A look at the shareholders of Nava Limited (NSE:NAVA) can tell us which group is most powerful. We can see that individual investors own the lion's share in the company with 43% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
As a result, individual investors were the biggest beneficiaries of last week’s 4.9% gain.
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Nava.
See our latest analysis for Nava
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.
As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in Nava. This suggests some credibility amongst professional investors. But we can't rely on that fact alone since institutions make bad investments sometimes, just like everyone does. 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 Nava's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
Nava is not owned by hedge funds. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is Nav Finance & Leasing Ltd with 11% of shares outstanding. For context, the second largest shareholder holds about 6.5% of the shares outstanding, followed by an ownership of 5.4% by the third-largest shareholder. Additionally, the company's CEO Ashwin Devineni directly holds 2.4% of the total shares outstanding.
After doing some more digging, we found that the top 15 have the combined ownership of 51% in the company, suggesting that no single shareholder has significant control over the company.
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. We're not picking up on any analyst coverage of the stock at the moment, so the company is unlikely to be widely held.
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.
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 a reasonable proportion of Nava Limited. It is very interesting to see that insiders have a meaningful ₹26b stake in this ₹141b business. It is good to see this level of investment. You can check here to see if those insiders have been buying recently.
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 43% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. 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.
We can see that Private Companies own 33%, of the shares on issue. It's hard to draw any conclusions from this fact alone, so its worth looking into who owns those private companies. Sometimes insiders or other related parties have an interest in shares in a public company through a separate private company.
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 be aware of the 1 warning sign we've spotted with Nava .
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.