share_log

TROOPS, Inc. (NASDAQ:TROO) Adds US$52m in Market Cap and Insiders Have a 53% Stake in That Gain

TROOPS, Inc. (NASDAQ:TROO) Adds US$52m in Market Cap and Insiders Have a 53% Stake in That Gain

部隊公司(NASDAQ:TROO)增加了 52 萬美元的市值,而內部人士在該收益中擁有 53% 的股份
Simply Wall St ·  2023/01/25 06:10

Every investor in TROOPS, Inc. (NASDAQ:TROO) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are individual insiders with 53% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).

納斯達克(Temasek Holdings:TROO)的每一位投資者都應該知道最強大的股東羣體。而持有這塊蛋糕最大份額的是個人內部人士,他們擁有53%的股份。換句話説,該集團面臨着最大的上行潛力(或下行風險)。

As a result, insiders scored the highest last week as the company hit US$293m market cap following a 22% gain in the stock.

因此,內部人士上週的得分最高,該公司在股價上漲22%後,市值達到2.93億美元。

In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of TROOPS.

在下面的圖表中,我們放大了部隊的不同所有權組。

View our latest analysis for TROOPS

查看我們對部隊的最新分析

ownership-breakdown
NasdaqCM:TROO Ownership Breakdown January 25th 2023
NasdaqCM:TROO所有權明細2023年1月25日

What Does The Lack Of Institutional Ownership Tell Us About TROOPS?

缺乏機構所有權告訴了我們關於軍隊的什麼?

We don't tend to see institutional investors holding stock of companies that are very risky, thinly traded, or very small. Though we do sometimes see large companies without institutions on the register, it's not particularly common.

我們不傾向於看到機構投資者持有風險很高、交易清淡或規模很小的公司的股票。儘管我們有時確實會看到大公司沒有登記在冊的機構,但這種情況並不特別常見。

There could be various reasons why no institutions own shares in a company. Typically, small, newly listed companies don't attract much attention from fund managers, because it would not be possible for large fund managers to build a meaningful position in the company. It is also possible that fund managers don't own the stock because they aren't convinced it will perform well. TROOPS might not have the sort of past performance institutions are looking for, or perhaps they simply have not studied the business closely.

為什麼沒有機構持有一家公司的股票,可能有各種原因。通常情況下,新上市的小型公司不會引起基金經理太多關注,因為大型基金管理公司不可能在該公司建立有意義的頭寸。基金經理也有可能不持有這隻股票,因為他們不相信它會表現良好。軍隊可能沒有機構所尋找的那種過去的業績,或者他們只是沒有仔細研究過這項業務。

earnings-and-revenue-growth
NasdaqCM:TROO Earnings and Revenue Growth January 25th 2023
納斯達克CM:TROO收益和收入增長2023年1月25日

TROOPS is not owned by hedge funds. Kai Kai Kwok is currently the largest shareholder, with 29% of shares outstanding. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 23% and 1.0%, of the shares outstanding, respectively.

軍隊不是由對衝基金擁有的。啟國目前是第一大股東,持有29%的流通股。與此同時,第二大股東和第三大股東分別持有流通股的23%和1.0%。

After doing some more digging, we found that the top 2 shareholders collectively control more than half of the company's shares, implying that they have considerable power to influence the company's decisions.

在進一步挖掘後,我們發現,前兩名股東共同控制着公司一半以上的股份,這意味着他們擁有相當大的權力來影響公司的決策。

While studying institutional ownership for a company can add value to your research, it is also a good practice to research analyst recommendations to get a deeper understand of a stock's expected performance. As far as we can tell there isn't analyst coverage of the company, so it is probably flying under the radar.

雖然研究一家公司的機構持股可以增加你的研究價值,但研究分析師的建議以更深入地瞭解一隻股票的預期表現也是一個很好的做法。據我們所知,沒有分析師對該公司的報道,所以它很可能在雷達下飛行。

Insider Ownership Of TROOPS

軍隊的內部人所有權

The definition of an insider can differ slightly between different countries, but members of the board of directors always count. 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.

不同國家對內部人的定義可能略有不同,但董事會成員總是算數的。公司管理層對董事會負責,董事會應代表股東的利益。值得注意的是,有時最高層管理人員本身也是董事會成員。

Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group.

大多數人認為內部人持股是積極的,因為它可以表明董事會與其他股東很好地結盟。然而,在某些情況下,太多的權力集中在這個羣體中。

Our information suggests that insiders own more than half of TROOPS, Inc.. This gives them effective control of the company. That means they own US$157m worth of shares in the US$293m company. That's quite meaningful. Most would be pleased to see the board is investing alongside them. You may wish todiscover (for free) if they have been buying or selling.

我們的信息顯示,內部人士擁有超過一半的軍隊,Inc.這讓他們有效地控制了公司。這意味着他們擁有這家市值2.93億美元的公司價值1.57億美元的股票。這是很有意義的。大多數人會高興地看到董事會與他們一起投資。您可能希望發現(免費)如果他們一直在買入或賣出。

General Public Ownership

一般公有制

The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 46% stake in TROOPS. 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.

普通公眾通常是個人投資者,他們持有軍隊46%的股份。這種規模的所有權雖然可觀,但如果決策與其他大股東不同步,可能不足以改變公司政策。

Next Steps:

接下來的步驟:

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. Take risks for example - TROOPS has 3 warning signs (and 1 which is potentially serious) we think you should know about.

我發現看看到底是誰擁有一家公司是非常有趣的。但為了真正獲得洞察力,我們還需要考慮其他信息。以風險為例-軍隊有3個警示標誌(和1個潛在的嚴重問題)我們認為您應該知道。

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.

如果你更願意看看另一家公司--一家財務狀況可能更好的公司--那麼不要錯過這一點免費令人感興趣的公司名單,有強勁的財務數據支持。

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:本文中的數字是使用過去12個月的數據計算的,指的是截至財務報表日期的最後一個月的12個月期間。這可能與全年的年度報告數字不一致。

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.

對這篇文章有什麼反饋嗎?擔心內容嗎? 保持聯繫直接與我們聯繫。或者,也可以給編輯組發電子郵件,地址是implywallst.com。
本文由Simply Wall St.撰寫,具有概括性。我們僅使用不偏不倚的方法提供基於歷史數據和分析師預測的評論,我們的文章並不打算作為財務建議。它不構成買賣任何股票的建議,也沒有考慮你的目標或你的財務狀況。我們的目標是為您帶來由基本面數據驅動的長期重點分析。請注意,我們的分析可能不會將最新的對價格敏感的公司公告或定性材料考慮在內。Simply Wall St.對上述任何一隻股票都沒有持倉。

声明:本內容僅用作提供資訊及教育之目的,不構成對任何特定投資或投資策略的推薦或認可。 更多信息
    搶先評論