Based on 21 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q2 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 1 quarter in a row
For 1 consecutive quarter, more hedge funds reduced or closed their FBYDW positions than added to them. Sustained institutional selling is a meaningful warning sign — these are professionals with deep research teams collectively deciding to exit.
📊
High ownership — 72% of 3.0Y peak
72% of all-time peak
21 funds currently hold this stock — 72% of the 3.0-year high of 29 funds (reached 2023 Q4). Ownership is elevated but not yet at maximum concentration. Room to grow, but watch if the trend reverses.
📉
Outflows — 5% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
1 fewer hedge funds hold FBYDW compared to a year ago (-5% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🔴
Heavy selling pressure — only 17% buying
1 buying5 selling
Last quarter: 5 funds sold vs only 1 buyers. This is widespread institutional distribution — not a few funds rebalancing, but a broad exit. High conviction bearish signal.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~0 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 1 → 3 → 2 → 0. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
81% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 81% conviction (2yr+)
■ 0% medium
■ 19% new
17 out of 21 hedge funds have held FBYDW 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 +41% but shares only +1% — price-driven
Last quarter: the total dollar value of institutional holdings rose +41%, but actual share count only changed +1%. 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
0 → 1 → 3 → 2 → 0 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 1 → 3 → 2 → 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 — 81% veterans vs 19% newcomers
■ 81% veterans
■ 0% 1-2yr
■ 19% new
Entry-cohort mix of 21 holders: 17 (81%) are 2+ year veterans, 0 entered 1–2 years ago, and 4 (19%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
📋
Smaller funds dominant — 8% AUM from top-100
8% from top-100 AUM funds
2 of 20 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, but together hold only 8% of total institutional value. The stock is held primarily by smaller and mid-sized funds.
Exit risk score 3.7/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.