share_log

Eastman Chemical Company's (NYSE:EMN) Institutional Investors Lost 3.6% Last Week but Have Benefitted From Longer-term Gains

Eastman Chemical Company's (NYSE:EMN) Institutional Investors Lost 3.6% Last Week but Have Benefitted From Longer-term Gains

伊士曼化工公司(紐交所:EMN)的機構投資者上週虧損了3.6%,但受益於長期收益。
Simply Wall St ·  06/17 21:11

Key Insights

主要見解

  • Significantly high institutional ownership implies Eastman Chemical's stock price is sensitive to their trading actions
  • A total of 16 investors have a majority stake in the company with 50% ownership
  • Insiders have sold recently
  • 機構持股比例顯著高表示伊士曼化工股票價格對機構的交易行爲非常敏感。
  • 總共有16家投資者擁有該公司的大部分股權,佔50%的所有權。
  • 近期內有內部人士出售股票

If you want to know who really controls Eastman Chemical Company (NYSE:EMN), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. With 86% stake, institutions possess the maximum shares in the company. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.

如果你想了解誰真正控制了伊士曼化學公司(NYSE:EMN),你需要看看它的股份登記簿的構成。機構持有該公司的最大股份達86%。換句話說,該群體將從其進入該公司的投資中獲利最多(或損失最多)。

Institutional investors endured the highest losses after the company's market cap fell by US$434m last week. However, the 24% one-year returns may have helped alleviate their overall losses. They should, however, be mindful of further losses in the future.

在上週公司市值下跌4.34億美元后,機構投資者遭受了最大的損失。然而,24%的一年回報率可能有助於緩解它們的總體損失。但它們應該注意將來可能會更多虧損。

In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Eastman Chemical.

在下面的圖表中,我們放大了伊士曼化學的不同所有權群體。

ownership-breakdown
NYSE:EMN Ownership Breakdown June 17th 2024
紐交所(NYSE:EMN)所有權分佈2024年6月17日

What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Eastman Chemical?

機構持股情況對伊士曼化工有何啓示?

Institutional investors commonly compare their own returns to the returns of a commonly followed index. So they generally do consider buying larger companies that are included in the relevant benchmark index.

機構投資者通常將自己的回報與常見的指數回報進行比較。因此,他們通常會考慮購買包括在相關基準指數中的較大公司。

As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in Eastman Chemical. This implies the analysts working for those institutions have looked at the stock and they like it. But just like anyone else, they could be wrong. It is not uncommon to see a big share price drop if two large institutional investors try to sell out of a stock at the same time. So it is worth checking the past earnings trajectory of Eastman Chemical, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.

正如你看到的,機構投資者在伊士曼化學中擁有相當數量的股份。這意味着爲那些機構工作的分析師已經研究了股票,而且他們喜歡它。但就像其他人一樣,他們可能是錯誤的。如果兩個大型機構投資者同時試圖拋售股票,股價大幅下跌並不罕見。因此,查看伊士曼化學的過去盈利軌跡(如下所示)是值得的。當然,還要記住考慮其他因素。

earnings-and-revenue-growth
NYSE:EMN Earnings and Revenue Growth June 17th 2024
紐交所(NYSE:EMN)盈利和營業收入增長2024年6月17日

Institutional investors own over 50% of the company, so together than can probably strongly influence board decisions. Hedge funds don't have many shares in Eastman Chemical. Our data shows that The Vanguard Group, Inc. is the largest shareholder with 13% of shares outstanding. With 7.1% and 4.1% of the shares outstanding respectively, BlackRock, Inc. and State Street Global Advisors, Inc. are the second and third largest shareholders.

機構投資者擁有公司的50%以上股份,因此他們可能會強烈影響董事會的決策。對於伊士曼化工,對沖基金沒有太多的股份。我們的數據顯示,The Vanguard Group,Inc.是最大的股東,持有13%的流通股份。BlackRock,Inc.和道富銀行分別擁有7.1%和4.1%的流通股份,是第二大和第三大股東。

After doing some more digging, we found that the top 16 have the combined ownership of 50% in the company, suggesting that no single shareholder has significant control over the company.

經過更深入的了解,我們發現前16名股東共同擁有公司50%的股份,這意味着沒有單一股東對公司有足夠的控制權。

Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. Quite a few analysts cover the stock, so you could look into forecast growth quite easily.

研究機構持股情況是衡量和篩選股票預期表現的好方法。通過研究分析師的情緒也可以取得相同的結果。相當多的分析師涵蓋了這筆股票,所以你可以很容易地調查預測增長。

Insider Ownership Of Eastman Chemical

伊士曼化工內部持股

The definition of an insider can differ slightly between different countries, but members of the board of directors always count. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO.

內部人員的定義在不同國家可能略有不同,但董事會成員總是計入內部人員。管理層最終向董事會回答。然而,經理往往會成爲執行董事會成員,尤其是如果他們是創始人或CEO。

Insider ownership is positive when it signals leadership are thinking like the true owners of the company. However, high insider ownership can also give immense power to a small group within the company. This can be negative in some circumstances.

當內部人持股情況表明領導層思考和公司真正所有者一樣時,內部所有權是積極的。然而,高達內部人士所有權也可能爲公司內的小團體帶來巨大的權力。在某些情況下,這可能是負面的。

Our information suggests that Eastman Chemical Company insiders own under 1% of the company. It is a very large company, so it would be surprising to see insiders own a large proportion of the company. Though their holding amounts to less than 1%, we can see that board members collectively own US$78m worth of shares (at current prices). Arguably recent buying and selling is just as important to consider. You can click here to see if insiders have been buying or selling.

我們的信息表明,伊士曼化學公司的內部人士擁有該公司不到1%的股份。它是一家非常大的公司,因此看到內部人士擁有大部分公司股份是令人驚訝的。儘管他們的持股不到1%,但我們可以看到,董事會成員共計擁有價值7800萬美元的股份(以當前價格計算)。最近的買賣同樣值得考慮。你可以點擊這裏查看內部人員是否在買賣。

General Public Ownership

一般大衆所有權

The general public-- including retail investors -- own 13% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. 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.

包括零售投資者在內的公衆持有公司的13%股權,因此不能被輕易忽略。儘管這種所有權規模可能不足以在他們有利時推動政策決策,但他們仍可以共同影響公司的政策。

Next Steps:

下一步:

It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand Eastman Chemical better, we need to consider many other factors. Take risks for example - Eastman Chemical has 3 warning signs we think you should be aware of.

考慮到公司不同群體的股權貢獻非常有價值。但要更好地了解伊士曼化學,我們需要考慮很多其他因素。比如企業的風險——伊士曼化學有3個預警信號,我們認爲你應該了解。

If you would prefer discover what analysts are predicting in terms of future growth, do not miss this free report on analyst forecasts.

如果您想發現分析師對未來增長的預測,請不要錯過這份有關分析師預測的免費報告。

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:本文中的數據是使用最後一個財務報表日期結束的爲期12個月的數據計算的。這可能與全年年度報告數據不一致。

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?關於內容有所顧慮?直接和我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com。
這篇文章是Simply Wall St的一般性文章。我們根據歷史數據和分析師預測提供評論,只使用公正的方法論,我們的文章並不意味着提供任何金融建議。文章不構成買賣任何股票的建議,也不考慮您的目標或您的財務狀況。我們的目標是帶給您基本數據驅動的長期關注分析。請注意,我們的分析可能不考慮最新的價格敏感公司公告或定性材料。Simply Wall St沒有任何股票頭寸。

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com

對本文有反饋?關於內容有所顧慮?直接和我們聯繫。或者發送電子郵件至editorial-team@simplywallst.com。

譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。


以上內容僅用作資訊或教育之目的,不構成與富途相關的任何投資建議。富途竭力但無法保證上述全部內容的真實性、準確性和原創性。
    搶先評論