Employers Holdings, Inc.'s (NYSE:EIG) Institutional Investors Lost 4.4% Over the Past Week but Have Profited From Longer-term Gains
Employers Holdings, Inc.'s (NYSE:EIG) Institutional Investors Lost 4.4% Over the Past Week but Have Profited From Longer-term Gains
Key Insights
关键洞察
- Significantly high institutional ownership implies Employers Holdings' stock price is sensitive to their trading actions
- 51% of the business is held by the top 9 shareholders
- Insiders have been selling lately
- 显著高的机构持股意味着雇主控股公司的股票价格对其交易行为敏感
- 前9个股东持有51%的业务
- 内部人士最近一直在卖出。
Every investor in Employers Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:EIG) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. The group holding the most number of shares in the company, around 83% to be precise, is institutions. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
每位投资者在雇主控股公司(纽交所:EIG)中应该了解最强大的股东集团。 持有公司最多股份的集团大约占83%,可以说是机构。 换句话说,该集团面临着最大的上行潜力(或下行风险)。
No shareholder likes losing money on their investments, especially institutional investors who saw their holdings drop 4.4% in value last week. However, the 32% one-year return to shareholders may have helped lessen their pain. We would assume however, that they would be on the lookout for weakness in the future.
没有股东喜欢在投资中亏损,尤其是那些上周看到其持股价值下跌4.4%的机构投资者。然而,32%的年度股东回报可能帮助减轻了他们的痛苦。不过,我们假设他们会关注未来的弱点。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Employers Holdings.
在下面的图表中,我们详细看看雇主控股的不同持股群体。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Employers Holdings?
机构持股告诉我们关于雇主控股什么信息?
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.
许多机构的表现与近似当地市场的指数进行比较。因此,他们通常更加关注那些被纳入主要指数的公司。
We can see that Employers Holdings 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. 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 Employers Holdings' historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
我们可以看到雇主控股确实有机构投资者,他们持有公司股票的相当一部分。这意味着为这些机构工作的分析师已经研究了这只股票,并且他们喜欢它。但和其他任何人一样,他们也可能是错的。当多个机构拥有一只股票时,总是存在他们处于“拥挤交易”的风险。当这样的交易出错时,多个参与方可能会迅速竞争出售股票。这种风险在没有增长历史的公司中更高。您可以在下面看到雇主控股的历史收益和营业收入,但请记住,故事还有更多。
Since institutional investors own more than half the issued stock, the board will likely have to pay attention to their preferences. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Employers Holdings. BlackRock, Inc. is currently the largest shareholder, with 14% of shares outstanding. The Vanguard Group, Inc. is the second largest shareholder owning 12% of common stock, and Dimensional Fund Advisors LP holds about 8.3% of the company stock.
由于机构投资者持有超过一半的已发行股票,董事会很可能需要关注他们的偏好。我们注意到对雇主控股公司, 对冲基金并没有进行有意义的投资。贝莱德目前是最大的股东,持有14%的流通股。先锋集团是第二大股东,持有12%的普通股,维度基金顾问公司持有约8.3%的公司股票。
We did some more digging and found that 9 of the top shareholders account for roughly 51% of the register, implying that along with larger shareholders, there are a few smaller shareholders, thereby balancing out each others interests somewhat.
我们进一步挖掘发现,排名前九的股东大约占股东名册的51%,这意味着除了较大的股东外,还有一些较小的股东,从而在一定程度上平衡了彼此的利益。
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 plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.
研究机构的所有权是评估和筛选股票预期表现的好方法。分析师情绪的研究也可以达到同样的效果。有很多分析师在覆盖该股票,因此查看他们的预期可能也是值得的。
Insider Ownership Of Employers Holdings
雇主控股公司的内部人士持股情况
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. The company management answer to the board and the latter should represent the interests of shareholders. Notably, sometimes top-level managers are on the board themselves.
虽然对内幕人的确切定义可能是主观的,但几乎所有人都认为董事会成员是内幕人。公司管理层向董事会负责,后者应该代表股东的利益。值得注意的是,有时候高层管理者自己也是董事会成员。
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.
我通常认为内部人拥有股份是一件好事。然而,在某些情况下,这使得其他股东更难让董事会对决策负责。
Our most recent data indicates that insiders own some shares in Employers Holdings, Inc.. It is a pretty big company, so it is generally a positive to see some potentially meaningful alignment. In this case, they own around US$22m worth of shares (at current prices). Most would say this shows alignment of interests between shareholders and the board. Still, it might be worth checking if those insiders have been selling.
我们最新的数据表明,内部人士持有一些Employers Holdings, Inc.的股份。 这是一家相当大的公司,因此看到一些可能有意义的利益一致性通常是一个积极的迹象。在这种情况下,他们持有约2200万美元的股份(按当前价格计算)。 大多数人会认为这表明股东与董事会之间的利益一致性。不过,值得查看一下这些内部人士是否有在卖出股票。
General Public Ownership
公众持股
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 16% stake in Employers Holdings. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
普通公众,通常是个人投资者,持有Employers Holdings 16%的股份。 虽然这一群体不一定能左右情况,但它确实可以对公司运行产生实际影响。
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. Consider risks, for instance. Every company has them, and we've spotted 1 warning sign for Employers Holdings you should know about.
虽然考虑拥有公司的不同群体是值得的,但还有其他更重要的因素。 例如,考虑风险。每家公司都有风险,我们发现了1个关于雇主控股的警告信号,你应该了解。
If you are like me, you may want to think about whether this company will grow or shrink. Luckily, you can check this free report showing analyst forecasts for its future.
如果你像我一样,你可能想考虑这家公司是会增长还是缩小。幸运的是,你可以查看这份免费的报告,了解分析师对其未来的预测。
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:本文中的数字是根据过去十二个月的数据计算得出的,指的是截至财务报表日期的月份最后一天的12个月期间。这可能与完整年度的年报数字不一致。
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.
对本文有反馈?对内容有疑虑?请直接与我们联系。或者,发送电子邮件至 editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com。
这篇来自Simply Wall St的文章是一般性的。我们根据历史数据和分析师预测提供评论,采用无偏见的方法,我们的文章并不旨在提供财务建议。它不构成对任何股票的买入或卖出建议,也未考虑到您的目标或财务状况。我们旨在为您提供以基本数据驱动的长期分析。请注意,我们的分析可能未考虑最新的价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没有持仓。
译文内容由第三方软件翻译。