Insider Buying vs. Insider Trading

Steve Cohen, the high profile hedge fund manager, narrowly escaped a prison sentence for trading on insider information. Yet cable billionaire John Malone’s recent insider buying of $16 million of Liberty Global shares, where he is Chairman of the Board and clearly knows a lot of non-public information, is perfectly legal and may be a valuable signal to investors. Can both be possible at the same time?

The not-so-simple answer: yes, and no. It depends on who is involved and what they are doing.

For nearly a century, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has sought to protect individual investors from trading by people who know secrets about companies. If these people could freely trade on critical private “inside information,” perhaps that a company was about to be acquired at a huge premium, or that an earnings report was going to be a disaster, investors might view the stock market as unfair. This would not only damage the public’s confidence in the market, but also impair its capital-raising function.

What qualifies as “inside” information? The widely-used definition is “material, non-public information”—that is, something that could likely have a meaningful impact on the stock price or that a reasonable investor would consider important when making an investment decision. And, it needs to be information that isn’t generally known by the investing public. If you overhear a barista at Starbucks talk about how well the new iced coconut milk macchiato is selling there, that’s not material as Starbucks has 26,000 stores and sells hundreds of different drinks. However, it you somehow learn that total company revenues across the entire chain will be up 12% next quarter, that’s material.

Just knowing the information isn’t illegal—it’s what you do with the information that matters. If you trade on “inside information,” or in some cases merely pass along that information to others who then trade on it, that’s illegal. Hedge fund managers and anyone else who trade on or are involved in passing along this kind of information should be prepared to spend some time in a court room on “insider trading” charges.[*]

However, this tight restriction could be unfair to officers and directors of public companies. They might rightfully want to buy and sell stock in their company, yet are also in a position to know a lot about their company that isn’t public. The SEC has carved out some protections for this group, whose trades are often referred to as “insider buying.”

As long as these corporate “insiders” buy and sell within specific rules, are not taking advantage of material, non-public information, and properly report these trades to the SEC, it’s perfectly legal. John Malone, of Liberty Global, followed these rules so his trades were legal.

For investors, these reported “insider” trades can indicate that those with the best knowledge of a company believe it will do better in the future. Long before anything newsworthy happens, or before an upturn appears in a company’s financials, an insider may see positive changes and purchase the company’s stock. This can be a sign that “outsiders” should consider buying it, too. Numerous academic studies support this idea and we agree that insider buying can be a useful investing signal.

Insiders who buy their company’s stock aren’t always right, however. It’s possible for insiders to be too close to a company and miss some broad, negative signals; or someone can be so loyal to their company that it clouds their thinking. There have been a number of cases where an insider buys into their company only to see the stock slide downwards.

Perhaps the most valuable insider buying signal is when a healthy company’s stock is temporarily out of favor and a savvy, highly credible CEO makes a large public purchase. In a famous example, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan, bought $26.6 million of his company’s stock in February 2016 at $53.18, at a time when most investors were selling heavily. By year-end the shares traded at $86, for a 62% gain worth over $16 million that everyone would like to take to the bank.

[*] This note is intended as a general overview of insider trading regulations for investors, and is not intended as legal advice. Insider trading case law and regulations are complicated and can change, sometimes abruptly. Please consult a qualified attorney or compliance officer if you need more specific guidance or advice.

More Turnaround Tips

Identify & Profit from Distressed Investing

Free Report: Turnaround Investing Mistakes

Turnaround Investing Blog

Turnaround Investing Blog

IBM: Not Yet Time to Swing at this Pitch

IBM’s stock underperformance since IBM’s current CEO took the helm in 2012 has been stark, with the shares declining 23% while the S&P500 Index has more than doubled. One big problem: revenue growth rate is zero, at best. Without revenue growth, what’s left to entice investors? The real driver of value at IBM – free cash flow that is used to repurchase shares. Can IBM borrow its way to shareholder prosperity as its cash flows shrink? What to do with IBM shares? Wait for a better pitch in the form of a catalyst or much lower valuation. Read More.

Comparing Stocks Vs. Bonds

While the common stock of a turnaround candidate usually has the greatest upside potential, other classes of securities, such as bonds or preferred stock, may offer attractive profit possibilities with less risk. Many turnaround companies have only one class of securities available to investors but where there are different classes to choose from, it can pay to do a little extra analysis of the various options.

Read More.

Turnaround Letter Stock Pick Named Top Performer of 2017

 

stock market advicex

 

What Last Year's Top Stock Pickers Are Buying in 2018

 

This Forbes write-up follows up on the recent Top Stock Tips report--naming The Turnaround Letter's Crocs recommendation the top performer of 2017: With 90% gains, CROX beat out 100 other investment ideas included in the report; and the stock continues to have value investing appeal, according to Putnam.

 

George notes, "We see additional upside for the stock in 2018 as management's efforts continue to bear fruit, though the gains will likely be more muted than we saw in 2017."