Advertisement
Singapore markets closed
  • Straits Times Index

    3,343.35
    +11.65 (+0.35%)
     
  • S&P 500

    5,485.81
    +7.91 (+0.14%)
     
  • Dow

    39,178.10
    +50.30 (+0.13%)
     
  • Nasdaq

    17,865.25
    +60.09 (+0.34%)
     
  • Bitcoin USD

    62,235.72
    +498.87 (+0.81%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    1,295.25
    +29.11 (+2.30%)
     
  • FTSE 100

    8,214.57
    -10.76 (-0.13%)
     
  • Gold

    2,336.10
    +22.90 (+0.99%)
     
  • Crude Oil

    81.75
    +0.85 (+1.05%)
     
  • 10-Yr Bond

    4.2810
    -0.0350 (-0.81%)
     
  • Nikkei

    39,341.54
    -325.53 (-0.82%)
     
  • Hang Seng

    17,716.47
    -373.46 (-2.06%)
     
  • FTSE Bursa Malaysia

    1,584.94
    -6.01 (-0.38%)
     
  • Jakarta Composite Index

    6,967.95
    +62.31 (+0.90%)
     
  • PSE Index

    6,390.58
    +77.47 (+1.23%)
     

With 67% institutional ownership, Nanosonics Limited (ASX:NAN) is a favorite amongst the big guns

Key Insights

  • Significantly high institutional ownership implies Nanosonics' stock price is sensitive to their trading actions

  • A total of 10 investors have a majority stake in the company with 54% ownership

  • Recent sales by insiders

Every investor in Nanosonics Limited (ASX:NAN) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. We can see that institutions own the lion's share in the company with 67% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.

Since institutional have access to huge amounts of capital, their market moves tend to receive a lot of scrutiny by retail or individual investors. As a result, a sizeable amount of institutional money invested in a firm is generally viewed as a positive attribute.

ADVERTISEMENT

Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Nanosonics, beginning with the chart below.

See our latest analysis for Nanosonics

ownership-breakdown
ownership-breakdown

What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Nanosonics?

Institutions typically measure themselves against a benchmark when reporting to their own investors, so they often become more enthusiastic about a stock once it's included in a major index. We would expect most companies to have some institutions on the register, especially if they are growing.

As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in Nanosonics. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. 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 Nanosonics' historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.

earnings-and-revenue-growth
earnings-and-revenue-growth

Institutional investors own over 50% of the company, so together than can probably strongly influence board decisions. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Nanosonics. The company's largest shareholder is Maurie Stang, with ownership of 6.3%. With 6.2% and 5.5% of the shares outstanding respectively, First Sentier Investors (Australia) IM Ltd and Yarra Funds Management Limited are the second and third largest shareholders.

We did some more digging and found that 10 of the top shareholders account for roughly 54% of the register, implying that along with larger shareholders, there are a few smaller shareholders, thereby balancing out each others interests somewhat.

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. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.

Insider Ownership Of Nanosonics

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.

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.

Our most recent data indicates that insiders own a reasonable proportion of Nanosonics Limited. Insiders have a AU$136m stake in this AU$903m business. This may suggest that the founders still own a lot of shares. You can click here to see if they have been buying or selling.

General Public Ownership

The general public-- including retail investors -- own 18% 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.

Next Steps:

It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand Nanosonics better, we need to consider many other factors. Consider for instance, the ever-present spectre of investment risk. We've identified 1 warning sign with Nanosonics , and understanding them should be part of your investment process.

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.

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.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com