Based on 27 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q1 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 2 quarters in a row
For 2 consecutive quarters, more hedge funds reduced or closed their FLDDW 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 64% of 3.0Y high
64% of all-time peak
Only 27 funds hold FLDDW today versus a peak of 42 funds at 2023 Q3 — 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 — 13% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
4 fewer hedge funds hold FLDDW compared to a year ago (-13% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🔴
Heavy selling pressure — only 33% buying
4 buying8 selling
Last quarter: 8 funds sold vs only 4 buyers. This is widespread institutional distribution — not a few funds rebalancing, but a broad exit. High conviction bearish signal.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~2 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 1 → 3 → 0 → 2. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
70% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 70% conviction (2yr+)
■ 19% medium
■ 11% new
19 out of 27 hedge funds have held FLDDW 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.
💰
Price up while funds trimmed (+2352% value, -21% shares)
Last quarter: total value of institutional FLDDW holdings rose +2352% even though funds reduced share count by 21%. The stock price increased enough to offset the selling. Institutions are quietly trimming into price strength — watch for rotation.
⚠️
Saturation — most institutions already know this story
30 → 1 → 3 → 0 → 2 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 1 → 3 → 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 — 81% veterans vs 19% newcomers
■ 81% veterans
■ 0% 1-2yr
■ 19% new
Entry-cohort mix of 27 holders: 22 (81%) are 2+ year veterans, 0 entered 1–2 years ago, and 5 (19%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
🏆
Elite ownership — 98% AUM from top-100 funds
98% from top-100 AUM funds
3 of 25 holders are among the 100 largest funds by AUM, controlling 98% of total institutional value in FLDDW. 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 2.3/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.