Based on 7 hedge funds · latest filing: 2025 Q4 · 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 64% of 3.0Y high
64% of all-time peak
Only 7 funds hold DQJCY today versus a peak of 11 funds at 2025 Q2 — just 64% 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 — 22% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
2 fewer hedge funds hold DQJCY compared to a year ago (-22% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🟢
More buyers than sellers — 75% buying
6 buying2 selling
Last quarter: 6 funds were net buyers (1 opened a brand new position + 5 added to an existing one). Only 2 were sellers (1 trimmed + 1 sold completely). A clear majority buying is a strong confirmation signal.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~1 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 1 → 3 → 1 → 1. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
57% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 57% conviction (2yr+)
■ 14% medium
■ 29% new
4 out of 7 hedge funds have held DQJCY 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 +142%, value -10%
Last quarter: funds added +142% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -10%. 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 → 1 → 3 → 1 → 1 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 1 → 3 → 1 → 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.
🏛️
Deep conviction — 43% of holders stayed 2+ years
■ 43% veterans
■ 29% 1-2yr
■ 29% new
Of 7 current holders: 3 (43%) have held for over 2 years without selling. These are not momentum buyers — they have lived through drawdowns and stayed. A large veteran base acts as a stabilizing force during selloffs.
📋
Smaller funds dominant — 0% AUM from top-100
0% from top-100 AUM funds
0 of 7 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, but together hold only 0% of total institutional value. The stock is held primarily by smaller and mid-sized funds.
Exit risk score 1.9/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.