Marathon Asset Management Q1 vs. Q2 2021: Examining Changes in Top Holdings
Ava Hoppe | 29 April, 2023
As a professional blog writer, I know that investors are always interested in analyzing changes in holdings from the previous quarter to identify trends and potential opportunities. In this blog post, we will examine Marathon Asset Management's Q1 2021 versus Q2 2021 13F holdings comparison. We will review the top holdings' changes, value, and options type from the previous quarter and see if there are any significant shifts in investment strategies.
Starting with the top holdings, we see that Oracle Corp (ORCL) remained the number one holding, although it decreased by 0.8%. Booking Holdings Inc. (BKNG) replaced Alphabet Inc. - Class A (GOOGL) as the second-largest holding, with an increase of 38.2% from the previous quarter. GOOGL also experienced an increase of 24.2% from Q1 to Q2 2021, landing in the third position. Johnson and Johnson (JNJ) decreased by 0.1%, shifting to the fourth position, and Alphabet Inc. - Class C (GOOG) climbed to the fifth position, with an increase of 73.2%.
Examining the changes in value, we see that Texas Instruments Inc (TXN) experienced the most significant increase from Q1 to Q2 2021, with a rise of 42%. The value of the top holding, ORCL, increased by 10%, and BKNG experienced a considerable 38.2% increase. The values of JP Morgan Chase & Co (JPM), General Dynamics Corp (GD), and Prologis Inc (PLD) remained the same, while Merck & Co Inc (MRK) experienced a modest increase of 4.7%.
The option types of the top holdings remained mostly unchanged from Q1 to Q2 2021. However, we saw one notable shift in holdings. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. (ADM) shifted from shares to a decrease of -26.9%. Meanwhile, the options type of Facebook Inc A (META) and Johnson and Johnson (JNJ) remained the same.
To summarize, Marathon Asset Management's top holdings remained relatively stable from Q1 to Q2 2021, with few changes in option type and company rankings. However, we did see a significant increase in the value of some holdings, such as TXN and BKNG, indicating potential shifts in investment strategy. It is important to note that these changes are always subject to fluctuations and may not reflect the overall market movements in the future.
In conclusion, investors must regularly review their investments and assess changes in holdings to identify trends and maximize returns. Marathon Asset Management's Q1 2021 versus Q2 2021 13F holdings comparison provided valuable insights into potential shifts in investment strategies, and investors must keep track of these movements to make informed decisions.
Other Posts
- Title: RWWM, Inc. Q3 2022 vs. Q4 2022 13F Holdings: Key Takeaways for Investors
- Investment Giants MinichMacGregor Wealth Management, LLC Q4 2022 vs. Q1 2023: A Comprehensive Analysis
- The Changing Tide: Invesco Private Capital's Q2 2019 vs. Q3 2019 13F Holdings
- Alta Capital Management LLC/ Q2 2023 vs. Q3 2023 13F Holdings Comparison
- Penbrook Management LLC Q2 2023 vs. Q3 2023 13F Holdings Comparison
- Navigating the Infrastructure Investment Labyrinth: A Guide to Antin's 2023 Universal Registration Document
- The Rise and Fall of Signature Financial Management: How Q4 2018 Holdings Stack Up Against Q3
- Analyzing Loudon Investment Management’s Q3 2022 vs. Q4 2022 13F Holdings: Understanding the Fund’s Investment Strategy.
- Analyzing Pension Partners, LLC's Q2 2019 vs. Q3 2019 13F Holdings Changes
- Marco Investment Management LLC Q3 2022 vs. Q4 2022: A Close Look at the 13F Holdings Comparison