Based on 12 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q1 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 3 quarters in a row
For 3 consecutive quarters, more hedge funds reduced or closed their CHEK 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 63% of 3.0Y high
63% of all-time peak
Only 12 funds hold CHEK today versus a peak of 19 funds at 2025 Q2 — just 63% 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 — 14% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
2 fewer hedge funds hold CHEK compared to a year ago (-14% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🟠
More sellers than buyers — 43% buying
6 buying8 selling
Last quarter: 8 funds reduced or exited vs 6 that bought or added. When more than half of active funds are selling, it's a caution flag — especially if the stock price hasn't moved down yet.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~2 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 5 → 2 → 0 → 2. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
50% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 50% conviction (2yr+)
■ 25% medium
■ 25% new
6 out of 12 hedge funds have held CHEK 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 -38%, value -80%
Last quarter: funds added -38% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -80%. 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
1 → 5 → 2 → 0 → 2 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 5 → 2 → 0 → 2. 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 — 42% veterans vs 33% newcomers
■ 42% veterans
■ 25% 1-2yr
■ 33% new
Entry-cohort mix of 12 holders: 5 (42%) are 2+ year veterans, 3 entered 1–2 years ago, and 4 (33%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
🏆
Elite ownership — 62% AUM from top-100 funds
62% from top-100 AUM funds
4 of 12 holders are among the 100 largest funds by AUM, controlling 62% of total institutional value in CHEK. When the biggest players dominate the cap table, it signifies deep institutional support — since mega-funds deploy the most rigorous due diligence and capital.
Exit risk score 2.1/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.