Based on 8 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q1 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 4 quarters in a row
For 4 consecutive quarters, more hedge funds reduced or closed their HUBCW 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 32% of 3.0Y high
32% of all-time peak
Only 8 funds hold HUBCW today versus a peak of 25 funds at 2023 Q2 — just 32% 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 — 43% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
6 fewer hedge funds hold HUBCW compared to a year ago (-43% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🔴
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 — ~1 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 2 → 1 → 0 → 1. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
75% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 75% conviction (2yr+)
■ 12% medium
■ 12% new
6 out of 8 hedge funds have held HUBCW 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 -11%, value -66%
Last quarter: funds added -11% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -66%. 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 → 2 → 1 → 0 → 1 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 2 → 1 → 0 → 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 — 88% veterans vs 12% newcomers
■ 88% veterans
■ 0% 1-2yr
■ 12% new
Entry-cohort mix of 8 holders: 7 (88%) are 2+ year veterans, 0 entered 1–2 years ago, and 1 (12%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
✅
Strong quality — 30% AUM from major funds
30% from top-100 AUM funds
4 of 8 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, accounting for 30% of total institutional value held. A meaningful share of the ownership value comes from the most well-resourced institutions.
Exit risk score 1.6/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.