Based on 23 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q2 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 2 quarters in a row
For 2 consecutive quarters, more hedge funds reduced or closed their AAGIY 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
23 funds currently hold this stock — 72% of the 3.0-year high of 32 funds (reached 2025 Q4). Ownership is elevated but not yet at maximum concentration. Room to grow, but watch if the trend reverses.
📉
Outflows — 8% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
2 fewer hedge funds hold AAGIY compared to a year ago (-8% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🔴
Heavy selling pressure — only 30% buying
6 buying14 selling
Last quarter: 14 funds sold vs only 6 buyers. This is widespread institutional distribution — not a few funds rebalancing, but a broad exit. High conviction bearish signal.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~1 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 2 → 10 → 2 → 1. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
48% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 48% conviction (2yr+)
■ 26% medium
■ 26% new
11 out of 23 hedge funds have held AAGIY 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.
💎
Buying through price weakness — shares -5%, value -24%
Last quarter: funds added -5% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -24%. 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
5 → 2 → 10 → 2 → 1 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 2 → 10 → 2 → 1. 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 — 48% veterans vs 39% newcomers
■ 48% veterans
■ 13% 1-2yr
■ 39% new
Entry-cohort mix of 23 holders: 11 (48%) are 2+ year veterans, 3 entered 1–2 years ago, and 9 (39%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
📋
Smaller funds dominant — 4% AUM from top-100
4% from top-100 AUM funds
2 of 23 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, but together hold only 4% of total institutional value. The stock is held primarily by smaller and mid-sized funds.
Exit risk score 3.3/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.