Based on 6 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q2 · updated quarterly
➡️
No change last quarter
The number of hedge funds holding this stock didn't change last quarter. Neither a buying nor selling signal on its own — watch the next quarter for direction.
🔻
Below peak — only 50% of 3.0Y high
50% of all-time peak
Only 6 funds hold BZLFY today versus a peak of 12 funds at 2025 Q2 — just 50% 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 — 50% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
6 fewer hedge funds hold BZLFY compared to a year ago (-50% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🟢
More buyers than sellers — 100% buying
2 buying0 selling
Last quarter: 2 funds were net buyers (0 opened a brand new position + 2 added to an existing one). Only 0 were sellers (0 trimmed + 0 sold completely). A clear majority buying is a strong confirmation signal.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~0 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 0 → 1 → 0 → 0. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
83% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 83% conviction (2yr+)
■ 17% medium
■ 0% new
5 out of 6 hedge funds have held BZLFY for over 2 years without selling. Long-term investors are generally harder to shake out during market stress, creating a stable ownership base that limits the risk of sudden capitulation.
💰
Value +28% but shares only +9% — price-driven
Last quarter: the total dollar value of institutional holdings rose +28%, but actual share count only changed +9%. The gap is explained by the stock's price rising — not new buying. Strong value growth with weak share growth means the rally is price momentum, not fresh institutional demand.
⚠️
Saturation — most institutions already know this story
1 → 0 → 1 → 0 → 0 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 0 → 1 → 0 → 0. 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.
🏛️
Veteran-anchored — 67% veterans vs 17% newcomers
■ 67% veterans
■ 17% 1-2yr
■ 17% new
Entry-cohort mix of 6 holders: 4 (67%) are 2+ year veterans, 1 entered 1–2 years ago, and 1 (17%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
✅
Strong quality — 38% AUM from major funds
38% from top-100 AUM funds
2 of 6 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, accounting for 38% of total institutional value held. A meaningful share of the ownership value comes from the most well-resourced institutions.
Exit risk score 1.0/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.