To get a sense of who is truly in control of Nameson Holdings Limited (HKG:1982), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. We can see that individual insiders own the lion's share in the company with 75% ownership. That is, the group stands to benefit the most if the stock rises (or lose the most if there is a downturn).
As a result, insiders scored the highest last week as the company hit HK$1.9b market cap following a 11% gain in the stock.
Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Nameson Holdings, beginning with the chart below.
Check out our latest analysis for Nameson Holdings
Institutional investors often avoid companies that are too small, too illiquid or too risky for their tastes. But it's unusual to see larger companies without any institutional investors.
There are many reasons why a company might not have any institutions on the share registry. It may be hard for institutions to buy large amounts of shares, if liquidity (the amount of shares traded each day) is low. If the company has not needed to raise capital, institutions might lack the opportunity to build a position. On the other hand, it's always possible that professional investors are avoiding a company because they don't think it's the best place for their money. Nameson Holdings might not have the sort of past performance institutions are looking for, or perhaps they simply have not studied the business closely.
Nameson Holdings is not owned by hedge funds. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is Ting Chung Wong with 75% of shares outstanding. This essentially means that they have extensive influence, if not outright control, over the future of the corporation. Dimensional Fund Advisors LP is the second largest shareholder owning 0.4% of common stock, and PHEIM Asset Management Sdn Bhd holds about 0.02% of the company stock.
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. As far as we can tell there isn't analyst coverage of the company, so it is probably flying under the radar.
The definition of company insiders can be subjective and does vary between jurisdictions. Our data reflects individual insiders, capturing board members at the very least. 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.
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.
Our most recent data indicates that insiders own the majority of Nameson Holdings Limited. This means they can collectively make decisions for the company. So they have a HK$1.4b stake in this HK$1.9b business. Most would argue this is a positive, showing strong alignment with shareholders. You can click here to see if those insiders have been buying or selling.
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 25% 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.
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Consider for instance, the ever-present spectre of investment risk. We've identified 1 warning sign with Nameson Holdings , and understanding them should be part of your investment process.
If you would prefer check out another company -- one with potentially superior financials -- then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, backed by strong financial data.
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.
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.