Based on 11 hedge funds · latest filing: 2026 Q1 · updated quarterly
📉
Selling streak — 3 quarters in a row
For 3 consecutive quarters, more hedge funds reduced or closed their WEBL 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 69% of 3.0Y high
69% of all-time peak
Only 11 funds hold WEBL today versus a peak of 16 funds at 2024 Q4 — just 69% 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.
〰️
Stable — ownership unchanged year-over-year
fund count last 6Q
The number of hedge funds holding WEBL is almost the same as a year ago (+0 funds, +0% change). No significant rush to buy or sell — institutional backing is holding steady.
🟡
Slight buying edge — 56% buying
9 buying7 selling
Last quarter: 9 funds bought or added vs 7 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.
➡️
Steady new buyers — ~2 new funds per quarter
new funds entering per quarter
Funds opening this position for the first time: 7 → 1 → 1 → 2. A stable flow of new institutional buyers suggests ongoing interest without signs of either acceleration or slowdown.
🔒
55% of holders stayed for 2+ years
■ 55% conviction (2yr+)
■ 27% medium
■ 18% new
6 out of 11 hedge funds have held WEBL 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 -23%, value -50%
Last quarter: funds added -23% more shares while total portfolio value only changed -50%. 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
4 → 7 → 1 → 1 → 2 new funds/Q
New funds entering each quarter: 7 → 1 → 1 → 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 — 71% veterans vs 7% newcomers
■ 71% veterans
■ 21% 1-2yr
■ 7% new
Entry-cohort mix of 14 holders: 10 (71%) are 2+ year veterans, 3 entered 1–2 years ago, and 1 (7%) joined within the past year. A veteran-weighted cap table skews toward institutional memory over fresh momentum.
📋
Smaller funds dominant — 8% AUM from top-100
8% from top-100 AUM funds
2 of 9 holders rank in the top 100 by AUM, but together hold only 8% of total institutional value. The stock is held primarily by smaller and mid-sized funds.
Exit risk score 1.9/10 — low institutional crowding. Ownership is below peak levels, holder base is relatively sticky, and buying momentum is positive.