Corporate Profile
About
History
Mission Statement
Diversity & Inclusion
Community Involvement
Giving Together
Sustainability
Careers
Overview
Corporate Profile
Corporate Structure
Directors & Officers
Governance Documents
Committee Charting
Mission Statement
Stock
Stock Quote
Historic Prices
Dividends
Financial Calculators
Dividend Reinvestment Plan
Filings
Documents
Annual Reports
Insider Filings
Insider Ownership
Institutional Ownership
Financials
Financial Highlights
Balance Sheet
Income Statement
As Reported Financial Statements
Financial Charting
Deposit Loan Composition
Peer Analysis
News & Market Data
Press Releases
Event Calendar
Covering Analysts
Mergers & Acquisitions
Presentations
Resources
Information Request
Email Notification
FAQs
Institutional Ownership
Ownership > 100%
Ownership > 100%
List of possible reasons behind the infrequent cases where we have total institutional ownership that exceeds 100% of the common shares outstanding for a specific company:
Double-counting
- On the 13-F filing, each institutional holder must report all securities over which they exercise sole or shared investment discretion. In cases where investment discretion is shared by more than one institution, care is generally taken to prevent double-counting, but there is always the exception. Another cause of double-counting is a company name change for the 13F filer where the holdings are accounted for under both filer names.
Short Interest
- A large short interest amount affects the institutional ownership amount considerably because all shares that have been sold short appear as holdings in two separate portfolios. One institution has lent its shares to a short seller, while the same shares have been purchased by another reporting institution. Consequently, the institutional ownership percentage reflected in the 13-F filings is overstated as a percentage of total shares outstanding.
A gap between 'as of' dates
- In the case where gaps between the 'as of' dates of the holdings and the shares outstanding arise, the percentage owned could be skewed due to a sharp increase/decrease in shares out. Again, this case doesn’t come up very often but the results are unavoidable.
Other possible reasons:
a) An overlap occurs amongst reporting institutions;
b) The 13F filing includes holdings other than common stock issues;
c) Mutual fund money is co-advised and incorrectly reported by multiple institutions.
Copyright
,
© Powered By Q4 Inc.