If you want to know who really controls Full House Resorts, Inc. (NASDAQ:FLL), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are institutions with 49% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
And so it follows that institutional investors was the group most impacted after the company's market cap fell to US$180m last week after a 15% drop in the share price. Needless to say, the recent loss which further adds to the one-year loss to shareholders of 31% might not go down well especially with this category of shareholders. Often called “market movers", institutions wield significant power in influencing the price dynamics of any stock. As a result, if the decline continues, institutional investors may be pressured to sell Full House Resorts which might hurt individual investors.
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Full House Resorts.
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Full House Resorts?
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.
Full House Resorts already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. 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. It is not uncommon to see a big share price drop if two large institutional investors try to sell out of a stock at the same time. So it is worth checking the past earnings trajectory of Full House Resorts, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
NasdaqCM:FLL Earnings and Revenue Growth August 13th 2023
Full House Resorts is not owned by hedge funds. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is BlackRock, Inc. with 6.0% of shares outstanding. For context, the second largest shareholder holds about 4.8% of the shares outstanding, followed by an ownership of 4.0% by the third-largest shareholder. Daniel Lee, who is the third-largest shareholder, also happens to hold the title of Member of the Board of Directors.
Our studies suggest that the top 25 shareholders collectively control less than half of the company's shares, meaning that the company's shares are widely disseminated and there is no dominant shareholder.
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. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.
Insider Ownership Of Full House Resorts
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. 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.
Shareholders would probably be interested to learn that insiders own shares in Full House Resorts, Inc.. As individuals, the insiders collectively own US$11m worth of the US$180m company. Some would say this shows alignment of interests between shareholders and the board, though we generally prefer to see bigger insider holdings. But it might be worth checking if those insiders have been selling.
General Public Ownership
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 45% 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.
Next Steps:
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important.
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.
