Based on 87 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 THQ positions than added to them. Sustained institutional selling is a meaningful warning sign — these are professionals with deep research teams collectively deciding to exit.
📊
High ownership — 84% of 3.0Y peak
84% of all-time peak
87 funds currently hold this stock — 84% of the 3.0-year high of 103 funds (reached 2024 Q4). Ownership is elevated but not yet at maximum concentration. Room to grow, but watch if the trend reverses.
〰️
Stable — ownership unchanged year-over-year
fund count last 6Q
The number of hedge funds holding THQ is almost the same as a year ago (-3 funds, -3% change). No significant rush to buy or sell — institutional backing is holding steady.
🟡
Slight buying edge — 51% buying
42 buying40 selling
Last quarter: 42 funds bought or added vs 40 that reduced or exited. It's nearly a 50/50 split — some institutions are convinced, others are taking profits. This mixed picture is normal near price highs.
📈
More new buyers each quarter (+8 vs last Q)
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening a new THQ position: 18 → 19 → 5 → 13. A growing influx of new institutional buyers means the asset is still gathering momentum — the consensus hasn't fully saturated yet.
🔒
57% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 57% conviction (2yr+)
■ 26% medium
■ 16% new
50 out of 87 hedge funds have held THQ 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 +3%, value -18%
Last quarter: funds added +3% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -18%. 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
7 → 18 → 19 → 5 → 13 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 18 → 19 → 5 → 13. 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 — 59% veterans vs 21% newcomers
■ 59% veterans
■ 21% 1-2yr
■ 21% new
Entry-cohort mix of 87 holders: 51 (59%) are 2+ year veterans, 18 entered 1–2 years ago, and 18 (21%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
🏆
Elite ownership — 52% AUM from top-100 funds
52% from top-100 AUM funds
11 of 87 holders are among the 100 largest funds by AUM, controlling 52% of total institutional value in THQ. 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 2.6/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.