Bullish Domino's Pizza Enterprises Insiders Loaded Up On AU$9.59m Of Stock
Over the last year, a good number of insiders have significantly increased their holdings in Domino's Pizza Enterprises Limited (ASX:DMP). This is encouraging because it indicates that insiders are more optimistic about the company's prospects.
Although we don't think shareholders should simply follow insider transactions, logic dictates you should pay some attention to whether insiders are buying or selling shares.
Our free stock report includes 4 warning signs investors should be aware of before investing in Domino's Pizza Enterprises. Read for free now.
In the last twelve months, the biggest single purchase by an insider was when Non-Executive Chairman Jack Cowin bought AU$9.5m worth of shares at a price of AU$31.67 per share. That means that an insider was happy to buy shares at above the current price of AU$25.20. Their view may have changed since then, but at least it shows they felt optimistic at the time. In our view, the price an insider pays for shares is very important. It is generally more encouraging if they paid above the current price, as it suggests they saw value, even at higher levels.
Happily, we note that in the last year insiders paid AU$9.6m for 302.60k shares. On the other hand they divested 25.00k shares, for AU$752k. In the last twelve months there was more buying than selling by Domino's Pizza Enterprises insiders. You can see the insider transactions (by companies and individuals) over the last year depicted in the chart below. If you want to know exactly who sold, for how much, and when, simply click on the graph below!
View our latest analysis for Domino's Pizza Enterprises
Domino's Pizza Enterprises is not the only stock insiders are buying. So take a peek at this free list of under-the-radar companies with insider buying.
Many investors like to check how much of a company is owned by insiders. I reckon it's a good sign if insiders own a significant number of shares in the company. Domino's Pizza Enterprises insiders own about AU$112m worth of shares. That equates to 4.7% of the company. We've certainly seen higher levels of insider ownership elsewhere, but these holdings are enough to suggest alignment between insiders and the other shareholders.
There haven't been any insider transactions in the last three months -- that doesn't mean much. However, our analysis of transactions over the last year is heartening. It would be great to see more insider buying, but overall it seems like Domino's Pizza Enterprises insiders are reasonably well aligned (owning significant chunk of the company's shares) and optimistic for the future. While it's good to be aware of what's going on with the insider's ownership and transactions, we make sure to also consider what risks are facing a stock before making any investment decision. Case in point: We've spotted 4 warning signs for Domino's Pizza Enterprises you should be aware of.
If you would prefer to check out another company -- one with potentially superior financials -- then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, that have HIGH return on equity and low debt.
For the purposes of this article, insiders are those individuals who report their transactions to the relevant regulatory body. We currently account for open market transactions and private dispositions of direct interests only, but not derivative transactions or indirect interests.
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
28 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump's China ‘truce' is nothing of the sort
At long last, the United States has reached a trade agreement with China. Again. After a testy war of words that escalated into a tit-for-tat restriction on key exports, American and Chinese officials this week met in the United Kingdom with a singular goal: Find a way to agree to what they had agreed to a month earlier in Geneva. It appears the countries' top trade negotiators have accomplished that. On Tuesday night, both Chinese and Trump officials said they had agreed to a framework to implement the consensus they reached in May, and the trade truce would be sent to their respective leaders for their approval. Businesses, consumers and Wall Street investors will no doubt breathe a sigh of relief: Burdensome tariffs have raised significant anxiety, and easing trade barriers between the world's two largest economies should lower costs and help inject some much-needed certainty into an economy that has been demonstrating some signs of strain. But in reality, the trade truce – if that's really what was accomplished this time around – is mostly just a return to the already-tense state of affairs from before April 2. Tariff rates from both countries remain historically high, and significant export restrictions remain in place. The United States has not opened its doors to China's autos, nor is it going to sell its high-end AI chips anytime soon. And, in President Donald Trump's parlance, China isn't treating America much more 'fairly' after this agreement than it did before. Without a doubt, a trade agreement was much needed. After Trump's April 2 'Liberation Day' announcements, tensions ran so high that trade between the United States and China came to an effective halt. A 145% tariff on most Chinese imports made the math impossible for US businesses to buy virtually anything from China, America's second-largest trading partner. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, America's chief negotiator in both trade talks with China, said previous tariff levels were 'unsustainable.' On May 12, delegates from China and the United States announced they would significantly roll back their historically high tariffs on one another. Economists pared back their recession forecasts, and moribund consumer confidence rebounded. But Trump and his administration in recent weeks grew increasingly hostile toward China, accusing the country of breaking the promises it made in mid-May. China similarly said the United States failed to live up to its obligations under the Geneva agreement. The Trump administration had expected China to lift restrictions on rare-earth materials that are critical components for a wide range of electronics, but China has only very slowly allowed them to return to the open market, causing intense displeasure inside the Trump administration and prompting a series of export restrictions on US goods to China, three administration officials told CNN last month. China has a virtual monopoly on rare earths, without which cars, jet engines, contrast dye used in MRI machines and some cancer drugs cannot be manufactured. Trump told reporters Friday that Chinese President Xi Jinping had agreed to allow exports of rare earth minerals products to begin, but industry analysts said the crucial materials had not been flowing to the United States as they once had. If both countries satisfy the terms of the agreement this time around, the de-escalation should prevent the direst warnings about the trade war, including potential pandemic-level shortages. Despite the good vibes, the United States and China remain in an economic standoff. The Trump administration – and the Biden administration before it – have maintained that Chinese companies are more than happy to sell inexpensive products to the US market but that China places significant restrictions on US businesses operating in the country and encourages Chinese companies to steal American intellectual property. China has long disputed those claims. Trump, in his first term, raised tariffs on China based on national security concerns. Biden maintained many of those tariffs and doubled down on some. But the second Trump administration has taken trade barriers to an unprecedented level. It has placed a 10% universal tariff on virtually all goods coming into the United States. It put in place an additional 20% tariff on Chinese goods in an effort to get China to take action to reduce the flow of fentanyl over the US border. Both of those extraordinary tariffs remain in place on most Chinese goods, with the exception of some products like electronics. In addition, the White House closed the so-called de minimis exemption that allowed packages with a value of under $800 to come into the United States tariff-free. Hefty new tariffs remain in place on small packages, undermining the business models of Chinese ecommerce giants Shein and Temu. The compounding tariffs create significant trade barriers with America's second-largest trading partner, raising prices for American businesses and consumers with no easy fixes or clear market alternatives. Some gigantic companies, such as Apple, have complex supply chains that can withstand some of the price pressures. But even Apple, which has said it would ship most US iPhones from India as Chinese tariffs rise, said it would face a $900 million quarterly cost increase because of tariffs – at their current levels, not at the sky-high 145% rate. So a trade truce may be better than the alternative – if it lasts this time.
CNN
28 minutes ago
- CNN
The days around Trump's trade war announcements saw spikes in lawmaker stock market transactions
In the days before President Donald Trump suddenly paused most of the punishing tariffs on foreign countries he had revealed in early April, more than a dozen congressional lawmakers were tied to thousands of dollars' worth of stock transactions, including significant purchases as the US stock market tumbled, a CNN analysis of financial filings shows. Seven Democrats and three Republicans reported stock transactions made on April 7, two days before Trump instituted the pause, according to a CNN review of a database of congressional financial filings compiled by Capitol Trades, a platform by the financial data research firm 2iQ which tracks lawmakers' financial activity. That day, a post on X erroneously suggested a pause was already underway, tumbling stocks and sending the markets into a state of turbulence. The next day, on the eve of Trump's tariff reprieve, seven Republicans and four Democrats were tied to transactions, filings show. The White House that day announced it would impose hefty tariffs on China and the S&P 500 closed at its lowest level so far this year. Then came April 9. 'BE COOL!' and 'THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY,' Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that day, hours before his White House announced a 90-day pause on tariffs against a number of countries save for China. The announcement set the S&P 500 on track to post its biggest single-day gain since October 2008. House and Senate lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have long traded stocks, and their reported transactions so far this Congress have largely mirrored Americans' high volume of trading activity amid the frenetic market shifts fueled by the president's whipsaw economic policy. While lawmakers who spoke with CNN denied having advance briefings, some who bought ahead of the president's tariff reprieve stood to make significant gains after it spurred a market rebound. Lawmakers told CNN the trades were made largely by third-party financial advisors with unilateral control over their portfolios. But experts and some on Capitol Hill say questions around the timing of the transactions strikes at the heart of an ethical and optical question that has long dogged Congress: Can lawmakers play the market without generating suspicion their access to information gives them an unfair advantage, or should they ban the practice altogether? 'At a time where there was significant or important non-public information swirling around Washington, the public can't help but fear that members of Congress are using their access to information to personally profit,' Indiana University Maurer School of Law Professor Donna Nagy, who has testified before Congress on the issue, told CNN after viewing the trading data. 'And whether that perception is true or not, it is destructive. It fuels a corrosive belief that lawmakers are using their positions for purposes of profit and not for the public interest.' Lawmakers, their spouses, and children are permitted to make trades but they are mandated to report any activity done on their behalf within 45 days. They are only required to disclose a monetary value range for trades. From March 31 — just before the president's April 2 'Liberation Day' announcement of tariffs of at least 10% across all countries — through the April 9 pause, a total of 35 lawmakers (19 Republicans and 16 Democrats) reported purchases between about $8.6 million and $27.9 million and sales between about $5.9 million and $22.4 million across 1,265 transactions. Not all of the trades were individual stocks; some involved were mutual funds or public bonds. From March 31 through April 9, Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna reported the most transactions at 438, while GOP Rep. Kevin Hern reported the single highest-value transaction of up to $5 million on April 4. Eleven lawmakers reported one transaction. Fourteen lawmakers reported two transactions or fewer. The transactions Khanna reported, his communications director Sarah Drory told CNN, were not stock trades but part of a trust managed by an independent third party that stems from money his wife had before they were married. Hern spokeswoman Miranda Dabney, meanwhile, told CNN: 'Rep. Hern does not have day-to-day management or control over his stock portfolio or his businesses.' In statements provided to CNN, representatives for the lawmakers who reported trades during that period pointed to various agreements with third-party financial advisors and noted that some purchases were bonds and not individual stocks. The offices told CNN the lawmakers are not directly involved in the purchases. 'President Trump was telling the entire world for months, and even decades, about the benefits of tariffs. It was even a central component of his 2024 presidential campaign. Suggesting any behind-the-scenes coordination is ridiculous,' a spokesperson for Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said, pushing back on concerns around the timing of the trades. The Georgia Republican – whose 11 reported purchases on April 8 included between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of stock each, according to the filings – does not direct her own trades but instead has a fiduciary agreement with her portfolio manager, the spokesperson said. Around Trump's trade war, a number of Republicans publicly pledged support for Trump's economic policy while protecting their own financial interests. Sen. Markwayne Mullin sold between $290,000 and $700,000 in stocks across industries from a joint account on April 8 through 'an independent, third-party operator firm that manages all stock portfolio investments on his behalf,' according to his spokesperson. At the same time, the Oklahoma Republican was publicly supporting the president's escalating trade war, despite the financial decisions that appeared to mirror broader consumer concerns. Hern, the fourth-highest ranking Republican in the House said on February 13, shortly after Trump announced 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from all countries: 'These reciprocal tariffs will incentivize other nations to level the playing field and remove long-standing, exorbitant tariffs.' On March 31 — two days before Trump announced expansive tariffs on April 2 — a trust affiliated with Hern sold between $500,000 and $1 million worth of structured investments. For Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, one of the Republicans behind the push to ban lawmaker stock trading, having an intermediary conduct the trades does little to assuage concern. 'Members of Congress should come here to advance the interests of their constituents, not to enrich themselves using stock trading,' Roy said. Rhode Island Rep. Seth Magaziner, one of the leading negotiators on the Democratic side of the effort to ban congressional stock trading who participates in regular meetings on the issue, similarly told CNN: 'We should eliminate the opportunity for members of Congress to engage in any sort of insider trading because the opportunity clearly exists.' The director of government affairs at the Project on Government Oversight Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette told CNN, 'You occasionally have these moments where it really clarifies and distills down just how bad this is. And I think the tariff announcements and subsequent trades and transactions are a prime example of that.' March 3 — the day before Trump levied an additional 10% tariff on China and a 25% tariff on Mexican and Canadian imports with some exceptions — saw the highest number of lawmakers reporting stock trading in a single day through mid-April, according to CNN's analysis. Sixteen lawmakers, evenly split among Democrats and Republicans, reported hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of transactions that day — most of them purchases. The president had confirmed at an afternoon White House event on March 3 that the tariffs would take effect the next day, leading to a sharp selloff in stocks. At that point, March 3 had so far been the worst day for the market. Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Dave McCormick, who reported purchases between $50,000 and $100,000, was the only lawmaker to report having personally traded on March 3. McCormick did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Lawmakers reached by CNN sought to distance themselves from the transactions filed during those key dates around Trump's tariffs announcements. CNN reached out to the 16 lawmakers who reported transactions on March 3, and the 35 lawmakers, some of whom overlapped, who reported having transactions between March 31 and April 9. Those who responded to CNN said they were unaware of trades being made through various agreements with financial advisors. They said the filings did not reflect traditional stock trades and that they had no interactions with the administration around key announcements. Some told CNN the filings reflected trades or reinvestments through a joint account or by a spouse. Democratic Rep. Josh Gottheimer is waiting on congressional approval for a blind trust, a spokesman told CNN. GOP Rep. Bruce Westerman, meanwhile, has instructed his investment advisor to not invest in individual stocks and is in the process of putting his assets back into a fund, after receiving heat for recent investments, spokesperson Kinsey Featherston shared. Democratic Rep. Julie Johnson has begun the process of divesting her stocks, managed by an independent third party, into ETFs and mutual funds upon becoming a member of Congress, her spokesperson told CNN. Some said they supported efforts to ban lawmaker trading of individual stocks, even those with active portfolios, including Khanna and GOP Rep. Rob Bresnahan. The STOCK Act passed with overwhelming support in 2012 to increase transparency about lawmaker stock trading and made it illegal for lawmakers to use inside information for financial benefit. But lawmakers and experts argue problems persist with existing reporting structures and enforcement mechanisms. Along with only being required to report a monetary range of transactions, lawmakers also don't report the timing of a trade on a given day, which could be useful context for those determining whether seemingly well-timed trades could be based on non-public information. There is also currently no designated oversight body to determine whether lawmakers hold a conflict of interest in their trading practices. Legal experts say that even lawmakers who use financial advisors to trade on their behalf are not necessarily insulated from scrutiny, and it depends on the details of the agreement. The $200 fine for late filings is hardly a deterrent, experts argue. 'That doesn't pass the sniff test even a little bit because there is no guarantee that they're not talking to those people because there is no prohibition against them from talking to those financial advisors,' Hedtler-Gaudette said of the arrangements most lawmakers have with their financial advisors. As efforts to ban congressional stock trading have fallen short, scholars and ethics experts have argued that members of Congress are privy to more information than the average American and are often faced with legislative decisions that overlap with their investment portfolios. 'It is essentially completely legal for a congressman, congresswoman or senator to go to Goldman Sachs, Blackrock or Vanguard and be like, 'Hey I'm proposing this regulation, what do you think will be the impact on the market?' There is nothing to stop you from that,' said Dr. Jan Hanousek Jr., an assistant professor at the University of Memphis who has studied the patterns of lawmaker stock trading. 'This is an insane problem.' Beyond ethics concerns, a 2022 Fox News poll found that 70% of respondents supported banning members of Congress and their families from trading stock, while a January UC San Diego study found that even when lawmakers make their trading practices public, it 'erodes' the legitimacy of Congress. The push to ban lawmaker stock trading last peaked when dozens of federal officials and some lawmakers made lucrative stock and mutual fund trades as the government was preparing for the financial onslaught of the Covid-19 pandemic in early 2020. The Department of Justice has since closed investigations into the moves. But in a sign this Congress' bipartisan group of lawmakers may be closer to finding the political will to ban the practice, House Speaker Mike Johnson, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and the president himself have publicly supported the effort, following news of lawmaker stock trading activity around the tariff announcements. 'I have been working on this issue for years,' Roy told CNN. 'We can and should fix the problem during this term now that President Trump and the Speaker have signaled their support for the measure. We have the will and the mandate of the American people to do this. Let's deliver.'
Motor 1
an hour ago
- Motor 1
Kia Blames Regulations For The Death of Gas Performance Cars
We recently mourned the loss of fun gas-powered cars in Europe due to tightening emissions regulations. But the situation is actually much worse. The gradual demise of performance vehicles with combustion engines is happening worldwide. Kia is the latest automaker to announce that its future sports cars will be purely electric to meet stricter legislation. Kia Australia's product chief, Roland Rivero, told Carsales that automakers have no choice but to 'satisfy the global situation and CO 2 regulations are tightening all around the world.' If there is a silver lining in all of this, it's that the GT badge will live on for more electric models. The new EV4 is a prime candidate to receive the electric GT treatment. Rivero remains optimistic about catering to enthusiasts, even in an increasingly electrified era. He believes 'there's no reason why an electrified product can't give you a similar experience [to internal combustion performance cars], albeit with some computer tech and whatnot.' Still, another car like the Stinger GT with its V-6 engine isn't going to happen. The GT badge is already appearing on electric models, such as the supersized EV9 GT . Meanwhile, the smaller EV6 GT recently received an update that includes simulated gear shifts and engine sounds , "features" that tie into Rivero's 'computer tech' comment. Hyundai's N division may have axed the i20 N and i30 N hot hatches, the Kona N crossover, and the quirky Veloster N, but it's not ready to abandon internal combustion just yet. The company still sells the Elantra N and has pledged to launch a next-generation model with a bigger engine . Earlier this year, N division co-founder Joonwoo Park hinted in an Auto Express interview that hybrid powertrains could help keep fun ICE cars alive under the N badge. Addressing the elephant in the room, any hybrid or EV with performance chops will come with a weight penalty. This is especially true for fully electric performance cars, but it's a compromise carmakers seem willing to accept. Hyundai and Kia appear to be leaning into SUVs for now, which only exacerbates the situation. But that's the reality of 2025. Consumers want SUVs, and governments want automakers to reduce the emissions of their fleets. To satisfy both demands and stay in business, car companies are producing more electric SUVs. A few of these receive upgrades to earn their GT and N badges, which were exclusive to combustion-engine cars not long ago. Hyundai's luxury brand Genesis does have a new twin-turbo V-8 , but it's intended solely for race cars. Source: Carsales Share this Story Facebook X LinkedIn Flipboard Reddit WhatsApp E-Mail Got a tip for us? Email: tips@ Join the conversation ( )
