The big shareholder groups in CURO Group Holdings Corp. (NYSE:CURO) have power over the company. Institutions will often hold stock in bigger companies, and we expect to see insiders owning a noticeable percentage of the smaller ones. Warren Buffett said that he likes “a business with enduring competitive advantages that is run by able and owner-oriented people.” So it’s nice to see some insider ownership, because it may suggest that management is owner-oriented.
With a market capitalization of US$603m, CURO Group Holdings is a small cap stock, so it might not be well known by many institutional investors. In the chart below, we can see that institutional investors have bought into the company. Let’s delve deeper into each type of owner, to discover more about CURO Group Holdings.
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About CURO Group Holdings?
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 CURO Group Holdings. 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. If multiple institutions change their view on a stock at the same time, you could see the share price drop fast. It’s therefore worth looking at CURO Group Holdings’ earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters.
Our data indicates that hedge funds own 5.1% of CURO Group Holdings. That catches my attention because hedge funds sometimes try to influence management, or bring about changes that will create near term value for shareholders. Our data suggests that Douglas Rippel, who is also the company’s Top Key Executive, holds the most number of shares at 17%. When an insider holds a sizeable amount of a company’s stock, investors consider it as a positive sign because it suggests that insiders are willing to have their wealth tied up in the future of the company. The second and third largest shareholders are Michael Mcknight and Chadwick Faulkner, with an equal amount of shares to their name at 15%. Interestingly, the third-largest shareholder, Chadwick Faulkner is also a Member of the Board of Directors, again, indicating strong insider ownership amongst the company’s top shareholders. Furthermore, CEO Donald Gayhardt is the owner of 1.1% of the company’s shares.
On looking further, we found that 53% of the shares are owned by the top 4 shareholders. In other words, these shareholders have a meaningful say in the decisions of the company.
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 a reasonable number of analysts covering the stock, so it might be useful to find out their aggregate view on the future.
Insider Ownership Of CURO Group Holdings
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. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.
Insider ownership is positive when it signals leadership are thinking like the true owners of the company. However, high insider ownership can also give immense power to a small group within the company. This can be negative in some circumstances.
Our most recent data indicates that insiders own the majority of CURO Group Holdings Corp.. This means they can collectively make decisions for the company. Given it has a market cap of US$603m, that means they have US$305m worth of shares. 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.
General Public Ownership
The general public, with a 19% stake in the company, will not 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.