Gilead Sciences, Inc. (NASDAQ:GILD) Is a Favorite Amongst Institutional Investors Who Own 86%
Gilead Sciences, Inc. (NASDAQ:GILD) Is a Favorite Amongst Institutional Investors Who Own 86%
Key Insights
主要見解
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, Gilead Sciences' stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- 50% of the business is held by the top 15 shareholders
- Using data from analyst forecasts alongside ownership research, one can better assess the future performance of a company
- 鑑於機構在該股票中持有的大部分股份,吉利德科學的股價可能會受到其交易決策的影響
- 前15名股東持有該公司50%的業務。
- 通過分析師預測數據和所有權研究,您可以更好地評估公司未來的業績。
To get a sense of who is truly in control of Gilead Sciences, Inc. (NASDAQ:GILD), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are institutions with 86% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
想要了解誰真正控制着吉利德科學公司(納斯達克:GILD),重要的是要了解業務的所有權結構。持有最大股份的集團是機構,佔有86%的所有權。換句話說,該集團面臨着最大的上行潛力(或下行風險)
Because institutional owners have a huge pool of resources and liquidity, their investing decisions tend to carry a great deal of weight, especially with individual investors. Therefore, a good portion of institutional money invested in the company is usually a huge vote of confidence on its future.
由於機構股東擁有巨大的資源池和流動資金,他們的投資決策往往承載着很大的權重,特別是對個人投資者來說。因此,機構投入該公司的資金通常是對其未來的極大信心。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Gilead Sciences.
在下面的圖表中,我們放大了吉利德科學的不同所有權群體。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Gilead Sciences?
機構持股情況揭示了哪些關於吉利德科學的信息?
Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices.
許多機構衡量其業績的標準是一個近似於當地市場的指數。因此,他們通常更加關注包括在主要指數中的公司。
Gilead Sciences already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. 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. 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 Gilead Sciences' historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
吉利德科學已經有機構在股東名冊上。事實上,他們在公司擁有一個體面的股份。這意味着爲這些機構工作的分析師已經看過這支股票,他們喜歡它。但和任何其他人一樣,他們也可能錯。當多個機構擁有一支股票時,總會存在它們被「盲目交易」的風險。當這種交易出現問題時,多方可能會競相快速出售股票。在一個沒有增長曆史的公司中,這種風險更高。您可以在下方看到吉利德科學的歷史收入和營業收入,但請記住故事總是更加豐富多彩的。
Institutional investors own over 50% of the company, so together than can probably strongly influence board decisions. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Gilead Sciences. Capital Research and Management Company is currently the largest shareholder, with 11% of shares outstanding. BlackRock, Inc. is the second largest shareholder owning 9.7% of common stock, and The Vanguard Group, Inc. holds about 9.3% of the company stock.
機構投資者擁有公司超過50%的股份,因此他們可能會對董事會決定產生強大影響。我們注意到對沖基金在吉利德科學沒有實質性投資。資本研究與管理公司目前是最大的股東,持有11%的股份。BlackRock, Inc.是第二大股東,擁有公司普通股的9.7%,而The Vanguard Group, Inc.持有公司股票約9.3%。
Looking at the shareholder registry, we can see that 50% of the ownership is controlled by the top 15 shareholders, meaning that no single shareholder has a majority interest in the ownership.
從股東名冊上可以看出,50%的所有權由前15名股東控制,這意味着沒有單一股東擁有大多數的所有權。
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. There are a reasonable number of analysts covering the stock, so it might be useful to find out their aggregate view on the future.
研究機構所有權是衡量和過濾股票預期表現的好方法。通過研究分析師的情緒也可以實現同樣的目的。由於有相當數量的分析師涵蓋這支股票,因此了解他們對未來的整體看法可能會有所幫助。
Insider Ownership Of Gilead Sciences
吉利德科學的內部持股
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.
雖然「內部人士」的明確定義具有主觀性,但幾乎所有人都認爲董事會成員是內部人士。公司管理業務,但首席執行官即使是董事會成員,也要向董事會負責。
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.
我通常認爲內部人士持股是一件好事。但是,在某些情況下,它會使其他股東更難以對董事會的決定進行問責。
Our data suggests that insiders own under 1% of Gilead Sciences, Inc. in their own names. As it is a large company, we'd only expect insiders to own a small percentage of it. But it's worth noting that they own US$89m worth of shares. In this sort of situation, it can be more interesting to see if those insiders have been buying or selling.
我們的數據顯示,吉利德科學公司內部人士僅以自己的名義擁有不到1%的股份。由於它是一家大公司,我們只會期望內部人士擁有很小的比例。但值得注意的是,他們持有價值8900萬美元的股票。在這種情況下,看一下這些內部人士是否一直在買入或賣出股票可能會更有趣。
General Public Ownership
一般大衆所有權
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 14% stake in Gilead Sciences. 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.
一般公衆,通常是個人投資者,在吉利德科學公司持有14%的股份。雖然這種所有權比例可能不足以左右有利於他們的政策決定,但他們仍然可以對公司政策產生集體影響。
Next Steps:
下一步:
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Take risks for example - Gilead Sciences has 4 warning signs we think you should be aware of.
雖然考慮到擁有公司的不同群體是值得的,但還有其他更重要的因素。例如,承擔風險——吉利德科學有4個警示信號,我們認爲您應該注意。
Ultimately the future is most important. You can access this free report on analyst forecasts for the company.
最終,未來最重要。您可以在這份關於該公司分析師預測的免費報告中獲取有關信息。
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.
對本文有任何反饋?對內容有任何疑慮?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team@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。
譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。