A look at the shareholders of Cupid Limited (NSE:CUPID) can tell us which group is most powerful. With 38% stake, individual insiders possess the maximum shares in the company. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.
As a result, insiders as a group endured the highest losses after market cap fell by ₹7.5b.
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Cupid.
See our latest analysis for Cupid
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.
We can see that Cupid does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. This implies the analysts working for those institutions have looked at the stock and they like it. But just like anyone else, they could be wrong. 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 Cupid, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Cupid. The company's CEO Aditya Halwasiya is the largest shareholder with 33% of shares outstanding. With 13% and 8.3% of the shares outstanding respectively, Columbia Petro Chem Pvt. Ltd and Cliff Trexim Pvt Ltd are the second and third largest shareholders.
A more detailed study of the shareholder registry showed us that 3 of the top shareholders have a considerable amount of ownership in the company, via their 54% stake.
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. Our information suggests that there isn't any analyst coverage of the stock, so it is probably little known.
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. 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.
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.
It seems insiders own a significant proportion of Cupid Limited. It is very interesting to see that insiders have a meaningful ₹41b stake in this ₹107b business. It is good to see this level of investment. You can check here to see if those insiders have been buying recently.
With a 15% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over Cupid. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
It seems that Private Companies own 33%, of the Cupid stock. Private companies may be related parties. Sometimes insiders have an interest in a public company through a holding in a private company, rather than in their own capacity as an individual. While it's hard to draw any broad stroke conclusions, it is worth noting as an area for further research.
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 - Cupid has 2 warning signs we think you should be aware of.
Of course this may not be the best stock to buy. Therefore, you may wish to see our free collection of interesting prospects boasting favorable financials.
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.