Based on 32 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q1 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 2 quarters in a row
For 2 consecutive quarters, more hedge funds reduced or closed their BZFD positions than added to them. Sustained institutional selling is a meaningful warning sign — these are professionals with deep research teams collectively deciding to exit.
🔻
Below peak — only 65% of 3.0Y high
65% of all-time peak
Only 32 funds hold BZFD today versus a peak of 49 funds at 2024 Q4 — just 65% of the maximum. Low institutional ownership can mean the stock is out of favor, but it also means there's a large pool of potential buyers if sentiment turns.
📉
Outflows — 29% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
13 fewer hedge funds hold BZFD compared to a year ago (-29% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🟡
Slight buying edge — 52% buying
17 buying16 selling
Last quarter: 17 funds bought or added vs 16 that reduced or exited. It's nearly a 50/50 split — some institutions are convinced, others are taking profits. This mixed picture is normal near price highs.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~5 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 7 → 8 → 3 → 5. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔄
Mostly new holders — 25% entered in last year
■ 12% conviction (2yr+)
■ 62% medium
■ 25% new
Only 4 funds (12%) have held >2 years. The majority of current holders are relatively new to the position. New holders tend to sell faster when prices drop — a shallow conviction base that could amplify any sell-off.
💎
Buying through price weakness — shares -0%, value -34%
Last quarter: funds added -0% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -34%. Institutions were buying while the price was falling — a high-conviction accumulation signal. They're deliberately loading up on the dip.
⚠️
Saturation — most institutions already know this story
9 → 7 → 8 → 3 → 5 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 7 → 8 → 3 → 5. Far fewer institutions are entering now vs. a year ago. When the pool of potential new buyers shrinks this fast, future price support from institutional inflows weakens significantly.
📊
Mixed cohorts — 3% veterans, 29% new entrants
■ 3% veterans
■ 69% 1-2yr
■ 29% new
Of 35 current holders: 1 (3%) held 2+ years, 24 held 1–2 years, 10 (29%) entered in the past year. Balanced distribution — some institutional memory, some recent momentum buyers.
✅
Strong quality — 34% AUM from major funds
34% from top-100 AUM funds
10 of 31 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, accounting for 34% of total institutional value held. A meaningful share of the ownership value comes from the most well-resourced institutions.
Exit risk score 1.9/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.