w*j
2 楼
naked short?
310%怎么搞的?我借给你,你借给他,他再借给她?
【在 w**j 的大作中提到】
: EDU 310%
: 怎么搞的?
B*S
3 楼
Trading Information
Stock Price History
Beta: 1.55
52-Week Change3: 38.47%
S&P500 52-Week Change3: 11.92%
52-Week High (Mar 4, 2011)3: 24.20
52-Week Low (Jun 28, 2011)3: 8.59
50-Day Moving Average3: 14.64
200-Day Moving Average3: 18.80
Share Statistics
Avg Vol (3 month)3: 2,716,440
Avg Vol (10 day)3: 1,138,110
Shares Outstanding5: 48.47M
Float: 34.45M
% Held by Insiders1: 5.40%
% Held by Institutions1: 34.60%
Shares Short (as of Jul 15, 2011)3: 7.06M
Short Ratio (as of Jul 15, 2011)3: 1.40
Short % of Float (as of Jul 15, 2011)3: N/A
Shares Short (prior month)3: 10.31M
Stock Price History
Beta: 1.55
52-Week Change3: 38.47%
S&P500 52-Week Change3: 11.92%
52-Week High (Mar 4, 2011)3: 24.20
52-Week Low (Jun 28, 2011)3: 8.59
50-Day Moving Average3: 14.64
200-Day Moving Average3: 18.80
Share Statistics
Avg Vol (3 month)3: 2,716,440
Avg Vol (10 day)3: 1,138,110
Shares Outstanding5: 48.47M
Float: 34.45M
% Held by Insiders1: 5.40%
% Held by Institutions1: 34.60%
Shares Short (as of Jul 15, 2011)3: 7.06M
Short Ratio (as of Jul 15, 2011)3: 1.40
Short % of Float (as of Jul 15, 2011)3: N/A
Shares Short (prior month)3: 10.31M
w*j
4 楼
google finance列的是142%
你从哪里看到上面的信息?
【在 B*S 的大作中提到】
: Trading Information
: Stock Price History
: Beta: 1.55
: 52-Week Change3: 38.47%
: S&P500 52-Week Change3: 11.92%
: 52-Week High (Mar 4, 2011)3: 24.20
: 52-Week Low (Jun 28, 2011)3: 8.59
: 50-Day Moving Average3: 14.64
: 200-Day Moving Average3: 18.80
: Share Statistics
T*0
5 楼
以下是摘录:
It is obviously not technically possible for any shareholder or category of
shareholder to hold more than 100% of a company's outstanding shares.
Therefore, when you see investment information websites reporting
institutional holdings exceeding the 100% mark, something is wrong with the
data. There are two likely sources that are responsible for the reporting
errors.
First, the figures in an institution's report correspond to an "
institutional holdings date". These can differ somewhat among the various
institutions holding a company's stock, resulting in differences that could
impact the reported percentage for institutional holdings. The data
presented is updated monthly with an approximate lag of four weeks. As a
result, even a slight imprecision in the reporting dates among one or more
institutions could throw off the count.
Second, we checked with Ownership Analyzer, which provides data on
institutional investors' holdings. Here's our summary of their take on the
most likely cause of distorted institutional holdings percentages:
Let's say that XYZ Company has 20 million shares outstanding and Institution
A owns all 20 million. In a shorting transaction, Institution B borrows 5
million of these shares from Institution A and sells them to Institution C.
If both A and C claim ownership of the shares shorted by B, the
institutional ownership of XYZ could be reported as 25 million shares (20 +
5), or 125% (25/20).
In cases where reported institutional ownership exceeds 100%, actual
institutional ownership would have to be very high. While somewhat imprecise
, this conclusion helps investors determine the degree of the impact that
institutional purchases and sales could have on a company's stock.
【在 w**j 的大作中提到】
: EDU 310%
: 怎么搞的?
It is obviously not technically possible for any shareholder or category of
shareholder to hold more than 100% of a company's outstanding shares.
Therefore, when you see investment information websites reporting
institutional holdings exceeding the 100% mark, something is wrong with the
data. There are two likely sources that are responsible for the reporting
errors.
First, the figures in an institution's report correspond to an "
institutional holdings date". These can differ somewhat among the various
institutions holding a company's stock, resulting in differences that could
impact the reported percentage for institutional holdings. The data
presented is updated monthly with an approximate lag of four weeks. As a
result, even a slight imprecision in the reporting dates among one or more
institutions could throw off the count.
Second, we checked with Ownership Analyzer, which provides data on
institutional investors' holdings. Here's our summary of their take on the
most likely cause of distorted institutional holdings percentages:
Let's say that XYZ Company has 20 million shares outstanding and Institution
A owns all 20 million. In a shorting transaction, Institution B borrows 5
million of these shares from Institution A and sells them to Institution C.
If both A and C claim ownership of the shares shorted by B, the
institutional ownership of XYZ could be reported as 25 million shares (20 +
5), or 125% (25/20).
In cases where reported institutional ownership exceeds 100%, actual
institutional ownership would have to be very high. While somewhat imprecise
, this conclusion helps investors determine the degree of the impact that
institutional purchases and sales could have on a company's stock.
【在 w**j 的大作中提到】
: EDU 310%
: 怎么搞的?
相关阅读
大家讨论一下黄金股吧？PA tells me大牛们赶紧加牛群，还未收到牛群 qq群号大牛，尼玛，黑八砸盘真是凶猛ALL IN AROINTC的今天就是大盘的明天大盘现在的形势很简单，请跟贴请问各牛们蛙们，都只买options还是both stocks & options?无脑跟版上大牛一个皮克龙虾好便宜stock版还是有几个牛逼的人物的股版有个别ID，专门攻击别人；到要露真格的时候就耸了，尿了捞钱不比吵架好这个版集体熬鹰雅虎，两年后集体退休BTFD[通知] Stock 主题为<<周三，12/4，S&P涨跌 >>的博彩已开奖如果最低工资从7.25/HR涨到10/HR以上，会发生什么？亏废了time to short今天是翻盘的日子呀 ～～