In the Wake of Redfin Corporation's (NASDAQ:RDFN) Latest US$55m Market Cap Drop, Institutional Owners May Be Forced to Take Severe Actions
In the Wake of Redfin Corporation's (NASDAQ:RDFN) Latest US$55m Market Cap Drop, Institutional Owners May Be Forced to Take Severe Actions
Key Insights
關鍵洞察
- Institutions' substantial holdings in Redfin implies that they have significant influence over the company's share price
- A total of 25 investors have a majority stake in the company with 50% ownership
- Using data from analyst forecasts alongside ownership research, one can better assess the future performance of a company
- 機構在Redfin的持股比例很大,意味着他們對公司股價有顯著影響。
- 共有25位投資者在公司中擁有大部分股份,持股比例達到50%。
- 通過分析師預測數據和所有權研究,可以更好地評估公司的未來表現。
If you want to know who really controls Redfin Corporation (NASDAQ:RDFN), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. With 62% 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.
如果你想知道誰真正控制Redfin公司(納斯達克:RDFN),那麼你需要查看其股東名冊的構成。機構以62%的持股比例擁有公司最高的股份。換句話說,這個集團在對公司的投資中最有可能獲得最大收益(或遭受最大損失)。
And institutional investors endured the highest losses after the company's share price fell by 4.6% last week. Needless to say, the recent loss which further adds to the one-year loss to shareholders of 5.4% might not go down well especially with this category of shareholders. Also referred to as "smart money", institutions have a lot of sway over how a stock's price moves. As a result, if the downtrend continues, institutions may face pressures to sell Redfin, which might have negative implications on individual investors.
機構投資者在公司股價上週下跌4.6%後承受了最高損失。不用說,最近的損失使得股東一年總損失達到5.4%,這對於這一類股東來說,可能不是個好消息。此外,被稱爲"聰明錢"的機構在股票價格變動方面具有很大的影響力。因此,如果下跌趨勢持續,機構可能面臨賣出Redfin的壓力,這可能對散戶投資者產生負面影響。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Redfin.
讓我們仔細看看不同類型的股東可以告訴我們關於Redfin的信息。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Redfin?
機構持股告訴我們關於Redfin什麼?
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一個常見的指數回報進行比較。因此,他們通常會考慮購買納入相關基準指數的大型公司股票。
We can see that Redfin does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. 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. 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 Redfin's earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters.
我們可以看到Redfin確實有機構投資者,他們持有公司股票的相當一部分。這表明爲這些機構工作的分析師已經關注了這隻股票,並且他們喜歡它。但就像其他任何人一樣,他們也可能是錯的。如果多個機構同時改變對一隻股票的看法,股價可能會迅速下跌。因此,值得查看下面Redfin的盈利歷史。當然,未來才是最重要的。
Institutional investors own over 50% of the company, so together than can probably strongly influence board decisions. Redfin is not owned by hedge funds. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is The Vanguard Group, Inc. with 14% of shares outstanding. For context, the second largest shareholder holds about 7.6% of the shares outstanding, followed by an ownership of 2.4% by the third-largest shareholder. Furthermore, CEO Glenn Kelman is the owner of 1.2% of the company's shares.
機構投資者持有超過50%的公司股份,因此他們可以共同強烈影響董事會的決策。Redfin不被對沖基金持有。從我們的數據來看,最大的股東是先鋒集團(The Vanguard Group, Inc.),擁有14%的流通股份。作爲對比,第二大股東持有大約7.6%的流通股份,第三大股東持有2.4%的股份。此外,CEO格倫·凱爾曼(Glenn Kelman)持有公司1.2%的股份。
Our studies suggest that the top 25 shareholders collectively control less than half of the company's shares, meaning that the company's shares are widely disseminated and there is no dominant shareholder.
我們的研究表明,前25大股東共同控制的公司的股份不到一半,這意味着公司的股份分散廣泛,沒有主導股東。
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.
研究機構的持股是一種很好的方式,可以評估和篩選股票的預期表現。通過研究分析師的情緒也可以實現同樣的目標。相當多的分析師覆蓋了這隻股票,您可以很容易地查找預測增長。
Insider Ownership Of Redfin
Redfin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。
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.
當內部持股顯示領導層像真正的公司所有者一樣思考時,這是積極的。然而,高比例的內部持股也可能給予公司內部小團體巨大的權力。在某些情況下,這可能是負面的。
We can report that insiders do own shares in Redfin Corporation. The insiders have a meaningful stake worth US$52m. Most would see this as a real positive. If you would like to explore the question of insider alignment, you can click here to see if insiders have been buying or selling.
我們可以報告,內部人士確實持有Redfin Corporation的股票。內部人士的持股價值爲5200萬美元。大多數人將其視爲一個積極因素。如果您想探索內部人士對齊的問題,您可以點擊這裏查看內部人士是否有買入或賣出的行爲。
General Public Ownership
公衆持股
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 33% stake in Redfin. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders.
公衆,通常是個人投資者,持有Redfin 33%的股份。儘管這種持股規模相當可觀,但如果決策與其他大股東不一致,可能不足以改變公司的政策。
Next Steps:
下一步:
I find it very interesting to look at who exactly owns a company. But to truly gain insight, we need to consider other information, too. To that end, you should learn about the 4 warning signs we've spotted with Redfin (including 1 which can't be ignored) .
我發現研究誰到底擁有一家公司非常有趣。但要真正獲得洞察,我們還需要考慮其他信息。爲此,你應該了解我們觀察到的與Redfin相關的4個警示信號(包括一個不能忽視的)。
Ultimately the future is most important. You can access this free report on analyst forecasts for the company.
最終,未來是最重要的。您可以訪問此免費的關於公司分析師預測的報告。
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。