The big shareholder groups in Icade (EPA:ICAD) have power over the company. Insiders often own a large chunk of younger, smaller, companies while huge companies tend to have institutions as shareholders. We also tend to see lower insider ownership in companies that were previously publicly owned.
Icade has a market capitalization of €6.2b, so it's too big to fly under the radar. We'd expect to see both institutions and retail investors owning a portion of the company. Our analysis of the ownership of the company, below, shows that institutions are noticeable on the share registry. Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholder can tell us about ICAD.
See our latest analysis for Icade
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Icade?
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 Icade does have institutional investors; and they hold 23% of the stock. 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 Icade, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
Icade is not owned by hedge funds. 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 Icade
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.
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 information suggests that Icade insiders own under 1% of the company. We do note, however, it is possible insiders have an indirect interest through a private company or other corporate structure. Keep in mind that it's a big company, and the insiders own €1.4m worth of shares. The absolute value might be more important than the proportional share. It is good to see board members owning shares, but it might be worth checking if those insiders have been buying.
General Public Ownership
The general public holds a 19% stake in ICAD. 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.
Private Company Ownership
We can see that Private Companies own 58%, of the shares on issue. 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.
Next Steps:
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important.
I like to dive deeper into how a company has performed in the past. You can find historic revenue and earnings in this detailed graph.
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.
We aim to bring you long-term focused research analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material.
If you spot an error that warrants correction, please contact the editor at editorial-team@simplywallst.com. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. Simply Wall St has no position in the stocks mentioned. Thank you for reading.
A landmark settlement is meant to punish Meta (META). If the 1998 tobacco deal is any guide, it might protect it.

Any moat with an opt-out clause for your competitors is just a fence around your own garden.
Worth looking at what previous legal action actually did to Meta rather than reaching for tobacco. The FTC's record five billion dollar privacy fine in 2019 was met with the stock rising, because it came in below fears and removed an open question. GDPR was designed to constrain large platforms and increased their share of the European ad market, because compliance cost fell hardest on small intermediaries. The FTC's antitrust case, the one that could genuinely have broken the company up, was decided in Meta's favour last November. The only thing that ever meaningfully hurt the business was Apple changing a tracking default, and Meta out-spent that too, while the ad-tech firms that could not afford to rebuild disappeared. The pattern is not that Meta survives regulation. It is that regulation keeps costing its smaller competitors more.
Andrew LeggetGreat earnings season, but are the earnings real?

About ENXTPA:ICAD
Icade
A real estate player that strives to make cities more pleasant places to live for everyone.
Undervalued with adequate balance sheet.