With 60% Ownership, Loews Corporation (NYSE:L) Boasts of Strong Institutional Backing
With 60% Ownership, Loews Corporation (NYSE:L) Boasts of Strong Institutional Backing
Key Insights
關鍵洞察
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, Loews' stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- 50% of the business is held by the top 10 shareholders
- Insiders have been selling lately
- 由於機構在股票中的大額持股,洛斯公司的股價可能會受到他們交易決策的影響。
- 前十名股東持有50%的股份。
- 內部人士最近一直在賣出。
Every investor in Loews Corporation (NYSE:L) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. The group holding the most number of shares in the company, around 60% to be precise, is institutions. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
每位洛斯公司(紐交所:L)的投資者都應該了解最強大的股東群體。持有公司最多股份的群體,大約佔60%,是機構。換句話說,該群體面臨最大的上漲潛力(或下行風險)。
Since institutional have access to huge amounts of capital, their market moves tend to receive a lot of scrutiny by retail or individual investors. Hence, having a considerable amount of institutional money invested in a company is often regarded as a desirable trait.
由於機構能夠接觸到大量資金,他們的市場動作往往受到散戶或個人投資者的高度關注。因此,公司中擁有大量機構資金的投資通常被視爲一種可取的特質。
Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Loews, beginning with the chart below.
讓我們深入探討洛斯公司的每一種股東類型,首先看看下面的圖表。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Loews?
機構擁有權告訴我們關於洛斯公司的什麼?
Institutions typically measure themselves against a benchmark when reporting to their own investors, so they often become more enthusiastic about a stock once it's included in a major index. We would expect most companies to have some institutions on the register, especially if they are growing.
機構通常在向自己的投資者報告時,會與基準進行比較,因此一旦股票被納入主要指數,他們通常對該股票會更加熱情。我們預期大多數公司在登記時都會有一些機構,尤其是當它們正在增長時。
As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in Loews. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see Loews' historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
正如您所看到的,機構投資者在洛斯公司中擁有相當多的股份。這可能表明該公司在投資社區中具有一定的可信度。然而,最好對依賴於機構投資者所帶來的假定驗證保持警惕。他們有時也會出錯。當多個機構持有一隻股票時,總是存在『擁擠交易』的風險。當這種交易出錯時,多個參與者可能會競相快速賣出股票。這種風險在沒有增長曆史的公司中更高。您可以在下面查看洛斯公司的歷史收益和營業收入,但請記住,故事總是還有更多。
Investors should note that institutions actually own more than half the company, so they can collectively wield significant power. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Loews. Our data shows that The Vanguard Group, Inc. is the largest shareholder with 9.7% of shares outstanding. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 7.2% and 6.8%, of the shares outstanding, respectively. James Tisch, who is the second-largest shareholder, also happens to hold the title of Chief Executive Officer.
投資者應該注意,機構實際上擁有公司的超過一半的股份,因此他們可以共同發揮重要的影響力。我們注意到對洛斯公司的對沖基金沒有進行有意義的投資。我們的數據顯示,先鋒集團是最大的股東,持有9.7%的流通股。同時,第二和第三大股東分別持有7.2%和6.8%的流通股。第二大股東詹姆斯·蒂施恰好也擔任首席執行官的職務。
We did some more digging and found that 10 of the top shareholders account for roughly 50% of the register, implying that along with larger shareholders, there are a few smaller shareholders, thereby balancing out each others interests somewhat.
我們進行了一些深入調查,發現十大股東大約佔註冊股份的50%,這意味着除了大股東之外,還有一些小股東,從而在一定程度上平衡了彼此的利益。
While studying institutional ownership for a company can add value to your research, it is also a good practice to research analyst recommendations to get a deeper understand of a stock's expected performance. As far as we can tell there isn't analyst coverage of the company, so it is probably flying under the radar.
雖然研究公司的機構持股可以爲您的研究增加價值,但研究分析師的推薦也是一個好的做法,可以更深入地理解股票的預期表現。就我們所知,似乎沒有分析師對該公司的覆蓋,因此它可能在雷達下飛行。
Insider Ownership Of Loews
洛斯公司的內部持股情況
The definition of an insider can differ slightly between different countries, but members of the board of directors always count. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.
內部人的定義在不同國家之間可能略有不同,但董事會成員總是算作內部人。公司管理層負責運營業務,但首席執行官將向董事會負責,即使他或她是董事會的成員。
I generally consider insider ownership to be a good thing. However, on some occasions it makes it more difficult for other shareholders to hold the board accountable for decisions.
我通常認爲內部人擁有股份是一件好事。然而,在某些情況下,這使得其他股東更難讓董事會對決策負責。
Our information suggests that insiders maintain a significant holding in Loews Corporation. Insiders own US$3.1b worth of shares in the US$18b company. That's quite meaningful. It is good to see this level of investment. You can check here to see if those insiders have been buying recently.
我們的信息顯示,內部人士在洛斯公司持有相當大的股份。內部人士在這家價值180億美元的公司中擁有價值31億美元的股票。這非常重要。看到這樣的投資水平令人欣慰。您可以在這裏查看這些內部人士最近是否有買入。
General Public Ownership
公衆持股
With a 23% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over Loews. While this size of ownership may not be enough to sway a policy decision in their favour, they can still make a collective impact on company policies.
公衆持有23%的股份,主要由個體投資者組成,對洛斯公司有一定的影響力。雖然這種股份的規模可能不足以在政策決策中對他們有利,但他們仍然可以對公司政策產生集體影響。
Next Steps:
下一步:
It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand Loews better, we need to consider many other factors. To that end, you should be aware of the 1 warning sign we've spotted with Loews .
考慮擁有公司股份的不同群體總是值得思考的。但爲了更好地了解洛斯公司,我們需要考慮許多其他因素。爲此,您應該注意到我們發現的洛斯公司的一個警告信號。
Of course, you might find a fantastic investment by looking elsewhere. So take a peek at this free list of interesting companies.
當然,您也可能會在其他地方找到一個絕佳的投資。請查看這個免費的有趣公司名單。
NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures.
注意:本文中的數字是根據過去十二個月的數據計算得出的,指的是截至財務報表日期的月份最後一天的12個月期間。這可能與完整年度的年報數字不一致。
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.
This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
對本文有反饋?對內容有疑慮?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至 editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com。
這篇來自Simply Wall ST的文章是一般性的。我們根據歷史數據和分析師預測提供評論,採用無偏見的方法,我們的文章並不旨在提供財務建議。它不構成對任何股票的買入或賣出建議,也未考慮到您的目標或財務狀況。我們旨在爲您提供以基本數據驅動的長期分析。請注意,我們的分析可能未考慮最新的價格敏感公司公告或定性材料。Simply Wall ST在提到的任何股票中均沒有持倉。
譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。