Based on 19 hedge funds · latest filing: 2025 Q4 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 1 quarter in a row
For 1 consecutive quarter, more hedge funds reduced or closed their MSAIW 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 51% of 3.0Y high
51% of all-time peak
Only 19 funds hold MSAIW today versus a peak of 37 funds at 2023 Q4 — just 51% 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 — 32% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
9 fewer hedge funds hold MSAIW compared to a year ago (-32% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🔴
Heavy selling pressure — only 9% buying
1 buying10 selling
Last quarter: 10 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: 4 → 2 → 1 → 0. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
89% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 89% conviction (2yr+)
■ 0% medium
■ 11% new
17 out of 19 hedge funds have held MSAIW 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 -18%, value -100%
Last quarter: funds added -18% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -100%. 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 → 4 → 2 → 1 → 0 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 4 → 2 → 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.
📊
Mixed cohorts — 21% veterans, 11% new entrants
■ 21% veterans
■ 68% 1-2yr
■ 11% new
Of 19 current holders: 4 (21%) held 2+ years, 13 held 1–2 years, 2 (11%) entered in the past year. Balanced distribution — some institutional memory, some recent momentum buyers.
📋
Smaller funds dominant — 18% AUM from top-100
18% from top-100 AUM funds
3 of 19 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, but together hold only 18% of total institutional value. The stock is held primarily by smaller and mid-sized funds.
Exit risk score 2.9/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.