LifeMD, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:LFMD) Market Cap Dropped US$62m Last Week; Individual Investors Who Hold 43% Were Hit as Were Institutions
LifeMD, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:LFMD) Market Cap Dropped US$62m Last Week; Individual Investors Who Hold 43% Were Hit as Were Institutions
Key Insights
主要見解
- LifeMD's significant retail investors ownership suggests that the key decisions are influenced by shareholders from the larger public
- A total of 25 investors have a majority stake in the company with 46% ownership
- Recent purchases by insiders
- LifeMD的散戶投資者持股比例顯著,表明關鍵決策受到更大公共股東的影響。
- 公司分爲25個投資者,共擁有46%的股份。
- 最近有內部人員購買。
Every investor in LifeMD, Inc. (NASDAQ:LFMD) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. We can see that retail investors own the lion's share in the company with 43% ownership. That is, the group stands to benefit the most if the stock rises (or lose the most if there is a downturn).
每個在LifeMD公司的投資者(納斯達克:LFMD)都應該了解最強大的股東群體。我們可以看到,散戶投資者在公司中擁有43%的控股權。這意味着,如果股票上漲,該群體將受益最大(如果下跌則損失最多)。
Following a 20% decrease in the stock price last week, retail investors suffered the most losses, but institutions who own 40% stock also took a hit.
在上週股票價格下降20%之後,散戶投資者遭受了最大的損失,但擁有40%股票的機構也受到了影響。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about LifeMD.
讓我們仔細看看不同類型的股東能爲我們提供關於LifeMD的什麼信息。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About LifeMD?
機構所有權對LifeMD有何含義?
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。
We can see that LifeMD does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. 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. If multiple institutions change their view on a stock at the same time, you could see the share price drop fast. It's therefore worth looking at LifeMD's earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters.
我們可以看到LifeMD確實有機構投資者;他們持有公司股票的很大一部分。這可以表明該公司在投資社區中具有一定的可信度。然而,依賴機構投資者所帶來的所謂驗證最好還是要小心。他們有時也會犯錯。如果多個機構同時改變對某隻股票的看法,您可能會看到股價迅速下跌。因此值得查看下面LifeMD的營業收入歷史。當然,未來才是真正重要的。
We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in LifeMD. With a 6.1% stake, CEO Justin Schreiber is the largest shareholder. With 5.7% and 3.9% of the shares outstanding respectively, BlackRock, Inc. and The Vanguard Group, Inc. are the second and third largest shareholders.
我們注意到對LifeMD的對沖基金投資不多。首席執行官賈斯廷·施雷伯(Justin Schreiber)持有6.1%的股份,是最大的股東。黑石集團(BlackRock, Inc.)和先鋒集團(The Vanguard Group, Inc.)分別持有5.7%和3.9%股份,是第二和第三大股東。
A deeper look at our ownership data shows that the top 25 shareholders collectively hold less than half of the register, suggesting a large group of small holders where no single shareholder has a majority.
對我們的所有權數據進行更深入的研究表明,前25名股東的持股總額不到註冊表的一半,表明有一個小股東的大群體,其中沒有單個股東擁有多數股份。
While it makes sense to study institutional ownership data for a company, it also makes sense to study analyst sentiments to know which way the wind is blowing. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.
儘管研究公司機構所有權數據是有意義的,但了解分析師的情緒也很有意義,以了解市場的走向。因爲有很多分析師正在跟蹤這個股票,所以看看他們的預測可能是值得的。
Insider Ownership Of LifeMD
LifeMD的內部所有權
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。
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。
It seems insiders own a significant proportion of LifeMD, Inc.. Insiders have a US$31m stake in this US$241m business. We would say this shows alignment with shareholders, but it is worth noting that the company is still quite small; some insiders may have founded the business. You can click here to see if those insiders have been buying or selling.
看來內部人士持有LifeMD, Inc.相當大比例的股份。內部人士在這家價值24100萬美元的企業中持有3100萬美元的股份。我們認爲這表明與股東的一致性,但值得注意的是,這家公司仍然相當小;一些內部人士可能是這家公司的創始人。您可以點擊這裏查看這些內部人士是否進行了買入或賣出。
General Public Ownership
一般大衆所有權
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 43% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
廣大公衆--包括散戶投資者--持有該公司的43%的股份,因此不能輕易忽略。雖然此群體不一定能左右大局,但它肯定會對公司如何運營產生真正的影響。
Private Company Ownership
私有公司的所有權
Our data indicates that Private Companies hold 3.9%, of the company's shares. Private companies may be related parties. Sometimes insiders have an interest in a public company through a holding in a private company, rather than in their own capacity as an individual. While it's hard to draw any broad stroke conclusions, it is worth noting as an area for further research.
我覺得看看誰真正擁有公司很有趣。但是,要真正獲得見解,我們需要考慮其他信息。例如,我們已經在這裏發現了上海古鰲電子科技的兩個警示信號,你在這裏進行投資前應該注意。
Next Steps:
下一步:
It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand LifeMD better, we need to consider many other factors. Consider for instance, the ever-present spectre of investment risk. We've identified 3 warning signs with LifeMD (at least 1 which shouldn't be ignored) , and understanding them should be part of your investment process.
始終值得考慮擁有公司股票的不同群體。但要更好地理解LifeMD,我們需要考慮許多其他因素。比如,投資風險始終伴隨在側。我們已經發現了LifeMD的3個警告信號(至少1個不應被忽視),理解這些信號應該是您投資過程的一部分。
If you would prefer discover what analysts are predicting in terms of future growth, do not miss this free report on analyst forecasts.
如果您希望了解分析師在未來增長方面的預測,請務必不要錯過這份免費報告。
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.
對這篇文章有反饋嗎?對內容感到擔憂嗎?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team @ simplywallst.com。
Simply Wall St的這篇文章是一般性質的。我們僅基於歷史數據和分析師預測提供評論,使用公正的方法,我們的文章並非意在提供財務建議。這並不構成買入或賣出任何股票的建議,並且不考慮您的目標或財務狀況。我們旨在爲您帶來基於基礎數據驅動的長期聚焦分析。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對提及的任何股票都沒有持倉。
譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。