Based on 9 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 CEADW 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 69% of 3.0Y high
69% of all-time peak
Only 9 funds hold CEADW today versus a peak of 13 funds at 2025 Q4 — just 69% 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.
📶
Steady growth — +12% more funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
+1 new funds entered over the past year (+12% YoY). Gradual, steady growth in institutional ownership is generally a healthy signal — not a speculative rush, but consistent conviction.
🔴
Heavy selling pressure — only 25% buying
1 buying3 selling
Last quarter: 3 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: 6 → 5 → 1 → 0. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
44% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 44% conviction (2yr+)
■ 44% medium
■ 11% new
4 out of 9 hedge funds have held CEADW 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 +0%, value -38%
Last quarter: funds added +0% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -38%. 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
2 → 6 → 5 → 1 → 0 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 6 → 5 → 1 → 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 — 56% veterans vs 33% newcomers
■ 56% veterans
■ 11% 1-2yr
■ 33% new
Entry-cohort mix of 9 holders: 5 (56%) are 2+ year veterans, 1 entered 1–2 years ago, and 3 (33%) 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 9 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 3.0/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.