Every investor in Nova Leap Health Corp. (CVE:NLH) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. Generally speaking, as a company grows, institutions will increase their ownership. Conversely, insiders often decrease their ownership over time. I generally like to see some degree of insider ownership, even if only a little. As Nassim Nicholas Taleb said, ‘Don’t tell me what you think, tell me what you have in your portfolio.
With a market capitalization of CA$28m, Nova Leap Health is a small cap stock, so it might not be well known by many institutional investors. Our analysis of the ownership of the company, below, shows that institutions are not on the share registry. Let’s delve deeper into each type of owner, to discover more about Nova Leap Health.
What Does The Lack Of Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Nova Leap Health?
We don’t tend to see institutional investors holding stock of companies that are very risky, thinly traded, or very small. Though we do sometimes see large companies without institutions on the register, it’s not particularly common.
There are multiple explanations for why institutions don’t own a stock. The most common is that the company is too small relative to fund under management, so the institition does not bother to look closely at the company. On the other hand, it’s always possible that professional investors are avoiding a company because they don’t think it’s the best place for their money. Institutional investors may not find the historic growth of the business impressive, or there might be other factors at play. You can see the past revenue performance of Nova Leap Health, for yourself, below.
Hedge funds don’t have many shares in Nova Leap Health. Norman Fulcher is currently the company’s largest shareholder with 16% of shares outstanding. Next, we have Christopher Dobbin and Dana Hatfield as the second and third largest shareholders, holding 12% and 4.5%, of the shares outstanding, respectively. They also happen to be Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, respectively. That is, insiders feature higher up in the heirarchy of the company’s top shareholders.
Our studies suggest that the top 6 shareholders collectively control less than 50% of the company’s shares, meaning that the company’s shares are widely disseminated and there is no dominant shareholder.
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.
Insider Ownership Of Nova Leap Health
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. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO.
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 Nova Leap Health Corp.. It has a market capitalization of just CA$28m, and insiders have CA$10m worth of shares in their own names. It is great to see insiders so invested in the business. It might be worth checking if those insiders have been buying recently.
General Public Ownership
The general public — mostly retail investors — own 62% of Nova Leap Health. This level of ownership gives retail investors the power to sway key policy decisions such as board composition, executive compensation, and the dividend payout ratio.
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Consider risks, for instance. Every company has them, and we’ve spotted 4 warning signs for Nova Leap Health you should know about.
Of course this may not be the best stock to buy. So take a peek at this free free list of interesting companies.
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.
If you spot an error that warrants correction, please contact the editor at email@example.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.
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. Thank you for reading.