Based on 6 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q1 · updated quarterly
📈
Buying streak — 1 quarter in a row
For 1 consecutive quarter, more hedge funds added TTNP than sold it. That's a consistent pattern of professional buying — not a one-time trade. When institutions keep buying quarter after quarter, it usually means they see a multi-year opportunity, not just a short-term momentum flip.
🔻
Below peak — only 32% of 3.0Y high
32% of all-time peak
Only 6 funds hold TTNP today versus a peak of 19 funds at 2025 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 — 62% fewer funds vs a year ago
fund count last 6Q
10 fewer hedge funds hold TTNP compared to a year ago (-62% decline). When institutions consistently reduce their exposure, it's worth exploring the underlying fundamental reasons driving them away.
🟢
More buyers than sellers — 100% buying
2 buying0 selling
Last quarter: 2 funds were net buyers (2 opened a brand new position + 0 added to an existing one). Only 0 were sellers (0 trimmed + 0 sold completely). A clear majority buying is a strong confirmation signal.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~2 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 3 → 2 → 0 → 2. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
50% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 50% conviction (2yr+)
■ 17% medium
■ 33% new
3 out of 6 hedge funds have held TTNP 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 +2%, value -16%
Last quarter: funds added +2% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -16%. 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
3 → 3 → 2 → 0 → 2 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 3 → 2 → 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.
📊
Mixed cohorts — 17% veterans, 50% new entrants
■ 17% veterans
■ 33% 1-2yr
■ 50% new
Of 6 current holders: 1 (17%) held 2+ years, 2 held 1–2 years, 3 (50%) entered in the past year. Balanced distribution — some institutional memory, some recent momentum buyers.
📋
Smaller funds dominant — 0% AUM from top-100
0% from top-100 AUM funds
0 of 6 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 1.0/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.