Enable files annual, quarterly and other reports and other information with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

[…]

Read More…

This article is reprinted by permission from NerdWallet. 
This article provides information and education for investors. NerdWallet does not offer advisory or brokerage services, nor does it recommend or advise investors to buy or sell particular stocks or securities.
When a house party gets a little too rowdy, it’s only a matter of time before the police take notice. And when that party’s happening down on Wall Street, it’s the Securities and Exchange Commission that gets the call.

That appears to be the case for special-purpose acquisition companies, or SPACs. So far in 2021, SPACs have raised $99.9 billion in initial public offerings — more than the amount SPAC IPOs raised from 2003 to 2019 combined. That’s the kind of explosive growth that gets the attention of regulators, and indeed, the SEC has intervened.
Also see: 5 things to watch out for before you invest in SPACs
Now, with the SPAC market sputtering, you may be wondering if you missed out. But it’s possible that if you sat out the SPAC frenzy, it was for the better — the surge in SPACs might just go down in the annals of the investing world as a seismic event with a short run, alongside GameStop, GME, -1.48% boom-and-bust cryptocurrencies and other hot investing trends.
So what did the SEC do? In a statement released earlier this month, the regulator presented new accounting guidance for SPACs. And while that may sound minor, it’s already having a profound impact.
The change will put additional stress on accountants working on SPAC deals and lead to a slowdown in the market, says Yelena Dunaevsky, managing editor of the American Bar Association’s Business Law Today and vice president of transactional insurance at insurance and consulting firm Woodruff Sawyer.
And perhaps, she says, a slowdown is exactly what the SEC wanted, considering how big the market had become.
More: With SPACs down as much as 90%, there are finally some good buys

What’s a SPAC anyway?
A SPAC is a company that doesn’t actually do anything — it has no operations and is referred to as a “shell” company. The SPAC is formed by a management team known as the “sponsor,” which then sells shares of the company in an IPO. Once the SPAC is a public company, it usually has two years to use the cash it raised to find and merge with a private company (the “target” company) that actually does have operations.
Why did SPACs surge?
According to Iliya Rybchin, a partner at global management consulting firm Elixirr, a confluence of events from the past few years, including deregulation, excess available capital and a volatile stock market, likely contributed to the surge. But what can’t be overlooked is that for the sponsors, SPACs can be a really, really sweet deal, Rybchin says.
If the SPAC finds and acquires a target company, the sponsors often get to own 20% of the merged company for a much lower price than the average investor would have to pay for the same equity. Considering this, alongside the other factors, it’s not hard to see why the number of SPACs went parabolic.
Did I miss the boat on SPACs?
With the inevitable slowdown coming, you may be having a bit of regret you didn’t have the chance to add SPACs to your portfolio. But if you look at the data, missing out may have been fortuitous.
In the short term, SPACs are attractive. According to data compiled by Elixirr, investing in SPACs outperformed investing in the S&P 500 SPX, -0.72%  in the latter half of 2020, and by December, the outperformance was significant. But this is looking at the earliest stages of a SPAC — the post-IPO period. From there, the SPAC still must find a target to acquire, merge successfully and start operating as a real company. And that, Rybchin says, is where the rubber really meets the road.
“In theory, yeah, SPACs are doing well. Everyone’s like ‘yeah, you guys are gonna go buy a clothing company!’ Then in reality, they go buy that clothing company, and they can’t deliver the efficiencies, the synergies, the cost savings, the growth,” he says. “You can no longer hide behind the veil of your thesis.”
Also see: These are the hidden dangers lurking inside SPACs that can hurt you
Elixirr data show that between 2010 and 2019, average one-year postmerger returns for earlier SPACs consistently underperformed the Russell 2000 index. RUT, -1.26%
“The explanation for this phenomenon is simple. Investors rush into a SPAC on the promise of big returns from famous SPAC founders,” Rybchin says. “However, we have found many of these SPAC leaders are not as hands-on as they once were, do not have support to operate the acquired businesses and many of the promised benefits are never realized.”
So, if you’re kicking yourself for not buying into the SPAC hype, maybe a change of attitude is in order. It’s more likely you avoided jumping on a bubble that was bound to burst. Looking ahead to a world that isn’t dominated by SPACs, you may want to follow the tried-and-true advice of financial experts: Put your money away in highly diversified, low-cost index funds, make regular contributions through a dollar-cost averaging strategy and focus on the long term, rather than chasing the types of investments making headlines.
More From NerdWallet

Chris Davis writes for NerdWallet. Email: [email protected].

[…]

Read More…

Raymond James (NYSE:RJF) – Seaport Global Securities raised their Q1 2022 earnings estimates for Raymond James in a research note issued on Thursday, April 29th. Seaport Global Securities analyst J. Mitchell now anticipates that the financial services provider will post earnings per share of $2.37 for the quarter, up from their prior forecast of $2.11. Seaport Global Securities also issued estimates for Raymond James’ Q2 2022 earnings at $2.09 EPS, Q3 2022 earnings at $2.20 EPS and Q4 2022 earnings at $2.39 EPS. Raymond James (NYSE:RJF) last announced its quarterly earnings data on Wednesday, April 28th. The financial services provider reported $2.51 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating the Zacks’ consensus estimate of $2.09 by $0.42. The firm had revenue of $2.37 billion during the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $2.26 billion. Raymond James had a net margin of 10.02% and a return on equity of 12.29%. Raymond James’s quarterly revenue was up 14.6% on a year-over-year basis. During the same quarter in the prior year, the firm posted $1.20 earnings per share.
A number of other analysts have also issued reports on the company. Credit Suisse Group boosted their target price on Raymond James from $105.00 to $114.00 and gave the company a “neutral” rating in a research report on Friday, January 29th. Zacks Investment Research raised Raymond James from a “hold” rating to a “buy” rating and set a $129.00 price objective on the stock in a research report on Thursday, April 1st. Morgan Stanley upped their price target on Raymond James from $141.00 to $150.00 and gave the stock an “overweight” rating in a report on Friday. The Goldman Sachs Group upgraded Raymond James from a “sell” rating to a “buy” rating and lifted their price objective for the company from $82.00 to $110.00 in a research note on Tuesday, January 5th. Finally, Wolfe Research upgraded shares of Raymond James from a “market perform” rating to an “outperform” rating and lifted their price target for the stock from $89.00 to $111.00 in a research note on Tuesday, January 5th. Two equities research analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating and ten have assigned a buy rating to the stock. The company currently has a consensus rating of “Buy” and an average price target of $122.36.
(Ad)Former 12-term Congressman, Air Force surgeon, and Presidential candidate says both political parties are wrong about how the rich REALLY get richer. Take a few minutes to hear him explain what’s going on… what’s coming next… and most importantly, what YOU can do about it, starting right now.

Shares of RJF opened at $130.78 on Monday. The company’s 50-day moving average price is $125.06 and its 200 day moving average price is $104.11. Raymond James has a 12-month low of $56.56 and a 12-month high of $132.56. The company has a current ratio of 0.98, a quick ratio of 0.96 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.46. The firm has a market cap of $18.01 billion, a P/E ratio of 22.47 and a beta of 1.35.
The business also recently disclosed a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Thursday, April 15th. Investors of record on Thursday, April 1st were given a dividend of $0.39 per share. The ex-dividend date was Wednesday, March 31st. This represents a $1.56 annualized dividend and a dividend yield of 1.19%. Raymond James’s dividend payout ratio is currently 25.53%.
In other news, EVP Bella Loykhter Allaire sold 9,330 shares of Raymond James stock in a transaction that occurred on Monday, March 29th. The shares were sold at an average price of $123.59, for a total transaction of $1,153,094.70. Following the sale, the executive vice president now owns 48,200 shares in the company, valued at $5,957,038. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is available at the SEC website. Also, insider Scott A. Curtis sold 10,000 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Thursday, March 11th. The shares were sold at an average price of $118.09, for a total transaction of $1,180,900.00. Following the completion of the transaction, the insider now directly owns 88,039 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $10,396,525.51. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Over the last 90 days, insiders sold 236,543 shares of company stock worth $26,524,083. 10.82% of the stock is owned by insiders.
A number of hedge funds and other institutional investors have recently bought and sold shares of RJF. Townsquare Capital LLC grew its holdings in shares of Raymond James by 43.6% in the 3rd quarter. Townsquare Capital LLC now owns 10,224 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $768,000 after acquiring an additional 3,106 shares during the last quarter. Brinker Capital Investments LLC bought a new position in Raymond James in the third quarter worth $1,123,000. Mercer Global Advisors Inc. ADV boosted its position in shares of Raymond James by 4.5% during the 3rd quarter. Mercer Global Advisors Inc. ADV now owns 34,264 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $2,493,000 after acquiring an additional 1,464 shares in the last quarter. Fulton Bank N.A. acquired a new position in shares of Raymond James in the 4th quarter worth approximately $204,000. Finally, Martin Capital Partners LLC increased its position in shares of Raymond James by 4.8% during the 4th quarter. Martin Capital Partners LLC now owns 4,035 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $386,000 after purchasing an additional 183 shares in the last quarter. Hedge funds and other institutional investors own 75.11% of the company’s stock.
About Raymond James
Raymond James Financial, Inc, a financial holding company, through its subsidiaries, engages in the underwriting, distribution, trading, and brokerage of equity and debt securities, and the sale of mutual funds and other investment products in the United States, Canada, Europe, and internationally. The company operates through Private Client Group, Capital Markets, Asset Management, RJ Bank, and Other segments.
Recommended Story: Trade Deficit

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest and most accurate reporting. This story was reviewed by MarketBeat’s editorial team prior to publication. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected]
Featured Article: How a Back-End Load Mutual Fund Works
7 Bellwether Stocks Signaling a Return to NormalBellwether stocks are considered to be leading indicators about the direction of the overall economy, a specific sector, or the broader market. They are predictive stocks in that investors can use the company’s earnings reports to gauge economic strength or weakness.The traditional definition of bellwether stocks brings to mind established, blue-chip companies. They are the home of mature brands with consumer loyalty. These may be stocks that aren’t associated with exceptional growth; some may be dividend stocks.But there’s something different about normal this time around. If it’s true (and I think it is) that the old rules no longer apply, investors need to change the way they think about bellwether stocks. Plus, let’s face it, many stocks that we might consider to be bellwether stocks have already had a bit of a vaccine rally. That means that the easy gains are gone.With that in mind, we’ve put together this special presentation that highlights seven of what may be termed the new bellwether stocks. These are stocks that investors should be paying attention to as the economy continues to reopen.One quality of many of these stocks is that they are either negative for 2021 or underperforming the broader market. And that means that they are likely to have a strong upside as the economy grows.View the “7 Bellwether Stocks Signaling a Return to Normal”.

[…]

Read More…

Stepan (NYSE:SCL) – Stock analysts at Seaport Global Securities increased their Q1 2022 earnings estimates for Stepan in a research note issued to investors on Wednesday, April 28th. Seaport Global Securities analyst M. Harrison now anticipates that the basic materials company will post earnings of $1.98 per share for the quarter, up from their prior estimate of $1.65. Seaport Global Securities has a “Neutral” rating on the stock. Stepan (NYSE:SCL) last issued its earnings results on Monday, April 26th. The basic materials company reported $1.82 EPS for the quarter, topping the Zacks’ consensus estimate of $1.43 by $0.39. Stepan had a net margin of 6.51% and a return on equity of 13.85%.
Separately, Zacks Investment Research upgraded shares of Stepan from a “hold” rating to a “buy” rating and set a $147.00 target price for the company in a research report on Friday.
Shares of NYSE:SCL opened at $130.66 on Monday. The business’s 50-day moving average is $129.13 and its 200 day moving average is $122.48. The firm has a market capitalization of $2.94 billion, a P/E ratio of 25.62 and a beta of 0.74. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.18, a current ratio of 2.31 and a quick ratio of 1.75. Stepan has a 1 year low of $83.66 and a 1 year high of $134.07.
The firm also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Tuesday, June 15th. Shareholders of record on Friday, May 28th will be paid a dividend of $0.305 per share. The ex-dividend date of this dividend is Thursday, May 27th. This represents a $1.22 dividend on an annualized basis and a yield of 0.93%. Stepan’s dividend payout ratio (DPR) is presently 23.83%.
(Ad)The “Great Reset” started on January 20th with the inauguration of Joe Biden. Between now and the midterms, the American economy could be reshaped forever – and renowned analyst Jeff Brown has found the “lynchpin” to the entire plan.

In other Stepan news, VP Debra Stefaniak sold 402 shares of the stock in a transaction on Monday, March 1st. The stock was sold at an average price of $121.85, for a total value of $48,983.70. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is available at this hyperlink. Also, CFO Luis Rojo sold 350 shares of Stepan stock in a transaction that occurred on Tuesday, March 16th. The shares were sold at an average price of $128.04, for a total transaction of $44,814.00. Following the sale, the chief financial officer now owns 5,307 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $679,508.28. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. In the last 90 days, insiders sold 1,912 shares of company stock valued at $244,918. Insiders own 6.20% of the company’s stock.
Several large investors have recently made changes to their positions in SCL. International Assets Investment Management LLC grew its stake in Stepan by 101.0% during the first quarter. International Assets Investment Management LLC now owns 201 shares of the basic materials company’s stock worth $25,000 after buying an additional 101 shares during the period. FMR LLC increased its position in Stepan by 189.0% in the 1st quarter. FMR LLC now owns 341 shares of the basic materials company’s stock valued at $30,000 after acquiring an additional 223 shares during the period. Focused Wealth Management Inc bought a new stake in shares of Stepan during the fourth quarter valued at about $57,000. USA Financial Portformulas Corp acquired a new position in shares of Stepan during the fourth quarter valued at approximately $57,000. Finally, Veriti Management LLC bought a new stake in shares of Stepan in the 4th quarter worth $105,000. 74.90% of the stock is owned by institutional investors and hedge funds.
Stepan Company Profile
Stepan Company, together with its subsidiaries, produces and sells specialty and intermediate chemicals to other manufacturers for use in various end products in North America, Europe, Latin America, and Asia. The company operates through three segments: Surfactants, Polymers, and Specialty Products.
Read More: What are municipal bonds?

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest and most accurate reporting. This story was reviewed by MarketBeat’s editorial team prior to publication. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected]
Featured Article: Return on Investment (ROI) Defined, Explained
7 Great Dividend Stocks to Buy For a Comfortable RetirementThere are people who will say the day of set it and forget it retirement accounts are over. But it’s a narrative we’ve heard before. The truth is the formula for saving for and enjoying a comfortable retirement, like the formula for weight loss, hasn’t really changed. A lot depends on whether an individual has the discipline to see it through.Dividend stocks remain one of the core elements of a retirement portfolio. As individuals near retirement the ability to reinvest dividends allows for a greater total return. And once individuals need to live off their portfolio, the dividends provide a source of income without having to tap their principal.However, not all dividend stocks are the same and many investors get sucked in by the allure of a high-yield dividend stock. But what you’re really looking for are companies with a history of increasing its dividend. The ability to increase a dividend over time illustrates that the company has a business model that can hold up regardless of how the broader economy is performing.In this special presentation, we’ll highlight seven stocks that individuals can buy today to capture a stable, recurring dividend.View the “7 Great Dividend Stocks to Buy For a Comfortable Retirement”.

[…]

Read More…

Major regulatory bodies in Europe and Asia are trying to determine whether the move by Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange by volume, to launch stock tokens such as Tesla and Coinbase violated securities laws, specifically in the way they have been marketed. 
Binance’s new initiative to trade stock tokens that represent a share of a publicly traded company has been met with enthusiasm by the crypto community, illustrated by trading volume for the Tesla TSLA/BUSD pair of nearly US$10 million on April 12, its first day of trade. Binance has since also released stock tokens for MicroStrategy, Apple and Microsoft.
According to Binance, the service allows users to buy stock tokens that represent public companies’ shares and can be traded at a hundredth of a fraction of the share. All trades are settled in Binance’s dollar-linked stablecoin, Binance USD (BUSD).
When an exchange user opens a trade, Switzerland-based Digital Assets AG (DAAG), purchases the corresponding amount of the company’s shares on behalf of a German firm called CM-Equity AG and a token is then created on DAAG’s private blockchain.
See related article: Binance Charity Fund donates to India’s COVID-19 fight
The purchased underlying shares are then put into a third-party security account associated with CM-Equity AG, and DAAG sends the token through CM-Equity to Binance and then on to the user.
Regulators investigating
However, regulatory bodies, such as the U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), German watchdog BaFin and Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) are all now investigating whether the stock tokens comply with the rules governing transparency and corporate disclosures in their respective jurisdictions.
On April 28, BaFin published a warning to investors that Binance may have violated European securities rules with the launch of its stock tokens.
According to the document published by BaFin, due to the nature of Binance’s product and the way it has been marketed, the cryptocurrency exchange has violated the European Prospectus Regulation by not supplying a prospectus to investors for the stock tokens. The securities violation means Binance could face a fine of up to US$6 million.
See related article: Ripple demands SEC to stop obtaining info on XRP dealings abroad
“The tokens are fully backed by a depository portfolio of underlying securities that represents the outstanding tokens. Stock tokens listed on Binance.com are a CM-Equity product that is compliant with MiFID-II and BaFin regulations,” a Binance spokesperson told Forkast.News. “Currently users only buy/sell the tokens from and to CM-Equity, which does not require a prospectus.”
Users in the U.S., China and Turkey are restricted from trading the stock tokens. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) commissioner Hester Peirce has said that Binance would not be able to launch such a product in the United States as it would “be an issue of concern for the SEC as it relates to our securities markets.”
Democratizing value transfer, but not legal rights
Binance’s chief executive Changpeng Zhao said in the official launch announcement on April 12, that the tokens “demonstrate how we can democratise value transfer more seamlessly, reduce friction and costs to accessibility, without compromising on compliance or security. Through connecting traditional and crypto markets, we are building another technological bridge for a more inclusive financial future.”
While the stock tokens allow greater access to holders who may not typically be able to gain economic exposure to these underlying shares — the tokens do not confer legal rights associated with share ownership such as voting rights.
See related article: Binance and Huobi stablecoins surge as Asia seeks fiat alternatives
“Essentially, these stock tokens enable people to invest in fractions of shares, and this could create a new and potentially huge derivative market,” said Professor Seen-Meng Chew at the Department of Finance at Chinese University Hong Kong, in an interview with Forkast.News.
According to Chew, however, the inherent risks of these derivative products are not well understood at this point and their prices are “likely to be volatile.” So, investors need to invest with great caution.
For stock token holders, dividends but not voting rights
“As token holders are also entitled to dividends, how these products could affect the governance and trading of the underlying shares remain uncertain,” Chew said, while noting that token holders do not have voting rights.
While the Binance representatives offered no comment on where the voting rights reside, traditionally shares give the stockholder the right to vote on matters of corporate policymaking. 
If Binance users are paying for public shares that are being held by a third-party entity and by agreeing to the trade they forfeit their voting rights, in theory it could mean the third party could be accumulating decision-making power in those public companies’ corporate governance at the expense of the exchange’s stock token holder. 
See related article: How to balance crypto investor protection and innovation in Hong Kong
In the traditional markets, such stock tokens could also constitute complex derivatives that are typically not available to retail investors. Red flags have already been raised by Hong Kong law firms regarding the Binance stock tokens and its marketing campaign to “trade equity with crypto coins” targeting retail investors. Marketing this to the broad public could be construed as misleading and hence caught the eyes of regulators.
Henry Chong, CEO of licensed digital securities exchange Fusang, told Forkast.News he believes Binance will “likely get into trouble for fraudulently marketing” the stock token.
“Their marketing is very strongly claiming these are fractional shares,” Chong said. “If you promote the product as a stock token, but then in fine print declare they are not in fact stock tokens, that just seems kind of dodgy. The honest truth is, especially retail investors, they don’t look that closely. They just kind of go with what you claim.”
According to Chong, only two options really exist for the stock tokens. The first is that, ”these really are shares, stocks, as they call them, in which case it seems downright illegal for them to do what they’re doing,” he said. “Binance isn’t registered as a stock exchange to list and trade stocks in that way.”
The second is that Binance is now acting as an agency broker and just passing the trades through to someone else. “Again, it doesn’t seem like Binance is licensed to do any of that,” Chong said. 
See related article: R3 Corda helping Thailand’s case for international trade dark horse
When asked directly on these points by Forkast.News, Binance representatives maintained that the stock tokens are a “CM-Equity AG product” that is compliant with MiFID-II and BaFIN regulations as CM-Equity has the license to sell securities and financial instruments, and as such does not require a prospectus. 
Where in the world is Binance headquartered now?
Since leaving China in 2017, Binance has learned to survive and thrive in the nascent cryptocurrency markets and has become the largest exchange in the world by volume. 
During the past three years, Binance appears to have been involved in a game of regulatory arbitrage — finding ways to skirt around regulators still trying to put in place efficient mechanisms for coordination across jurisdictions in the same way they have done for traditional markets, such as stocks and foreign exchange.
When Binance came under the Hong Kong SFC’s spotlight, a spokeswoman for Binance said the exchange did not operate in the city, and offered no comment on any licensing. Notably, Binance’s Zhao has consistently deflected or chosen not to answer any direct questions regarding the firm’s actual headquarters.
See related article: Turkey’s Thodex exchange fraud case yields six new suspects
“A lot of companies, Binance included, have always been very weary of answering questions about their headquarters,” said Chong, the Fusang CEO. “Even in a digital world where you serve a global customer base, you always need to be serving that customer base from somewhere. I’m not just talking about digital assets, as companies increasingly become cross-border, like Google for example. The question is, who regulates them?”
Investors should undoubtedly be asking more questions. According to a two-page “Binance Stock Tokens Trading Service Agreement” the exchange “reserves the right to suspend or terminate Binance stock tokens trading service without notice. If necessary, Binance.com has the right to suspend and terminate Binance stock tokens trading service at any time.”
The trading agreement means that Binance currently is within their rights to terminate the service at any time, although this is unlikely given the reputational damage it would cause. But it could leave traders with little recourse, zero exposure to their share of a company stock and confused about which regulator they could turn to for help.

[…]

Read More…

Impinj, Inc. (NASDAQ:PI) – Investment analysts at Colliers Securities boosted their FY2021 EPS estimates for Impinj in a report issued on Thursday, April 29th. Colliers Securities analyst D. Soderberg now anticipates that the company will earn ($1.54) per share for the year, up from their previous estimate of ($1.67). Colliers Securities also issued estimates for Impinj’s FY2022 earnings at ($1.14) EPS. Impinj (NASDAQ:PI) last released its quarterly earnings results on Wednesday, April 28th. The company reported $0.01 EPS for the quarter, beating the Zacks’ consensus estimate of ($0.12) by $0.13. The firm had revenue of $45.25 million for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $42.10 million. Impinj had a negative net margin of 30.63% and a negative return on equity of 26.61%. The company’s revenue for the quarter was down 5.4% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same period in the previous year, the business earned $0.13 earnings per share.
A number of other research firms have also commented on PI. Canaccord Genuity boosted their price target on shares of Impinj from $55.00 to $75.00 and gave the company a “buy” rating in a research report on Wednesday, February 10th. Roth Capital upped their target price on shares of Impinj from $31.00 to $74.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a research report on Thursday, February 11th. Morgan Stanley upped their target price on shares of Impinj from $53.00 to $58.00 and gave the stock an “equal weight” rating in a research report on Thursday, February 11th. Zacks Investment Research lowered shares of Impinj from a “buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a research report on Wednesday, January 20th. Finally, Needham & Company LLC reduced their target price on shares of Impinj from $77.00 to $66.00 and set a “buy” rating on the stock in a research report on Thursday. Two investment analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating and six have issued a buy rating to the company. Impinj currently has an average rating of “Buy” and an average price target of $69.00.
(Ad)The Electric Vehicle boom is here! This upstart lithium developer is positioning to be a future supplier to Tesla’s Gigafactory in the Nevada desert. Best of all, it’s currently undiscovered by Wall Street below US$1 per share.

NASDAQ:PI opened at $47.46 on Monday. The firm has a market cap of $1.14 billion, a PE ratio of -24.46 and a beta of 2.56. Impinj has a 12 month low of $20.91 and a 12 month high of $79.05. The company has a quick ratio of 6.44, a current ratio of 8.38 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.49. The company’s 50-day moving average price is $56.70 and its two-hundred day moving average price is $48.89.
Several hedge funds have recently modified their holdings of PI. Janus Henderson Group PLC bought a new stake in shares of Impinj during the fourth quarter worth $29,575,000. Credit Suisse AG increased its position in shares of Impinj by 570.6% during the fourth quarter. Credit Suisse AG now owns 72,933 shares of the company’s stock worth $3,053,000 after acquiring an additional 62,057 shares in the last quarter. Morgan Stanley increased its position in shares of Impinj by 20.0% during the fourth quarter. Morgan Stanley now owns 352,943 shares of the company’s stock worth $14,778,000 after acquiring an additional 58,930 shares in the last quarter. Renaissance Technologies LLC increased its position in shares of Impinj by 75.7% during the fourth quarter. Renaissance Technologies LLC now owns 114,400 shares of the company’s stock worth $4,790,000 after acquiring an additional 49,300 shares in the last quarter. Finally, K.J. Harrison & Partners Inc bought a new position in Impinj in the fourth quarter valued at $1,884,000. 85.57% of the stock is owned by institutional investors.
In other Impinj news, CEO Chris Ph.D. Diorio sold 1,543 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction that occurred on Monday, April 5th. The shares were sold at an average price of $58.73, for a total value of $90,620.39. Following the completion of the sale, the chief executive officer now owns 288,581 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $16,948,362.13. The sale was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which can be accessed through the SEC website. Also, Director Oppen Peter H. Van sold 25,000 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction that occurred on Wednesday, February 17th. The shares were sold at an average price of $70.60, for a total transaction of $1,765,000.00. Following the completion of the sale, the director now directly owns 43,617 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $3,079,360.20. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Insiders sold 26,984 shares of company stock worth $1,880,405 over the last 90 days. 25.70% of the stock is currently owned by company insiders.
Impinj Company Profile
Impinj, Inc operates a cloud connectivity platform. Its platform, which comprises multiple product families, wirelessly connects individual items and delivers data about the connected items to business and consumer applications. The company’s platform comprises endpoint ICs, a miniature radios-on-a-chip that attaches to a host item and includes a number to identify the item.
Read More: What is a SEC Filing?
This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest and most accurate reporting. This story was reviewed by MarketBeat’s editorial team prior to publication. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected]
Featured Article: Growth Stocks
7 Infrastructure Stocks That May Help Rebuild AmericaDespite their disagreements (real or imagined) on almost everything, Democrats and Republicans alike love infrastructure projects. These are easy wins for Congressional leaders seeking re-election. And they typically spur job creation, which contributes to economic growth.With that in mind, it’s ironic that, in the last four years, the United States Congress did not pass an infrastructure bill.Nevertheless, even with (and maybe because of) the gridlock that looks to be in the country’s future, the infrastructure looks to be on the front burner again. The economic recovery is still far from complete. Unfortunately, neither are America’s roads, energy grid, telecommunications systems, and the like. That means that it would seem like a good policy for a Biden administration to look at an infrastructure bill.Biden will be under pressure to endorse the $1.5 trillion infrastructure package that the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives passed in July. But the package may need to be tweaked a bit since it currently includes climate change initiatives that have kept the bill from advancing through the Senate.However, it appears that the economy will need some significant juice after whatever this winter brings in terms of the virus. And if calmer heads prevail (we can always hope), there may be a major infrastructure bill to stimulate job creation. And we’ve identified seven stocks that should bear watching if this comes to pass.View the “7 Infrastructure Stocks That May Help Rebuild America”.

[…]

Read More…

Endeavor’s Beverly Hills headquarters.

Eighteen months after pulling out of its first IPO bid, Beverly Hills-based entertainment company Endeavor Group Holdings Inc. made its stock market debut on April 29.Endeavor listed its shares on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol EDR. The stock, which was priced at $24 peaked at $28.47 before ending the day up 5% at $25.26.The company offered a total of 21.3 million shares. Opening day trading was active, with volume of 15,778,621.In September 2019, Endeavor abandoned an attempt to go public the day its shares were supposed to hit the market. The company had looked to raise at least $405 million at a valuation of $6.5 billion. Endeavor announced new plans to go public on March 31. In an April 20 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company said it planned to raise $511.2 million with its initial public offering. Endeavor had a valuation of around $10 billion, according to the filing. The IPO filing also said Elon Musk, co-founder and chief executive of Space Exploration Technologies Corp. and Tesla Inc., will join Endeavor’s board of directors.Endeavor said it will also raise $1.7 billion in a private placement with a host of investors, including Chinese technology conglomerate Tencent Holdings Ltd., New York-based firm Elliott Management Corp., and Menlo Park-based private equity firm Silver Lake Partners. Silver Lake Partners, Endeavor’s senior executives and other controlling investors will hold nearly 90% of Endeavor’s stock, according to an SEC filing. Investors who bought into the company’s IPO will hold roughly 8.4% of the company’s stock, the filing stated. Founded in 1995 by Ari Emanuel, the company’s chief executive, Endeavor’s assets include talent agency William Morris Endeavor, sports management company IMG and the Miss Universe Organization. Endeavor’s revenue plummeted nearly 24% to $3.5 billion for 2020 with a net loss of more than $625 million as the pandemic hammered parts of the entertainment industry. The company laid off 250 people last year. Many of Endeavor’s senior executives declined to take salaries in 2020, but they still received handsome compensation packages.Some members of the Endeavor exec team are among the highest paid in Los Angeles, according to a federal securities filing and data collected by the Business Journal.For 2020, Emanuel received total compensation, including bonus and stock awards, of $14.3 million. Endeavor President Mark Shapiro received $18.1 million.Other company executives with notable payouts for 2020 included Executive Chairman Patrick Whitesell, who received $3.2 million, Chief Financial Officer Jason Lublin, who earned $2.5 million, and Chief Legal Officer Seth Krauss, who received $3.1 million. Emanuel and Shapiro did not respond to requests for comment.
For reprint and licensing requests for this article, CLICK HERE.

[…]

Read More…

Talking points

Volkswagen Group of America being investigated by the SEC
Authorities probing whether ‘Voltswagen’ April Fool’s Day joke may have misled investors
Automaker under fire while still recovering from ‘Dieselgate’ scandal

Volkswagen’s American arm is being investigated by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over whether its April Fool’s Day ‘Voltswagen’ prank misled investors.
According to Reuters, sources claim the investigation has been in the works since early April – although the SEC has refused to comment on its probe.
In late March, media reports across the globe began to report so-called leaked information that VW in the US would be changing its name to ‘Voltswagen’ later this year to emphasise its commitment to electric vehicles.

4

The following day, despite having just issued a statement from its American CEO perpetuating the stunt, it turned out to be an April Fools’ joke.
At that time there was speculation the German marque could find itself in trouble with US regulators for misleading investors in the country because its stock price spiked in response on the day the bogus statement was officially issued.
Even though VW later did eventually admit it was a prank, it’s that stock price hike that is said to have sparked the SEC’s investigation. 

4

Volkswagen Group of America CEO Scott Keogh told Reuters in an interview last month that the name change was a “gag” designed to “have some humour” and “to celebrate our (VWs) profound focus on electrification.”

There is no evidence to suggest at this point that the hoax name change was linked to foul play, but it’s not the first time investors have responded in favour of automakers increasing electric vehicle production. Recent months have seen the value of shares of Tesla as well as of some EV start-ups soar.
The investigation comes at a time when the company is still trying to repair its image after the ‘Dieselgate’ scandal.
In 2015 Volkswagen admitted to using illegal software to cheat diesel emissions tests. 

4

It is thought as many as 11 million vehicles worldwide were affected by the cheating software, and VW was slammed with more than 32 billion Euros worth of fines as a result.

How are you finding our new site design? Tell us in the comments below or send us your thoughts at [email protected].

[…]

Read More…

News and research before you hear about it on CNBC and others. Claim your 1-week free trial to StreetInsider Premium here.

Test Available Exclusively through Labcorp in the U.S. and Canada
Lille, France; Cambridge, MA; May 3, 2021 – GENFIT (Nasdaq and Euronext: GNFT), a late-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving the lives of patients with metabolic and liver diseases, today announced the launch of NASHnext®, a novel, noninvasive diagnostic test for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). The test is offered exclusively in the U.S. and Canada through Labcorp, a leading global life sciences company. NASHnext® is powered by NIS4™, GENFIT’s proprietary diagnostic technology that uses a novel, blood-based molecular biomarker test to identify NASH and significant fibrosis, also referred to as at-risk NASH, in patients with at least one metabolic risk factor, as published in The Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 1
NASH, the most severe form of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), is a highly underdiagnosed cause of severe liver complications. NAFLD, a precursor to NASH, is estimated to affect nearly 80 million people in the U.S., but only 5 percent of patients are aware of their liver disease due to its asymptomatic nature and limited availability of tests, with highly invasive liver biopsy being the current clinical standard to diagnose it. Individuals meeting appropriate clinical criteria to support suspected cases of NAFLD or NASH are target populations for NASHnext® testing, one of the first blood-based tests that provides a simple score for the diagnosis of both NASH and significant to advanced liver fibrosis.
“Labcorp supported the research and development of NASHnext® through our Drug Development business, and now through our diagnostics capabilities, we can bring this valuable experience and the test to millions of patients. NASH is a widespread yet underdiagnosed liver disease with very serious consequences including end-stage liver disease and cardiovascular events,” said Brian Caveney, M.D., chief medical officer and president of Labcorp Diagnostics. “NASHnext®has the potential to substantially benefit very large patient populations by providing people with essential information regarding their liver health. With a clear diagnosis and the help of their doctors, patients will be able to make informed decisions and implement strategies to monitor or slow the progression of their liver disease.”
In September 2020, GENFIT entered into a licensing agreement with Labcorp for the development and commercialization of a blood-based molecular diagnostic test powered by GENFIT’s NIS4™ technology. Since early 2019, Labcorp Drug Development has been offering the test to global researchers, which has also provided Labcorp with valuable experience in the validation and performance of the test. With the clinical launch of NASHnext®, healthcare providers and patients across the U.S. and Canada now have convenient access to this powerful new tool that provides vital information about a serious health condition that is underdiagnosed.
“The commercialization of NASHnext® by Labcorp is a major milestone for the entire NASH field. We believe that the capabilities and reach of Labcorp, a highly regarded life sciences company, will allow for wide and early availability of the test to help both patients and healthcare professionals manage NASH at scale,” said Suneil Hosmane, Global Head of Diagnostics at GENFIT.
GENFIT is a pioneer in NASH diagnostics and is committed to the development of additional diagnostics and therapeutics in chronic liver disease.
Labcorp has been a leader in the development of drugs and diagnostics for more than 50 years and is a recognized global leader in NASH clinical trials. For more information about NASH, visit: http://www.labcorp.com/NASH.
Financial terms for this agreement have not been disclosed.
ABOUT GENFIT
GENFIT is a late-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving the lives of patients with cholestatic and metabolic chronic liver diseases. GENFIT is a pioneer in the field of nuclear receptor-based drug discovery, with a rich history and strong scientific heritage spanning more than two decades. GENFIT is currently enrolling in ELATIVE™, a Phase 3 clinical trial evaluating elafibranor in patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis (PBC). Elafibranor is an investigational compound that has not been reviewed and has not received approval by any regulatory authority. As part of GENFIT’s comprehensive approach to clinical management of patients with liver disease, the Company is also developing NIS4™, a new, non-invasive blood-based diagnostic technology which could enable easier identification of patients with at-risk NASH. NIS4™ technology has been licensed to LabCorp® in the U.S. and Canada for the development and commercialization of a blood-based molecular diagnostic test powered by NIS4™ technology. GENFIT has facilities in Lille and Paris, France, and Cambridge, MA, USA. GENFIT is a publicly traded company listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and on compartment B of Euronext’s regulated market in Paris (Nasdaq and Euronext: GNFT). www.genfit.com
ABOUT LABCORP
Labcorp is a leading global life sciences company that provides vital information to help doctors, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, researchers, and patients make clear and confident decisions. Through our unparalleled diagnostics and drug development capabilities, we provide insights and accelerate innovations to improve health and improve lives. With more than 70,000 employees, we serve clients in more than 100 countries. Labcorp (NYSE: LH) reported revenue of $14.0 billion in FY2020. Learn more about us at http://www.Labcorp.com or follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter @Labcorp.
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This press release contains certain forward-looking statements with respect to GENFIT, including those within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, with respect to GENFIT, including statements regarding the potential market size and patient population for NASHNext®, the diagnostic test powered by GENFIT’s NIS4® diagnostic technology and developed by its partner Labcorp, the test’s and technology’s ability to identify NASH with significant fibrosis and its potential to contribute to NASH management and monitoring at a large scale, and Labcorp’s capacity to disseminate it on a large scale. The use of certain words, including “consider”, “contemplate”, “think”, “aim”, “expect”, “understand”, “should”, “aspire”, “estimate”, “believe”, “wish”, “may”, “could”, “allow”, “seek”, “encourage” or “have confidence” or (as the case may be) the negative forms of such terms or any other variant of such terms or other terms similar to them in meaning is intended to identify forward-looking statements. Although the Company believes its projections are based on reasonable expectations and assumptions of the Company’s management, these forward-looking statements are subject to numerous known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things, the uncertainties inherent in research and development, including in relation to safety, biomarkers, progression of, and results from, its ongoing and planned clinical trials, review and approvals by regulatory authorities of its drug and diagnostic candidates, exchange rate fluctuations and the Company’s continued ability to raise capital to fund its development, as well as those risks and uncertainties discussed or identified in the Company’s public filings with the AMF, including those listed in Chapter 2 “Main Risks and Uncertainties” of the Company’s 2020 Universal Registration Document filed with the AMF on 23 April 2021 under n° D.21-0350, which is available on the Company’s website (www.genfit.com) and on the website of the AMF (www.amf-france.org) and public filings and reports filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) including the Company’s 2020 Annual Report on Form 20-F filed with the SEC on April 23, 2021. In addition, even if the Company’s results, performance, financial condition and liquidity, and the development of the industry in which it operates are consistent with such forward-looking statements, they may not be predictive of results or developments in future periods. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of publication of this document. Other than as required by applicable law, the Company does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information or statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
LABCORP CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This press release contains forward-looking statements, including but not limited to statements with respect to Labcorp’s (the Company’s) future operations, expansion of offerings and capabilities, and opportunities for future growth. Each of the forward-looking statements is subject to change based on various important factors, many of which are beyond the Company’s control, including without limitation, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business and financial condition, as well as on general economic, business, and market conditions, competitive actions and other unforeseen changes and general uncertainties in the marketplace, changes in government regulations, including healthcare reform, customer purchasing decisions, including changes in payer regulations or policies, other adverse actions of governmental and third-party payers, changes in testing guidelines or recommendations, the effect of public opinion on the Company’s reputation, adverse results in material litigation matters, failure to maintain or develop customer relationships, our ability to develop or acquire new products and adapt to technological changes, failure in information technology, systems or data security, and employee relations. These factors, in some cases, have affected and in the future (together with other factors) could affect the Company’s ability to implement the Company’s business strategy, and actual results could differ materially from those suggested by these forward-looking statements. As a result, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any of our forward-looking statements. The Company has no obligation to provide any updates to these forward-looking statements even if its expectations change. All forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. Further information on potential factors, risks, and uncertainties that could affect operating and financial results is included in the Company’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent Forms 10-Q, including in each case under the heading RISK FACTORS, and in the Company’s other filings with the SEC.
CONTACT
GENFIT | Investors
Tel: +1 (617) 714 5252 | [email protected]
PRESS RELATIONS | Media
Hélène LAVIN – Press relations | Tel: +333 2016 4000 | [email protected]
CONTACT LABCORP:
Media: Christopher Allman-Bradshaw – 336-436-8263
[email protected]
Investors: Chas Cook – 336-436-5076
[email protected]

1 Harrison SA, Ratziu V et al. A blood-based biomarker panel (NIS4) for non-invasive diagnosis of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and liver fibrosis: a prospective derivation and global validation study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol, (in press). Accessed August 3, 2020. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langas/article/PIIS2468-1253(20)30252-1/fulltext
 GENFIT | 885 Avenue Eugène Avinée, 59120 Loos – FRANCE | +333 2016 4000 | www.genfit.

[…]

Read More…

Breadcrumb Trail Links

PMN Press Releases
Business Wire News Releases

Author of the article:

Business Wire

Publishing date:
May 03, 2021  •  54 minutes ago  •  8 minute read  •  Join the conversation

Masimo Radical-7® with PVi® Business Wire

Article content
Researchers Found That PVi May Be Used to Guide Fluid Administration in Nasal High-Flow Patients
NEUCHATEL, Switzerland — Masimo (NASDAQ: MASI) announced today the findings of a study published in the Journal of Applied Physiology in which Dr. Marina García-de-Acilu and colleagues at the Vall d’Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona evaluated the utility of Masimo PVi® as a noninvasive method of predicting preload responsiveness in patients treated with nasal high-flow (NHF) therapy. They found that PVi may identify preload responders and noted that PVi may therefore be used in the “day-to-day clinical decision-making process in critically ill patients treated with NHF, helping to provide adequate resuscitation volume.”1 More than 100 independent studies have demonstrated the utility of PVi as an indicator of fluid responsiveness.2 This is the first time PVi has been evaluated in patients treated with NHF therapy.

Advertisement

Story continues below

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Article content
Noting the potential convenience of a noninvasive method of predicting fluid responsiveness in NHF patients, the researchers sought to evaluate whether PVi, which is noninvasive and easy to use, could play such a role. To do so, they compared PVi to reference measurements—stroke volume (SV) and cardiac output (CO)—in 20 adult ICU patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) supported by NHF (flow ≥ 30 L/min). SV and CO were measured using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) using a portable echocardiogram. PVi was measured using a Masimo Radical-7® Pulse CO-Oximeter® with a pulse oximetry sensor attached to the finger. Within the first 24 hours of NHF support, the patients’ SV/CO and PVi were assessed. Passive leg raising (PLR) was performed and SV/CO and PVi were then reassessed. Preload responsiveness was defined as a ≥ 10% increase in SV after PLR. A fluid challenge was then conducted by administering a 250-mL saline solution to patients who were found to be preload responders (12 of the 20 patients). SV/CO and PVi were measured again after the fluid challenge in these patients.
The researchers found that preload responders showed higher baseline PVi values and ΔPVi after PLR. PVi and ΔPVi after PLR showed “excellent diagnostic accuracy for predicting preload responsiveness.” At a baseline cut-off value of 16%, PVi had sensitivity of 91.7% and specificity of 87.8% for discriminating between preload responders and non-responders; a change of 2% or more in PVi allowed for discrimination between the two groups with 100% sensitivity and specificity. Additionally, the researchers found that ΔPVi after PLR and after fluid challenge were strongly correlated (r = 0.84, p < 0.001). The researchers concluded, “This physiological study suggests that PVi might predict preload responsiveness in hypoxemic ARF patients treated with NHF. Further research should focus on validating these results and analyze whether PVi-guided fluid administration can improve outcomes in NHF patients.” The researchers also noted that PVi may not be sufficient to identify preload responders in all patients using NHF, hypothesizing that the intrathoracic pressures delivered by NHF are lower than those generated during invasive mechanical ventilation and that therefore a certain degree of hypoperfusion might potentially be required to effect changes in baseline PVi. Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content The accuracy of PVi in predicting fluid responsiveness is variable and influenced by numerous patient, procedure, and device-related factors. PVi measures the variation in the plethysmography amplitude but does not provide measurements of stroke volume or cardiac output. Fluid management decisions should be based on a complete assessment of the patient’s condition and should not be based solely on PVi. In the U.S., PVi is cleared as a noninvasive, dynamic indicator of fluid responsiveness in select populations of mechanically ventilated adult patients. @Masimo | #Masimo About Masimo Masimo (NASDAQ: MASI) is a global medical technology company that develops and produces a wide array of industry-leading monitoring technologies, including innovative measurements, sensors, patient monitors, and automation and connectivity solutions. Our mission is to improve patient outcomes, reduce the cost of care, and take noninvasive monitoring to new sites and applications. Masimo SET® Measure-through Motion and Low Perfusion™ pulse oximetry, introduced in 1995, has been shown in over 100 independent and objective studies to outperform other pulse oximetry technologies.3 Masimo SET® has also been shown to help clinicians reduce severe retinopathy of prematurity in neonates,4 improve CCHD screening in newborns,5 and, when used for continuous monitoring with Masimo Patient SafetyNet™ in post-surgical wards, reduce rapid response team activations, ICU transfers, and costs.6-9 Masimo SET® is estimated to be used on more than 200 million patients in leading hospitals and other healthcare settings around the world,10 and is the primary pulse oximetry at 9 of the top 10 hospitals according to the 2020-21 U.S. News and World Report Best Hospitals Honor Roll.11 Masimo continues to refine SET® and in 2018, announced that SpO2 accuracy on RD SET® sensors during conditions of motion has been significantly improved, providing clinicians with even greater confidence that the SpO2 values they rely on accurately reflect a patient’s physiological status. In 2005, Masimo introduced rainbow® Pulse CO-Oximetry technology, allowing noninvasive and continuous monitoring of blood constituents that previously could only be measured invasively, including total hemoglobin (SpHb®), oxygen content (SpOC™), carboxyhemoglobin (SpCO®), methemoglobin (SpMet®), Pleth Variability Index (PVi®), RPVi™ (rainbow® PVi), and Oxygen Reserve Index (ORi™). In 2013, Masimo introduced the Root® Patient Monitoring and Connectivity Platform, built from the ground up to be as flexible and expandable as possible to facilitate the addition of other Masimo and third-party monitoring technologies; key Masimo additions include Next Generation SedLine® Brain Function Monitoring, O3® Regional Oximetry, and ISA™ Capnography with NomoLine® sampling lines. Masimo’s family of continuous and spot-check monitoring Pulse CO-Oximeters® includes devices designed for use in a variety of clinical and non-clinical scenarios, including tetherless, wearable technology, such as Radius-7® and Radius PPG™, portable devices like Rad-67®, fingertip pulse oximeters like MightySat® Rx, and devices available for use both in the hospital and at home, such as Rad-97®. Masimo hospital automation and connectivity solutions are centered around the Masimo Hospital Automation™ platform, and include Iris® Gateway, iSirona™, Patient SafetyNet, Replica™, Halo ION™, UniView®, UniView :60™, and Masimo SafetyNet™. Additional information about Masimo and its products may be found at www.masimo.com. Published clinical studies on Masimo products can be found at www.masimo.com/evidence/featured-studies/feature/. Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content ORi and RPVi have not received FDA 510(k) clearance and are not available for sale in the United States. The use of the trademark Patient SafetyNet is under license from University HealthSystem Consortium. References García-de-Acilu M, Pacheco A, Santafé M, Francisco-Javier R, Ruiz-Rodríguez J, Ferrer R, Roca O. Pleth variability index may predict preload responsiveness in patients treated with nasal high flow: a physiological study. J Appl Physiol. 2021 Apr 15. DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00614.2020. Published clinical studies on PVi, with varying results and outcomes, can be found on our website at http://www.masimo.com/evidence/pulse-oximetry/pvi. Studies include independent and objective studies which are comprised of abstracts presented at scientific meetings and peer-reviewed journal articles. Published clinical studies on pulse oximetry and the benefits of Masimo SET® can be found on our website at http://www.masimo.com. Comparative studies include independent and objective studies which are comprised of abstracts presented at scientific meetings and peer-reviewed journal articles. Castillo A et al. Prevention of Retinopathy of Prematurity in Preterm Infants through Changes in Clinical Practice and SpO2 Technology. Acta Paediatr. 2011 Feb;100(2):188-92. de-Wahl Granelli A et al. Impact of pulse oximetry screening on the detection of duct dependent congenital heart disease: a Swedish prospective screening study in 39,821 newborns. BMJ. 2009;Jan 8;338. Taenzer A et al. Impact of pulse oximetry surveillance on rescue events and intensive care unit transfers: a before-and-after concurrence study. Anesthesiology. 2010:112(2):282-287. Taenzer A et al. Postoperative Monitoring – The Dartmouth Experience. Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation Newsletter. Spring-Summer 2012. McGrath S et al. Surveillance Monitoring Management for General Care Units: Strategy, Design, and Implementation. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety. 2016 Jul;42(7):293-302. McGrath S et al. Inpatient Respiratory Arrest Associated With Sedative and Analgesic Medications: Impact of Continuous Monitoring on Patient Mortality and Severe Morbidity. J Patient Saf. 2020 14 Mar. DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000696. Estimate: Masimo data on file. http://health.usnews.com/health-care/best-hospitals/articles/best-hospitals-honor-roll-and-overview. Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content Forward-Looking Statements This press release includes forward-looking statements as defined in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, in connection with the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include, among others, statements regarding the potential effectiveness of PVi®. These forward-looking statements are based on current expectations about future events affecting us and are subject to risks and uncertainties, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control and could cause our actual results to differ materially and adversely from those expressed in our forward-looking statements as a result of various risk factors, including, but not limited to: risks related to our assumptions regarding the repeatability of clinical results; risks related to our belief that Masimo’s unique noninvasive measurement technologies, including PVi, contribute to positive clinical outcomes and patient safety; risks related to our belief that Masimo noninvasive medical breakthroughs provide cost-effective solutions and unique advantages; risks related to COVID-19; as well as other factors discussed in the “Risk Factors” section of our most recent reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), which may be obtained for free at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements are reasonable, we do not know whether our expectations will prove correct. All forward-looking statements included in this press release are expressly qualified in their entirety by the foregoing cautionary statements.

[…]

Read More…

ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. (NYSE:ZIM) – Jefferies Financial Group upped their Q2 2021 EPS estimates for ZIM Integrated Shipping Services in a research note issued on Wednesday, April 28th. Jefferies Financial Group analyst R. Giveans now forecasts that the company will post earnings per share of $3.17 for the quarter, up from their previous estimate of $2.02. Jefferies Financial Group currently has a “Buy” rating and a $35.00 price target on the stock. Jefferies Financial Group also issued estimates for ZIM Integrated Shipping Services’ Q3 2021 earnings at $1.89 EPS, Q4 2021 earnings at $0.65 EPS, FY2021 earnings at $9.72 EPS, Q1 2022 earnings at $1.34 EPS, Q2 2022 earnings at $1.16 EPS, Q4 2022 earnings at $1.28 EPS, FY2022 earnings at $5.01 EPS and FY2023 earnings at $6.80 EPS. ZIM Integrated Shipping Services (NYSE:ZIM) last announced its earnings results on Sunday, March 21st. The company reported $3.48 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, missing the consensus estimate of $3.72 by ($0.24). The business had revenue of $1.36 billion for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $1.10 billion.
Several other brokerages have also issued reports on ZIM. Clarkson Capital lifted their price target on ZIM Integrated Shipping Services from $30.00 to $38.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a research note on Monday, March 22nd. Barclays initiated coverage on ZIM Integrated Shipping Services in a research note on Monday, March 1st. They issued an “equal weight” rating and a $20.00 target price for the company. The Goldman Sachs Group started coverage on shares of ZIM Integrated Shipping Services in a research note on Monday, February 22nd. They set a “neutral” rating on the stock. Citigroup initiated coverage on shares of ZIM Integrated Shipping Services in a report on Tuesday, February 23rd. They issued a “buy” rating and a $28.00 price objective for the company. Finally, Zacks Investment Research cut shares of ZIM Integrated Shipping Services from a “buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a research report on Friday. Three equities research analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating and three have issued a buy rating to the stock. ZIM Integrated Shipping Services has a consensus rating of “Buy” and a consensus price target of $31.40.
(Ad)In An Industry Where Growth Can Happen Fast. This Tech Stock Is Pleading Its Case!

Shares of NYSE:ZIM opened at $37.45 on Monday. ZIM Integrated Shipping Services has a 52-week low of $11.34 and a 52-week high of $38.22. The stock has a fifty day moving average of $28.30.
An institutional investor recently bought a new position in ZIM Integrated Shipping Services stock. Signaturefd LLC acquired a new stake in shares of ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. (NYSE:ZIM) in the 1st quarter, according to its most recent disclosure with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The institutional investor acquired 2,000 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $49,000.
ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Company Profile
ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd., together with its subsidiaries, provides container shipping and related services in Israel and internationally. The company offers dry, reefer, project, out of gauge, breakbulk, and dangerous cargo services; inland transport services; and ZIMonitor, a reefer cargo tracking service.
Read More: Understanding debt-to-equity ratio in fundamental analysis

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest and most accurate reporting. This story was reviewed by MarketBeat’s editorial team prior to publication. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected]
Featured Article: Market Capitalization – What it Means for Investors
7 Stocks to Watch When Student Debt Forgiveness Gets PassedNow that the Biden administration is fully in charge, student debt forgiveness has moved to the front burner. Consider these numbers. There is an estimated $1.7 trillion in student debt. The average student carries approximately $30,000 in student loans.If $10,000 of student debt were to be canceled, there are estimates that one-third of borrowers (between 15 million to 16.3 million) would become debt-free. Of course, if the number hits $50,000 as some lawmakers are suggesting the impact would even greater.Putting aside personal thoughts on the wisdom of pursuing this path, it has the potential to unleash a substantial stimulus into the economy.And as an investor, it’s fair to ask where that money would go. After all, there’s no harm in having investors profit from this stimulus as well.A counter-argument is that the absence of one monthly payment may not provide enough money to make an impact. However, Senator Elizabeth Warren referred to the effect student loans have in preventing many in the millennial and Gen-Z generations from pursuing big picture life goals such as buying a house, starting a business, or starting a family.With that in mind, we’ve put together this special presentation that looks at 7 stocks that are likely to benefit if borrowers are set free from the burden of student loans.View the “7 Stocks to Watch When Student Debt Forgiveness Gets Passed”.

[…]

Read More…

Melea Atkins
A “worrisome trend” of private equity investment in nursing homes should be scrutinized and halted altogether within five years, asserts a left-leaning think tank in an issue brief released Friday.
Lawmakers should force all private equity firms to get out of any investments they have in nursing homes, according to the Roosevelt Institute report. Until then, all nursing home transactions should be screened by the Securities and Exchange Commission to prevent private equity and similar investors from buying in, report author Melea Atkins wrote.
The goal is to improve care outcomes, which Roosevelt researchers say have suffered when PE has been involved. Atkins noted an overall rise in private equity investments during the pandemic, with record levels in healthcare in particular, of which eldercare was the second-most popular. She cited examples of groups buying up nursing homes and profiting while seeing them flail.
“As private equity investment in nursing homes continues to soar, studies showing higher mortality rates and lower quality of care in private equity-owned nursing homes … have renewed concerns that the tens of billions of taxpayer dollars spent each year on nursing care may, in fact, be lining the pockets of rich private equity investors at the expense of vulnerable seniors,” Atkins wrote
“A powder keg of private equity cash will only accelerate this worrisome trend of private equity investment in nursing homes,” she added.
PE ownership increased the likelihood of death by about 10% in a nursing home, alleged one witness at a House Ways and Means subcommittee hearing in March that excoriated such investments. They also faced criticism in the Senate earlier this year.
Advocates have countered that less than 10% of all nursing homes fall under private-equity ownership — a figure that has been contested —  and that it is counterintuitive to not pursue best business practices.
Roosevelt author Atkins contends, however, that profits have been prioritized over patients, thanks to “common private equity practices” such as ownership restructuring, debt refinancing and leveraged asset sales, and vertical integration or the formation of complementary business to ensure the flow of mostly taxpayer dollars to company coffers.
“We must recognize that the unique attributes of the nursing home industry require decisive action to prevent further private equity ownership,” Atkins wrote. “Without swift action, we will see a significant increase in private equity ownership of nursing homes and a corresponding decline in the quality of care.”
The solution is more ownership transparency, enforced by the SEC, according to the brief. Private equity and investment funds also should have to register with both the SEC and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, with the goal of getting them out of such investments.

[…]

Read More…

Article content
HONG KONG — Chinese online insurance technology firm Waterdrop Inc aims to raise up to $360 million in an initial public offering on the New York Stock Exchange, company filings show.
Waterdrop, which is backed by Tencent, will sell 30 million American Depository shares for between $10 and $12 each, it said in the filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The shares will be priced on Thursday after the U.S. market closes, a term sheet for the deal obtained by Reuters shows.
Cornerstone investors have subscribed for $210 million worth of stock with Boyu Capital, one of the company’s existing major shareholders, taking $100 million in the deal already.
A so-called greenshoe, or over-allotment option, exists, to allow an extra 4.5 million shares to be sold.
In April, Reuters reported that the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC), had questioned the company’s business risks, which has slowed the IPO process.
The Chinese regulator even told founder Shen Peng in April that it would not suggest that Waterdrop go public at that point, said one of the sources.
Beijing-headquartered Waterdrop distributes insurance policies online and provides illness crowd-funding. It was not immediately clear what exactly CBIRC felt was risky in its business.
At the time, Waterdrop denied in an emailed statement that Chinese regulators were opposed to its capital markets plan, adding that its senior managers were in regular communication with regulators.

[…]

Read More…

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Email Print
Font Size:

The gamification of financial trading apps should be cultivated, not criticized.

Font Size:

Remember when stock market trading was so easy that even a baby could do it? It appears that trading has gotten even easier.
Growing numbers of individual investors are now trading on their phones through app-based trading platforms offered by Robinhood Financial and a host of other new brokerages, such as Webull and Public. Although Robinhood first rose to prominence when it led the charge to zero-commission trading—an idea that became the industry standard in late 2019—the fintech startup has come under fire recently for leading the way in another innovation: the “gamification” of trading.
But what do commentators mean by gamification when they apply it to trading platforms? And how, if at all, should government officials regulate such platform design?
At its most basic, gamification means using game-like elements in non-game activities. This strategy is nothing new. Many industries have used gamification for decades to build brand loyalty and encourage consumption. Airlines, for example, created frequent flyer awards to engage better with consumers. Businesses also use gamification to educate, such as when companies provide their employees with interactive online training sessions.
Some critics warn that adding game-like design elements to trading platforms turns investing into an actual game that detrimentally influences investor behavior to the advantage of brokerages.
There is little consensus, however, as to which parts of these trading platforms are genuinely problematic. Critics have pointed to a host of diverse features of trading apps that gamify investing, including:

Using vivid colors;
Giving free stock for opening an account;
Making transferred money instantly available for trading;
Including social-media-style feeds;
Awarding bonuses and hosting contests for referrals;
Providing a variety of stock lists, including stocks popular on the trading platform or stocks related to the ones already owned by the investor;
Sending “push notifications” to app users; and
Using digital effects, such as the frequently referenced burst of digital confetti.

Despite this lack of consensus—or perhaps because of it—regulators are increasing their scrutiny of digital trading platforms. Although the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) current exam priorities only hint at the agency’s focus on digital apps by highlighting its plan to review compliance “around trade recommendations made in mobile applications,” SEC Chair Gary Gensler vowed during his confirmation hearing to study gamification and “behavioral prompts” used by investment apps. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (FINRA) current exam priorities are more explicit. FINRA identifies “digital platforms with interactive and ‘game-like’ features” as presenting “emerging digital communications risks” and lists of a host of regulatory requirements that may be applicable.
Massachusetts securities regulators have gone even further, filing a lawsuit against Robinhood claiming that the app’s use of gamification to encourage investors to use its trading platform violates Massachusetts law. The state’s complaint alleges that several elements of Robinhood’s trading platform—including “colorful confetti raining down” after executing a trade, the “promise of free stock to lure new customers,” and sending “push notifications to customers to encourage interaction with the application and trading”—facilitate “frequent, risky, and unsuitable trading” by customers. The complaint similarly alleges that Robinhood’s lists of “most-traded” and “most popular” securities encourage customers to purchase unsuitable securities.
Although Massachusetts holds brokers to a higher standard of care than federal regulators, both the Massachusetts fiduciary standard and the federal Regulation Best Interest standard are triggered by a broker’s trading recommendation. Yet, Robinhood denies that it is making recommendations to its users. Under existing rules, Robinhood likely is correct. Determining what qualifies as a “recommendation” depends on the facts and circumstances, but a recommendation generally is a call to action. The more tailored the communication is to a particular customer about a particular security, the more likely it is a recommendation. Netflix-style prompts—which send investors alerts that suggest they might like a stock because they bought a similar stock—come the closest to a particularized call to action. But few, if any, of the other so-called gamified elements remotely resemble recommendations.
Regulators are more likely to analyze app-based trading platforms under rules such as FINRA Rule 2210 that govern how brokers communicate with their customers. These rules are fairly broad and generally prohibit brokers from providing false, misleading, or otherwise unfairly presented information. Some portion of app-design, however, falls outside of typical broker communication and probably is not covered by existing regulations.
Policymakers should exercise caution when considering whether to impose new regulations on trading app design. Brokerages are in the business of getting customers to trade stocks. Drawing the right line between good marketing and abusive practices is difficult, if not impossible— especially without sufficient research on how app design influences investor behavior. Drawing that line is further complicated by the fact that, as one commentator put it, the “main dopamine payoff of the game is probably seeing if you made money.”
Making investing easy—or even fun—should not itself solicit a reflexive call for greater regulation. The past year has brought a surge of new investors into the markets, nearly half of whom accessed their new accounts primarily through a mobile app. Although a number of factors are likely at play, including zero-commission trading and the unique circumstances of the pandemic, the easy mobile trading apps have helped to attract new investors. Those new investors are younger, more diverse, and have lower incomes than those who previously had trading accounts. As SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce recognized, regulators must “be open to technological improvements that make the markets work better and encourage and equip more people to participate in them.”
Regulators should narrowly focus their efforts on limiting deceptive behavior by brokerages, rather than inhibiting modern app design that investors expect and which brokerages use to compete. Some design elements might cross a line, but regulators should not import holdover views about how trading should look or feel to the investor—particularly as younger investors begin to make their own investment decisions. And regulators should affirmatively recognize that gamified elements can play a role in educating investors.
We should celebrate technological advances that have made investing simpler and more attractive, not hamper them with regulatory requirements that micromanage trading interfaces and investor behavior.
Trading these days may not be easy enough for babies, but many new investors are finding it a lot easier than it was before. And that is a good thing for both investors and markets.

Jennifer J. Schulp is the Director of Financial Regulation Studies at the Cato Institute’s Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives.

This essay is part of an 11-part series, entitled Regulation In the Era of Fintech.

[…]

Read More…

Subscribers can listen to this article

A multi-disciplinary investigation by law enforcement agencies in South Africa and the US is probing the “strategic donation” of R30 million by the American multinational General Electric (GE) through Eskom to a foundation registered in the name of Deputy President David Mabuza.
According to documentation unearthed in the Eskom Files – tens of thousands of pages of detailed forensic reports, emails and other documents revealing the scope of corruption at the electricity parastatal – a senior Eskom executive offered the donation to Mabuza’s foundation in 2016. This was after a payment of millions of rand was seemingly made by GE to finance part of Eskom’s corporate social investment (CSI) programme.
Subscribe to News24 and get access to our exclusive journalism and features today.

[…]

Read More…