1. finance
2. investing
3. stocks

Shareownership in Finland 2015*
Matti Keloharju
Eero Kasanen Professor of Finance
Aalto University School of Business, CEPR, and IFN
Antti Lehtinen
Systems Architect
Aalto University School of Business
June 8, 2015
Abstract
This paper studies patterns in ownership of Finnish stocks and bonds in 2015, and
changes in shareownership patterns between 1995 and 2015. Our key findings are as
follows. (1) In 2015, 12.8% (0.4%) of Finns own stocks (bonds) directly. (2) The
median stock portfolio is worth 4,200 euros while the median bond portfolio is worth
15,000 euros. (3) Men account for 58% of shareholders, 70% of individuals’
combined investment wealth, and 73% of share millionaires. (4) Shareholders are on
average 15 years older than the population. Wealthy investors are even older. (5) The
Swedish-speaking minority accounts for 5.3% of the population but owns 17.5% of
individuals’ directly owned stock wealth. (6) The wealthiest 0.01% (1%) of individual
investors owns 12% (46%) of the directly owned share wealth of individuals. (7)
Individuals’ direct shareownership has become less concentrated since 2003.
Keywords: Shareownership, bond ownership
*
Corresponding author: Matti Keloharju, Department of Finance, Aalto University School of Business,
Runeberginkatu 22-24, 00100 Helsinki, Finland. Email [email protected] and
[email protected]. We would like to thank Euroclear for making the ownership data available to
us, and Joni Hämäläinen, Yakill Reyes Ramu, Janne Virtala, and Petra Vokatá for their help in putting
it together. Financial support from the Finnish Foundation for Share Promotion is gratefully
acknowledged.
1
1. INTRODUCTION
This paper presents a descriptive analysis of shareownership patterns in
Finnish listed companies in year 2015 using data from Euroclear Finland. Moreover,
the paper compares share and bond ownership in 2015 and analyzes trends in
shareownership patterns. In many respects, the paper is an update of Karhunen and
Keloharju (2001) which studied shareownership patterns in Finland in year 2000. An
important difference between the papers is that Karhunen and Keloharju did not study
bond investments. Armed with a much longer time series of observations, this paper
also provides a more comprehensive analysis of trends in shareownership patterns.
Our study reports the following issues: (1) the breakdown of the number of
investors and the proportion of aggregate investment wealth by institutional category;
(2) the distribution of individuals’ investment wealth by gender, age, mother tongue,
municipality, and region; (3) the number and socioeconomic attributes of individuals
with at least one million euros of stock wealth; (4) the concentration of individuals’
stock wealth; (5) portfolio diversification; (6) the relationship between a stock’s
ownership structure and exchange listing, industry, market capitalization, and
dividend yield; (7) comparison of the socioeconomic characteristics of share- and
bondholders; and (8) the extent to which investors hold bonds and shares of
companies headquartered in the investor’s home municipality or region. Moreover,
we report changes in shareownership by institutional category, gender, mother tongue,
and region, and analyze trends in ownership concentration and diversification.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. The next section describes
the data. Section three describes ownership patterns at the beginning of 2015. Section
four compares the ownership patterns of stocks and bonds. Section five analyzes
trends in shareownership. Section six summarizes the findings.
2. DATA
Our data include the initial balance in Euroclear’s ownership records on
January 1, 1995 and all changes in these records until January 1, 2015 for all publicly
quoted companies represented in the paperless system of share ownership and trading,
called the Book Entry System. Moreover, the ownership records also include
ownership and change of ownership for many other asset classes, including bonds and
structured securities. In all, there are about 280 million initial balance records and
2
changes of ownership in our data. Since all changes in the records are stamped on the
settlement day, these data allow us determine the ownership for each stockholder at
any point of time between the above two dates. Our paper analyzes registered
stockholder ownership records at the annual frequency. This means that our time
series consists of 21 annual snapshots.
The Book Entry System entails compulsory registration of holdings for
Finnish individuals and institutions.
Foreigners are partially exempted from
registration as they can opt for registration in a nominee name. This means that their
holdings are combined to a larger pool of nominee registered holdings and cannot be
separated from each other.
We use the data to generate the following information for each investor and for
each point of time:1
Investor identification number: from 1 to 1,735,235. Individual investors are
initially identified by their social security number and companies and other
institutions by their official registration number. With the help of this unique
number the holdings of an investor are kept separate from the holdings of other
investors. For security reasons, in our data, the unique identifying number is
replaced by a unique running number.
Share class
Bond issue and issuer
Number of shares or bonds
Ownership type. Euroclear classifies ownership into eight types of which only two
have practical significance: private ownership and nominee registered ownership.
Investor category.
This identifies the line of business or profession of the
investor. It is based on the 73-category institutional classification system by
Statistics Finland. Our aggregation of the categories results in six categories or
less.
Dummy variables for males and females (individual investors)
Birth year (individual investors)
Mother tongue (individual investors)
Zip code. We designate investors with a post office box number to the respective
zip code.
1
For more details of the data, see Ilmanen and Keloharju (1999) and Grinblatt and Keloharju (2000).
3
While our database includes comprehensive data on direct shareholdings, it does
not cover indirect shareholdings. Therefore, for example, the holdings of investment
companies owned by a single individual are considered to represent institutional
ownership. For the same reason, we do not consider individuals’ indirect ownership
through mutual funds.2
Many companies have listed two share classes of which one is attached with a
greater number of votes than the other. This makes the stocks imperfect substitutes
for each other and potentially gives rise to different owner clienteles. Therefore, we
consider share classes with voting power differences as separate stocks. Unlisted
share classes are not analyzed in the paper.
The classification of investor categories changed in 2007. Our classification of the
investor categories in year 2015 is based on the most recent classification in the data.
However, many of the investors with old category codes do not appear in the data
after 2007, i.e. we do not directly observe their new investor-category codes. The
same problem applies to many investors that only have transactions in the newcategory domain: for them, we do not observe the old investor-category codes.
Moreover, for some investor categories, there is no exact correspondence between the
old and new codes. For these investor categories, investors are randomly assigned
from old categories to new categories in the same proportion as old-category investors
known to have an old and a new category code correspond to various new categories.
To put the data obtained from Euroclear into perspective, we compare it to
population statistics detailed on Statistics Finland’s web page. Statistics Finland’s
data also allow us to aggregate zip code level information to municipality and region
levels.
3. OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE IN 2015
3.1. Distribution of investment wealth by investor category
Table 1 reports the number of investors by asset class at the beginning of
2015.3 With about 740,000 distinct investors, stocks are by far the largest investor
category, followed by structured securities (140,000 investors), bonds (25,000
2
Keloharju, Knüpfer, and Rantapuska (2012) analyze share and mutual fund ownership between 2004
and 2008. Their analysis is based on a random sample of individuals, not the whole population
(including institutional investors) as in this paper.
3
The table only includes asset classes that have been acquired for investment purposes and that are not
very short-lived. Therefore, for example, we do not consider subscription rights in our analysis.
4
investors), derivatives (10,000 investors), and exchange traded funds (6,000
investors). As expected, the vast majority of investors in each asset class are
individual investors: for example, they account for 94% of stockholders and 96% of
owners of structured securities. All in all, 12.8% of Finns own stocks directly. Owners
of structured securities (bonds) account for about 2.5% (0.4%) of the population.
Our subsequent analyses focus on shareholders and, to less extent, on
bondholders. Analyses of structured securities (that tend to be much more complex
than stocks and bonds) and the other asset classes are left for future research.
TABLE 1 HERE
Table 2 reports on the value of stock and bond portfolios of each investor
category. The combined value of the shareholdings is 177 billion euros, i.e. 62 times
the combined value of bondholdings (2.9 billion euros). Domestic investors own
about half of the stock market capitalization and about four-fifths of the bond market
capitalization. Among domestic investor categories, individual investors are the
largest investor category, accounting for about 17% of the stockholdings and 31% of
the bondholdings. The median individual investor stock (bond) portfolio is worth
4,200 (15,000) euros. As expected, individual investors’ mean stock (bond) portfolio
is worth much more than the median portfolio, 41,000 (38,000) euros. The difference
between the mean and the median is driven by the fact that there are many investors
with large ownership stakes.
TABLE 2 HERE
Table 2 further investigates the distribution of stock wealth according to the
categorization of Statistics Finland. Among domestic institutional owners, the largest
shareholders are government and municipalities (14.1%) and corporations (14.0%),
followed by non-profit institutions (3.9%) and financial and insurance institutions
(3.5%).
5
3.2. Joint distribution of age and sex and the relationship between share wealth,
age, and sex
Table 3 shows the joint distribution of age and sex and for the entire Finnish
population and for shareholders. Moreover, the table tabulates the gender and age
distribution of investment wealth. The mean age of male investors is 55 years and that
of female investors is 58 years; the corresponding numbers for the population are 41
and 43 years, respectively. In other words, investors are on average about 15 years
older than the population.
TABLE 3 HERE
The shareownership patterns of men and women differ from each other. 58%
of the individual investors are men and 42% of them are women. Shareownership
wealth is more skewed towards men than the number of investors: men own 70% and
women 30% of individuals’ combined investment wealth.
Table 3 also reports the fraction of investors with at least one million euros
worth of shares (henceforth, millionaires) by age and sex. As expected from the
investment wealth figures, men are more dominant among millionaires than among
investors at large. Men account for 73% for the millionaires, which is 15 percentage
points more than their fraction of all investors. Millionaires also tend to be more
senior people than investors in general. Male millionaires are on average 66 years
old, i.e. eleven years older than investors at large. Female millionaires are on average
65 years old.
Figure 1 illustrates the proportion of inhabitants and investors in each age and
sex category. Figure 2 compares the proportion of inhabitants in each age and sex
category to the proportion of investment wealth owned by the investors in this
category.
FIGURE 1 HERE
FIGURE 2 HERE
Figure 3 displays individual investors’ mean share wealth as a function of their
birth year. Older investors are on average wealthier than younger investors: for
6
example, the mean wealth of investors born in 1945 is 58,000 euros, whereas that of
investors born in 1990 is 18,000 euros. Overall, mean portfolio size increases with
age up to about 70 years, after which it gradually decreases.
FIGURE 3 HERE
3.3. Share investment activity and share wealth by municipality and region
Table 4 shows how investment wealth in Finland is distributed across regions.
There are large differences in the relative frequency of investor-inhabitants. In
particular, the regions of Ahvenanmaa and Uusimaa stand out: the ratio of investorinhabitants to all inhabitants is in Ahvenanmaa 28% and in Uusimaa 19% whereas the
national average is 13%. The ratio of investor-inhabitants in Uusimaa is largely
driven by the Greater Helsinki Area where 21% of the inhabitants own stocks. The
next-largest investment activity is in Pohjanmaa where 15% of the inhabitants own
stocks. The average investment wealth per shareholder is in Ahvenanmaa 47,000
euros and in Uusimaa 48,000 euros (in Greater Helsinki Area, 53,000 euros). The
national average is 41,000 euros.
TABLE 4 HERE
Table 4 also reports the distribution of share wealth by region. Owing to its
large and wealthy population, Uusimaa accounts for 52% of individuals’ aggregate
share wealth. Varsinais-Suomi and Pirkanmaa represent the second- and third-most
important concentrations of share wealth with 8.1% and 6.6% of aggregate share
wealth, respectively.
Figure 4 gives a more accurate description of the geographical distribution of
shareownership by illustrating the number of investors per inhabitant figure at the
municipality level. The graph shows clear concentration in investment activity in the
Greater Helsinki Area, Ahvenanmaa, Pirkanmaa, Pohjanmaa, and Varsinais-Suomi.
Figure 5 finds generally similar, but somewhat noisier results using the share wealth
per inhabitant metric.
FIGURE 4 HERE
7
FIGURE 5 HERE
3.4. Share wealth by mother tongue
Table 5 investigates how mother tongue is related to share wealth.
The
Swedish-speaking minority (5.3% of the Finnish population) is much wealthier than
the Finnish-speaking majority (89% of population): the average share wealth of
Finnish-speaking Finns owning stocks, 37,500 euros, is one-half of the share wealth
of Swedish-speaking Finns owning stocks, 75,000 euros. The ratio of investorinhabitants to all inhabitants is also much larger for Swedish-speaking Finns (23%)
than for Finnish-speaking Finns (13%). As a result, the average stock wealth of
Swedish-speaking Finns (17,100 euros) is more than three times as large as that of
Finnish-speaking Finns (4,800 euros). In all, Swedish speakers own 18% of the
combined share wealth and account for 23% of the millionaires.
TABLE 5 HERE
More than 5% of Finns have mother tongue other than Finnish or Swedish.
Yet, their ownership fraction is very small: 0.4% of the total share wealth. Moreover,
only 1.2% of them invest in stocks, which is about 10% of the corresponding fraction
of Finnish speakers and 5% of that of Swedish speakers. There are at least two
potential reasons for the low investment activity. First, many of the non-Finnish or
non-Swedish speakers are recent immigrants and may not have money to invest in
stocks. Second, the language coded as their mother tongue may not be the real one: a
bank or asset manager may not be able to correspond with their customers in other
than the Finnish or Swedish language, and may code the language of correspondence
(probably Finnish) as the mother tongue of the customer. Doing so would
mechanically increase the share of Finnish-speaking investors, and decrease the share
of other-language speakers.
3.5. Concentration of individuals’ share wealth
Table 6 shows the degree of concentration in individuals’ shareownership.
The richest 0.01% of individual investors (70 individuals) own 12% and the richest
1% (7,009 individuals) 46% of the investment wealth of individuals. Similarly, the
8
richest 0.01% of the entire Finnish population (547 individuals) owns 24% and the
richest 1% (54,717 individuals) 77% of the investment wealth of individuals. These
numbers probably are probably conservative estimates of the ownership fraction of
the wealthiest investors. Wealthy individuals are more likely than others to own
stocks via holding companies, whose ownership is not reflected in the analysis of
individuals’ ownership.
TABLE 6 HERE
3.6. Stock portfolio diversification
Table 7 describes the diversification of stock portfolios. Most individual
investors hold poorly diversified portfolios: 46% of individual investors have only one
stock in their portfolio and 16% hold two stocks. The same applies to institutions of
which 50% hold only one stock and 12% two stocks. All in all, only 23% of
individuals and 26% of institutions hold at least five stocks in their portfolio.
TABLE 7 HERE
Table 8 reports the average number of stocks in investors’ portfolios. The
average number of stocks held is 3.6 for individuals and 4.2 for institutions.
TABLE 8 HERE
Large portfolios tend to be much better diversified than small portfolios. On
average, individual investors with at least one million euros worth of shares hold 18
stocks.
3.7. Ownership structure and firm characteristics
Table 9 takes a brief look into how the ownership structure of publicly quoted
share classes is related to their exchange listing, industry, market capitalization, and
dividend yield. To analyze the general tendencies behind investment in different share
classes, the table gives each share class an equal weight. This obviously significantly
downplays the role of large companies like Nordea or Nokia, which constitute the
9
bulk of the market capitalization. Appendix 1 reports a detailed list of ownership
structure variables by share class.
Like in Japan, foreign investors prefer stocks listed on the main list and those
with large market capitalization (see Kang and Stulz (1997)). These are generally also
the most liquid stocks. Individual investors tend to invest more in small stocks and
those listed on the First North list.
TABLE 9 HERE
There are also clear differences in individual investors’ preferences. Men and
younger investors are more likely to invest in stocks that have a smaller market
capitalization, are listed in the First North list, and pay no dividends. For example, the
fraction of men increases monotonically from 67% in the largest market capitalization
quintile to 80% in the smallest quintile. At the same time, investors’ mean age
decreases monotonically from 56 years to 52 years. These differences in investment
allocation are probably at least partly driven by differences in risk tolerance. For
example, Jianakoplos and Bernasek (1998) find that single women are relatively more
risk averse in their asset holdings than single men or married couples.
4. COMPARISON OF SHARE- AND BONDHOLDERS
4.1. Comparison of the demographic characteristics of share- and bondholders
Table 10 compares shareholders to bondholders. These groups differ from one
another in several respects. First, a much larger fraction of shareholders are men (58%
vs. 43%). This result is consistent with more risk tolerant investors investing in
stocks. Second, shareholders are on average eight years younger than bondholders.
This result is consistent with financial planners’ standard advice for older people to
reduce the share of equity in the portfolio. Third, a larger fraction of stockholders than
bondholders live in urban areas (72% vs. 64%). Conversely, a larger fraction of
bondholders than stockholders (18% vs. 12%) live in rural municipalities. Fourth and
finally, Swedish speakers are much more likely to invest directly in bonds than
Finnish speakers. The fraction of Swedish-speaking investors is almost twice as large
(18.3% vs. 9.5%) among bondholders than among stockholders.
10
TABLE 10 HERE
4.2. The influence of headquarters location on share- and bondownership
Past research has documented that investors tend to prefer to invest in stocks
that are headquartered close to the municipality where the investor lives.4 This so
called home bias may arise, among others, because investors are more familiar with
these companies, because they have superior information of these companies, or
because they have invested in these companies due to an employee or customer
relationship.
Table 11 provides a simple analysis of the preference of investors to invest in
stocks and bonds that are headquartered in the same municipality or region the
investor lives in. To our knowledge, we are the first to analyze this effect for
bondholders. 5 Following Grinblatt and Keloharju (2001), we compute the following
ratio to measure this preference for shareholders:
Firm i’s shareowner weight for investors in the municipality of its headquarters
Firm i’s shareowner weight among all investors in Finland
The numerator is simply the number of individual shareowners of firm i residing
in the municipality the firm is headquartered in, divided by the sum, across all firms,
of the number of shareholdings in that same municipality. The denominator is the
comparable ratio for all of Finland. In the absence of home bias, the ratio equals one.
As an example of the computation of the ratio, take Ponsse, a company
producing harvesters. Ponsse has 1,003 individual shareowners, 116 of whom live in
its headquarters municipality of Vieremä.
Summing the number of individual
investors’ shareholdings over all firms, we find that Vieremä has 7,686 shareholdings,
while Finland has 2,259,234 shareholdings.6 The numerator for Ponsse’s ratio is thus
116 / 1,003 while the denominator is 7,686 / 2,259,234, making Ponsse’s ratio 34.
The results suggest that individual investors living in the headquarters
municipality (region) of a median company are 6.0 (3.7) times as likely to own the
4
See, for example, Coval and Moskowitz (1999) and Grinblatt and Keloharju (2001).
Fidora, Fratzscher, and Thimann (2007) and Demoor and Vanpée (2013), among others, analyze
home bias in bond investments, but they focus on country-level rather than within-country bias.
6
The total number of shareholdings is somewhat smaller than the product of the number of individual
investors and the mean number of shares in their portfolio. This is because we restrict the home bias
analysis to those investors for whom we have information on location.
5
11
stock of that company as the stock of other companies, provided that the company is
headquartered outside of the Greater Helsinki Area. For all of these 40 companies, an
investor living in the headquarters municipality of the company is more likely to
invest in that company than in other companies. Greater Helsinki Area headquartered
companies display much less home bias than other companies. This is probably
largely due to the fact that these companies tend to be larger and more nationally
known, attracting investors from all over Finland.
TABLE 11 HERE
Home bias is not confined to shareholdings. Individual investors living in the
headquarters municipality (region) of a median bond issuer are 22 (7) times as likely
to own bonds issued by that issuer as bonds of other issuers, provided that the issuer is
headquartered outside of the Greater Helsinki Area.7 For 17 of these 20 companies, an
investor living in the headquarters municipality of the company is more likely to
invest in that company than in other companies. Thus, if anything, the home bias in
bondholdings appears to be larger than that in shareholdings. Similar to stocks, the
home bias in bondholdings is weaker for issuers headquartered in the Greater Helsinki
Area.
Both individual and institutional investors display home bias. For both stocks
and bonds, institutions’ home bias appears to be about as large as that of individual
investors. A relatively small number of institutional investors adds noise to the
institutional home bias numbers. This is also the reason why we do not report the
home bias for institutions at the municipality level.
What accounts for the home bias in bondholdings? We suspect that
recommendations of the issuer play a role here. Over half of the bond issuers are
banks, many of them local banks, and their customers are more likely to live close to
the headquarters of the bank. The home bias is far stronger for bonds issued by banks
than those of other issuers. Individual and institutional investors living in the
headquarters region of a median bank-based issuer are both five times as likely to own
bonds issued by that issuer as bonds of other issuers. When the bond is issued by
institution other than a bank, the corresponding ratios are close to one. Our results are
consistent with a scenario where financial advisors at the bank recommend their
7
This analysis drops government bonds from the sample.
12
customers to buy bonds issued by the bank, and the customers follow this
recommendation.
5. TRENDS IN SHAREOWNERSHIP
5.1. Trends in ownership structure by main investor categories
Figure 6 shows how the distribution of stock ownership has changed across
the main investor categories during the time period. There are large large swings in
ownership, in particular among domestic institutions and foreigners. For example,
foreign owners accounted for about 74% of the market capitalization in 2001, while
the corresponding fractions in 1995 and 2013 were 33% and 41%, respectively. Much
of these swings can be attributed to Nokia, whose market capitalization varied greatly
during the sample period and which at its peak was more than 90% foreign owned.
Appendix 2 reports the results formally as a table.
FIGURE 6 HERE
5.2. Trends in the number of shareholders
Figure 7 shows how the number of investors has changed during our sample
period. The number increased from 475,000 in 1997 to 746,000 in 2000 because of a
flurry of initial public offerings and listings, and because Sampo joined the share
registry. After that the increase in the number of shareholders has been much smaller;
there have even been decreases in the number of shareholders, as there was between
2002 and 2008 when the number of stockholders decreased from 753,000 to 642,000.
FIGURE 7 HERE
Figure 7 also reports how the number of millionaires has fluctuated during our
sample period. Here, the key determinant of the fluctuation is change in market prices.
For example, the number of millionaires dropped from 2,707 at the beginning of 2008
(when the stock prices were close to a local high) to 1,206 at the beginning of 2009
(when stock prices were hit by the financial crisis). The number of millionaires was at
its highest, at 3,224, at the beginning of 2000, which was close to the peak of the IT
bubble. Appendix 3 reports more details of the time series variation of the number of
investors at various parts of the wealth distribution.
13
5.3. Trends in shareownership concentration
Figure 8 reports the fraction of share wealth owned by four investor
categories: 1) the wealthiest 0.01% of investors, 2) the wealthiest 0.1% of investors
(excluding the top 0.01% of investors), 3) the wealthiest 0.5% of investors (excluding
the top 0.1% of investors), and 4) the wealthiest 1% of investors (excluding the top
0.5% of investors). Of these four investor categories, the wealthiest three exhibit most
variation during the sample period. In particular, the wealthiest 0.01% of investors
display remarkable variation: their ownership fraction more than doubled from 8% in
year 1995 to 19% in year 2004, and decreased to 12% in 2015. The two nextwealthiest investor categories increased their ownership fraction from 13% and 15%
in 1995 to 17% and 18% in 2001, after which the ownership fraction decreased to
13% in 2015. For the wealthiest 1% of investors (excluding the top 0.5% of
investors), the ownership fraction varied between 7.5% and 9.0% during the sample
period. Their ownership fraction reached its peak already in 1999.
FIGURE 8 HERE
Figure 9 shows how the concentration of ownership has evolved over time. A
useful summary measure of ownership concentration is the gini coefficient. By
definition, the gini coefficient varies between 0 and 1, with larger numbers indicating
larger degrees of concentration.8
Figure 9 shows that individual investors’ shareownership concentration
increased almost monotonically from 1995 to 2003, and decreased almost
monotonically from 2003 to 2015. The gini coefficients, computed from ownership
among investors, increased from 0.860 in 1995 to 0.895 in 2003, and fell back to
0.866 in 2015. The gini coefficients based on the entire population are larger, and
their variation also reflects variation in the number of shareholders. At the end of the
sample period, the gini coefficient for Finnish individuals was 0.983. Appendix 4
reports the results as a table.
8
Following Deltas (2003), the gini coefficient is estimated as 2cov(y,ry)/(nE(y)), where n is the number
of individuals sampled and cov(y,ry) is the covariance between shareownership wealth, y, and the ranks
of individuals according to their shareownership wealth, ry, from the poorest (ry = 1) to the richest (ry =
n).
14
FIGURE 9 HERE
Figure 9 showed that the total portfolio share of the wealthiest 0.01% of
investors has fluctuated considerably over time. Although not reported formally, we
check whether this affects our results on the negative trend of the gini coefficient after
2003. The answer is by and large no: although the negative trend flattens somewhat
after 2004, the overall trend pattern is very similar. This suggests that changes e.g. in
the extent to which the very wealthiest investors invest in stocks directly vs. through
holding companies is unlikely to explain the negative trend in ownership
concentration.
How do our results compare with other time-series evidence on the
concentration of wealth? We compare our results to Statistics Finland’s wealth study,
which keeps track of gini coeffients for different combinations of asset classes. The
study is conducted every four or five years for a sample of individuals, and it
complements data obtained from administrative registers with that from interviews.
Statistics Finland’s wealth study finds that financial assets have become more
concentrated over time. For example, the gini coefficient increased from 0.793 in
2004 to 0.818 in 2013. This contrasts with our evidence, which finds a decrease in
concentration since 2003.
What accounts for the difference in the direction of change in ownership
concentration between our and Statistics Finland’s study? One difference between the
studies is that Statistics Finland’s study is based on a sample while ours is based on
the whole population of investors. A sample may not give an accurate picture of the
portfolios of the wealthiest investors, who may be reluctant to participate in the
survey. Another difference is that we do not have data on ownership of holding
companies; some wealthy investors are known to have channelled at least part of their
shareholdings to holding companies. Statistics Finland has information on nonlisted
holdings, although their value is estimated imperfectly, particularly in the earlier
years. A third (and in our opinion probably the most important) difference is that
Statistics Finland’s study pools all financial assets together, while we focus on only
one (albeit very important) asset class. It is possible that the gini coefficients have
decreased because wealthy investors have moved some of the assets tied into direct
stockholdings into other asset classes, e.g. mutual funds or exchange traded funds
15
issued by foreign investment houses. Because we do not observe investments in these
assets, we cannot test this conjecture directly. The next subsection will attempt to shed
light on this issue indirectly by studying trends in ownership patterns in different
regions.
5.4. Trends in shareownership structure by region
Table 12 examines trends in ownership patterns by region, focusing on the
changes in their ownership fractions between 1995 and 2003 and between 2003 and
2015. (Details of region-level ownership changes can be found from Appendix 5).
The largest relative changes in the ownership fraction in the first period were the
increase from 1.3% to 2.7% (a 109% increase) for Ahvenanmaa and the increase from
2.5% to 4.5% (a 78% increase) for Pohjois-Pohjanmaa. The first result can at least
partly be attributed to Viking Line joining the Euroclear registry in 1999, while the
latter was probably driven by the listings of many information technology companies
in the Oulu area.
TABLE 12 HERE
The 2003–15 period is interesting in the sense that it is associated with a
trendlike decrease in the gini coefficient. Here, it is of interest to study the
development of the ownership fractions in Ahvenanmaa and Uusimaa, the two regions
with the largest per capita portfolios and the greatest fraction of investors in the
population. These statistics hint that the investors residing in these regions are more
likely than others to be informed of other asset classes. The investors in these regions
also turn out to have decreased their ownership fraction of individuals’ total share
wealth more than investors in the other regions, in Ahvenanmaa from 2.7% in 2003 to
1.3% in 2015 (a 51% drop) and in Uusimaa from 55.3% to 51.5% (a 7% drop).
Although we do not know what has caused the decreases in ownership fraction in
these two regions, our results are nevertheless broadly consistent with the idea that at
least part of the decrease in the gini coeffiecient can be attributed to reallocation of
stock wealth to other asset classes.
16
5.5. Trends in shareownership by gender and language
Table 13 reports growth rates in shareownership by gender and mother tongue.
The number of shareholding men increased at the rate of 2.3% per year, while the
number of shareholding women increased by 1.5% per year. Men’s portfolios also
increased at a faster rate than those of women: the growth rates were 7.8% and 6.3%,
respectively. Men’s portfolio values increased more than those of women at all
studied parts of the wealth distribution (top-10%, 50%, bottom-10%), but the growth
gap between male and female portfolios was the largest among the wealthiest
investors. As a result of these demographic changes, men’s share of the number of
investors increased from 54% in 1995 to 58% in 2015, and their ownership fraction
increased from 61% to 70%.
TABLE 13 HERE
The results for growth by mother tongue are mixed. On the one hand, the
number of Finnish-speaking investors increased at a lower rate (1.9%) than that of
Swedish speakers (2.4%), but on the other hand the value of the portfolios of the
Finnish-speaking investors increased at a higher rate (7.6% vs. 5.7%). All in all,
Finnish speakers’s share of directly owned share wealth increased from 78% in 1995
to 82% in 2015.
We also study the growth rates in two subperiods, between 1995 and 2003,
and between 2003 and 2015. Men have higher growth rates than women in both
periods both in the number of shareholders and in average portfolio sizes. The growth
rates by mother tongue are mixed. In the first subperiod, the number of Finnishspeaking investors grew faster than that of Swedish speakers, while in the latter
subperiod the opposite happened. Portfolio size growth patterns are the opposite to
those of stock market participation. In the first subperiod, the average portfolio size of
Swedish speakers increased at a faster rate than that of Finnish speakers, while in the
latter the average portfolio size of Finnish speakers increased at a faster rate than that
of Swedish speakers.
What explains these patterns? We can think of at least the following
explanations for the differences in the growth rates of men and women. First,
Keloharju et al. (2012) find that women invest relatively more in mutual funds than
men. As mutual funds have become more popular, women may have channelled a
17
relatively larger fraction of their assets to indirect shareholdings. Second, men tend to
earn more than women. If this allows them to save more, and if these savings are
channelled to direct shareholdings, their portfolios can grow faster. Third, men may
earn a higher return on their portfolios than women. We consider this unlikely, as
Barber and Odean (2001) find stock portfolios of men to underperform those of
women after transaction costs.
When it comes to explaining the differences in the growth rates between
Finnish and Swedish speakers, it is easier to focus on the 2003–15 subperiod that was
more stable both in terms of corporate events and stock market volatility. 9 Here, the
most interesting statistic is the growth rate in portfolio size: 7.8% for Finnish speakers
vs. 2.8% for Swedish speakers. The difference is about equally large for all portfolio
size categories.
We can think of two potential explanations for this result. First, the average
size of Swedish-speakers’ portfolio is twice as large as that of Finnish speakers. At the
same time, the income differences between Finnish and Swedish speakers, and
differences in their ability to inject additional capital to shareholdings, are likely to be
much smaller. As a result, we would expect the wealth differences between Finnish
and Swedish speakers to decrease over time. Second, it is possible that Swedish
speakers have channelled a relatively larger fraction of their wealth to other asset
classes. Banks and asset managers probably have marketed their services (which may
include diversifying into other asset classes) more actively to the wealthy Swedish
speakers. Moreover, their greater wealth has also given Swedish speakers a greater
incentive to become informed of other asset classes.
5.6. Trends in stock portfolio diversification
Household portfolios have become better diversified over time. Figure 10
shows that the average number of stocks held by individuals increased from 2.0 in
1995 to 3.6 in 2015. At the same time, the average number of stocks in institutional
portfolios increased from 3.3 to 4.2.
FIGURE 10 HERE
9
The first subperiod was characterized by a flurry of IPOs, listings, and demutualizations and the boom
and the bust around the millennium. These events might have had asymmetric effects for Finnish and
Swedish speakers.
18
We can only speculate what accounts for the increase in the average number of
stocks in individuals’ portfolios. One possibility is that these portfolios have become
larger over time, encouraging investors to diversify them better. Another possibility is
that investors with poorly diversified portfolios have liquidated their stock positions.
Many of these portfolios stem from demutualizations of Sampo and local telephone
companies, not from active purchase decisions, so the investors may have been less
keen to hold on to these positions than investors on average.
19
4. CONCLUSIONS
This study documents patters in the direct ownership of Finnish shares and
bonds on January 1, 2015 and changes in shareowner patterns since the beginning of
1995. Our main findings are as follows:
Finnish listed companies have altogether about 740,000 Finnish investors. Of
them about 700,000 are individuals. Structured securities have about 140,000
investors and bonds about 25,000.
Domestic investors own about half of the stock market capitalization and about
four-fifths of the bond market capitalization. Among domestic investor categories,
individual investors are the largest investor category, accounting for about 17% of
the stockholdings and 31% of the bondholdings. Among domestic institutional
owners, the largest shareholders are government and municipalities, and nonfinancial corporations. Both of them own about 14% of the stock market
capitalization.
The median individual investor stock portfolio is worth 4,200 euros. The median
individual investor bond portfolio is worth 15,000 euros. The average stock (bond)
portfolio is much larger: 41,000 (38,000) euros.
Men account for 58% of shareholders, 70% of individuals’ combined investment
wealth, and 73% of share millionaires.
Investment wealth tends to be concentrated to the more senior citizens. Investors
are on average about 15 years older than the population on average. Wealthy
investors are even older.
There are substantial differences in the relative frequency of investor-inhabitants
across regions. In Ahvenanmaa, 28% of the inhabitants own stocks. In Uusimaa,
19% of the population owns stocks. The national average is 13%. The differences
in investment wealth per investor across regions are smaller.
Uusimaa accounts for the majority, 52%, of share wealth. Varsinais-Suomi and
Pirkanmaa and represent the second- and third-most important concentrations of
share wealth with 8.1% and 6.6% ownership fractions, respectively.
The Swedish-speaking minority accounts for 5.3% of the population but owns
17.5% of individuals’ directly owned stock wealth. Swedish speakers are almost
twice as likely to invest in stocks as Finnish speakers, and their portfolios are on
average twice as large as those of Finnish speakers.
20
The wealthiest 0.01% of individual investors owns 12% of the directly owned
share wealth of individuals. The wealthiest 1% of individual investors owns 46%
of the directly owned share wealth of individuals.
There are 2,687 investors with a stock portfolio worth at least one million euros.
There are 330 investors with a stock portfolio worth at least five million euros.
The number of millionaires peaked in year 2000.
Most investors hold poorly diversified stock portfolios: only 23% of individuals
and 26% of institutions hold at least five stocks in their portfolio. The average
number of stocks held is 3.6 for individuals and 4.2 for institutions.
Foreign investors prefer stocks which have large market capitalization and those
listed on the main list. Individual investors are relatively more likely to invest in
stocks with low market capitalization, and those listed in the First North list.
There are also clear differences in individual investors’ preferences. Women and
older investors invest relatively more in bonds, stocks listed on the main list, and
those with large market capitalization, whereas men and younger investors invest
relatively less in bonds and more in small stocks, those listed in the First North
list, and those that pay no dividends.
Individual investors living in the headquarters municipality of a median company
are six times as likely to own the stock of that company as stocks of other
companies, provided that the company is headquartered outside of the Greater
Helsinki Area. The corresponding fraction for bond investors is even greater, 22.
Institutions exhibit about as strong home bias as individuals.
Men have increased their direct ownership of stocks more than women. Men’s
share of the number of investors increased from 54% in 1995 to 58% in 2015, and
their ownership fraction increased from 61% to 70%.
Individuals’ direct shareownership has become less concentrated since 2003.
Residents of Ahvenenmaa and Uusimaa have decreased their ownership fraction
relatively most since 2003.
21
REFERENCES
Barber, B. & Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and
common stock investment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116:1, 261–292.
Coval, J. & Moskowitz, T. (1999). Home bias at home: Local equity preference in
domestic portfolios. Journal of Finance 54:6, 2045–2073.
Deltas, G. (2003). The small-sample bias of the Gini coefficient: Results and
implications for empirical research. Review of Economics and Statistics 85:1,
226–234.
Demoor, L. & Vanpée, R. (2013). What drives international equity and bond
holdings? An empirical study. Applied Financial Economics 23:13, 1067–1082.
Fidora, M., Fratzscher, M. & Thimann, C. (2007). Home bias in global bond and
equity markets: The role of real exchange rate volatility. Journal of International
Money and Finance 26:4, 631–655.
Grinblatt, M. & Keloharju, M. (2000). Momentum investing and performance using
Finland’s unique data set. Journal of Financial Economics 55:1, 43–67.
Grinblatt, M. & Keloharju, M. (2001). How distance, language, and culture influence
stockholdings and trades. Journal of Finance 56:3, 1053–1073.
Ilmanen, M. & Keloharju, M. (1999). Shareownership in Finland. Finnish Journal of
Business Economics 48:3, 257–285.
Jianakoplos, N. & Bernasek, S. (1998). Are women more risk averse? Economic
Inquiry 36:4, 620–630.
Kang, J. & Stulz, R. (1997). Why is there home bias? An analysis of foreign portfolio
equity ownership in Japan, Journal of Financial Economics 46:1, 3–28.
Karhunen, J. & Keloharju, M. (2001). Shareownership in Finland 2000. Finnish
Journal of Business Economics 50:2, 188–226.
Keloharju, M., Knüpfer, S., & Rantapuska, E. (2012). Mutual fund and share
ownership in Finland. Finnish Journal of Business Economics 61:2, 178–198.
22
FIGURE 1. Proportion of investors or population in age and sex
categories at January 1, 2015
90-
Men
Women
75-79
Age category
60-64
45-49
30-34
Population
15-19
Investors
0-4
12 %
10 %
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
23
FIGURE 2. Proportion of share wealth or population in age
and sex categories at January 1, 2015
90-
Men
Women
75-79
Age category
60-64
45-49
30-34
15-19
Population
Investors
0-4
12 %
10 %
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
24
FIGURE 3. Investors' mean share wealth as a function of
birth year at January 1, 2015
Investors' mean share wealth, 1000 €
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1915
1925
1935
1945
1955
1965
1975
Birth year
1985
1995
2005
25
FIGURE 4. Number of share investors per
inhabitant by municipality
26
FIGURE 5. Share wealth per inhabitant by
municipality
27
FIGURE 6. Distribution of stock ownership by investor category as
percentage of total market capitalization, 1995-2015
100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
60 %
Foreign ownership
50 %
Individuals
40 %
Institutions
30 %
20 %
10 %
0%
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
28
800 000
3500
700 000
3000
600 000
2500
500 000
2000
400 000
1500
300 000
1000
200 000
500
100 000
0
0
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
Number of investors
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
Number of millionaires
2015
Number of millionaires
Number of investors
FIGURE 7. Number of individual share investors and millionaires,
1995-2015
29
FIGURE 8. Top wealth shares, 1995-2015
(shareholdings only)
20%
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1995
1997
1999
0.01%
2001
2003
0.01-0.1%
2005
2007
2009
0.1-0.5%
2011
2013
0.5-1.0%
2015
30
FIGURE 9. Gini coefficients for shareownership, 1995-2015
0.90
0.989
0.988
0.89
0.986
0.88
0.985
0.984
0.87
0.983
0.86
0.982
0.981
0.85
0.980
0.979
0.84
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Investors
Population
Population Gini coefficient
Investor Gini coefficient
0.987
31
FIGURE 10. Mean number of stocks in portfolio by institutional
status, 1995-2015
4.5
4.0
Mean number of stocks
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
Institutions
2005
2007
2009
Individuals
2011
2013
2015
32
TABLE 1. Number of investors by asset class and investor category at January 1, 2015
Number of privately registered owners in different asset classes. Nominee registered shares are registered in a financial intermediary's name,
and are thus excluded from the table. Only foreigners are allowed to register in nominee name.
Investor category
Shares
Finnish
government
bonds
Domestic
Institutions
Corporations
Financial and insurance corporations
Government and municipalities
Non-profit institutions
25 668
493
428
5 600
8
7
0
5
848
173
62
550
144
47
12
63
3 658
187
89
1 030
812
18
11
107
257
25
5
65
700 934
915
22 728
399
134 903
8 580
5 763
7 427
4
147
9
490
34
26
740 550
939
24 508
674
140 357
9 562
6 141
12.8 %
0.02 %
0.42 %
0.01 %
2.47 %
0.16 %
0.11 %
Individuals
Foreigners
Totals
Population share of individual investors
Other
bonds
Mezzanine
securities
Structured
securities
Exchange
Derivatives traded funds
33
TAB LE 2. Inves tment wealth in s hares and bonds by inves tor categ ory at January 1, 2 01 5
M ean , m edian an d t o t al wealt h in sh ares an d bo n ds. No m in ee regist ered sh ares are regist ered in a fin an cial in t erm ediary 's n am e.
O n ly f o reign ers ar e allo wed t o regist er in n o m in ee n am e.
P r o p o rt io n o f t o t al
Sum o f in v est m en t
In v est o rs' m edian
In v est o rs' m ean
wealt h , m ill. €
in v est m en t wealt h ,
in v est m en t
in v est m en t
1000 €
wealt h , 1 0 0 0 €
In v est o r cat ego r y
Sh ares
Do m est ic
I n st it ut io n s
Co rp o rat io n s
913
Fin an cial an d in sur an ce co rp o rat io n s 1 1 9 6 0
Go v ern m en t an d m un icip alit ies
55 180
N o n -p ro f it in st it ut io n s
1 180
In div iduals
41
Fo reign
P riv at ely regist ered
No m in ee regist ered
T o t als
825
Bo n ds
Sh ares
Bo n ds
276
3 426
5 762
344
38
1 2 .0
2 5 3 .9
4 0 .2
1 5 .1
4 .2
100
600
500
100
15
167
3 .4
20
Sh ares
23
5
23
6
28
Bo n ds
Sh ares
443
896
617
609
428
236
593
357
190
887
1 4 .0
3 .5
1 4 .1
3 .9
1 7 .0
%
%
%
%
%
6 131
73 309
25
583
3 .7 %
4 3 .8 %
167 434
2 870
Bo n ds
8 .2
2 0 .7
1 2 .4
6 .6
3 0 .9
%
%
%
%
%
0 .9 %
2 0 .3 %
1 0 0 .0 % 1 0 0 .0 %
34
TABLE 3. Population, individual investors, and share wealth by age and sex
Population and investor age and wealth figures are from January 1, 2015. Half of the investors are assumed to have born during
the first half of each year. Millionaires refer to individual investors with at least EUR 1 million worth of shares.
Age
9085-89
80-84
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
Population
Men
Women
0.2 %
0.8 %
0.6 %
1.2 %
1.0 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
2.1 %
2.1 %
2.4 %
3.4 %
3.6 %
3.3 %
3.5 %
3.3 %
3.4 %
3.4 %
3.4 %
3.3 %
3.2 %
2.9 %
2.8 %
3.2 %
3.0 %
3.4 %
3.2 %
3.1 %
3.0 %
3.2 %
3.0 %
2.8 %
2.7 %
2.7 %
2.6 %
2.8 %
2.7 %
2.8 %
2.6 %
Individual investors
# of investors
Investment wealth
Men
Women
Men
Women
1.6 %
1.7 %
2.5 %
1.7 %
1.6 %
1.7 %
2.4 %
1.5 %
2.5 %
2.2 %
3.8 %
1.9 %
3.7 %
3.1 %
5.4 %
2.6 %
5.1 %
4.2 %
8.9 %
4.0 %
6.6 %
5.3 %
9.4 %
4.0 %
5.4 %
4.2 %
9.9 %
3.1 %
4.9 %
3.6 %
6.9 %
2.8 %
4.9 %
3.4 %
6.3 %
2.4 %
4.5 %
2.9 %
5.1 %
1.7 %
4.1 %
2.3 %
3.6 %
1.1 %
3.7 %
2.0 %
2.1 %
1.0 %
3.1 %
1.6 %
1.4 %
0.8 %
2.3 %
1.2 %
1.0 %
0.5 %
1.5 %
0.9 %
0.8 %
0.4 %
0.9 %
0.7 %
0.3 %
0.3 %
0.6 %
0.5 %
0.2 %
0.2 %
0.6 %
0.5 %
0.1 %
0.1 %
0.2 %
0.2 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
# of millionaires
Men
Women
3.1 %
2.5 %
3.8 %
1.7 %
6.2 %
2.1 %
7.3 %
2.5 %
12.2 %
3.2 %
11.5 %
3.5 %
7.9 %
2.1 %
6.4 %
2.3 %
5.8 %
2.0 %
3.2 %
1.4 %
1.5 %
0.8 %
1.1 %
0.8 %
1.0 %
0.6 %
0.6 %
0.8 %
0.7 %
0.5 %
0.4 %
0.2 %
0.1 %
0.1 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
0.0 %
Totals
49.2 %
50.8 %
57.8 %
42.2 %
72.8 %
27.2 %
40.7
43.4
55.3
58.0
66.2
65.2
Mean age
69.9 %
30.1 %
35
TABLE 4. Share investment activity and share wealth of individual investors by region and form of municipality at
January 1, 2015
Region or form of municipality
Number of
individual
investors
Number of
individual
investors /
Number of
inhabitants
Investors'
mean
investment
wealth,
1000 €
Investors'
median
investment
wealth, 1000
€
Individuals'
investment
wealth per
inhabintant,
1000 €
Sum of
individuals'
investment
wealth, mill. €
Proportion of
individuals'
total
investment
wealth
14 642
12 054
2 306
773
475
1 890
702
476
388
394
796
368
646
680
811
164
1 210
151
364
373
819
28 428
51.5 %
42.4 %
8.1 %
2.7 %
1.7 %
6.6 %
2.5 %
1.7 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
2.8 %
1.3 %
2.3 %
2.4 %
2.9 %
0.6 %
4.3 %
0.5 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
2.9 %
100.0 %
43.5 %
32.7 %
7.8 %
3.1 %
2.7 %
8.7 %
2.4 %
2.6 %
1.6 %
1.7 %
2.6 %
1.8 %
3.8 %
2.9 %
3.9 %
0.9 %
4.3 %
0.8 %
1.9 %
1.1 %
1.7 %
100.0 %
21 615
3 142
2 576
1 094
76.0 %
11.1 %
9.1 %
3.8 %
73.2 %
13.7 %
11.1 %
2.0 %
Proportion of
total number of
individual
investors
Region:
Uusimaa
of which in Greater Helsinki Area *
Varsinais-Suomi
Satakunta
Kanta-Häme
Pirkanmaa
Päijät-Häme
Kymenlaakso
Etelä-Karjala
Etelä-Savo
Pohjois-Savo
Pohjois-Karjala
Keski-Suomi
Etelä-Pohjanmaa
Pohjanmaa
Keski-Pohjanmaa
Pohjois-Pohjanmaa
Kainuu
Lappi
Ahvenanmaa - Åland
Unknown
Whole country
304 833
229 130
54 840
21 993
19 058
61 207
16 694
17 980
11 044
12 058
18 098
12 485
26 648
20 513
27 504
6 636
30 429
5 539
13 179
8 005
12 191
700 934
19.2 %
21.0 %
11.6 %
9.8 %
10.9 %
12.2 %
8.2 %
9.9 %
8.4 %
7.9 %
7.3 %
7.5 %
9.7 %
10.6 %
15.2 %
9.7 %
7.5 %
6.9 %
7.2 %
27.9 %
12.8 %
48.0
52.6
42.0
35.2
24.9
30.9
42.1
26.4
35.2
32.7
44.0
29.5
24.2
33.2
29.5
24.7
39.8
27.3
27.6
46.6
67.2
40.6
4.0
4.4
5.8
4.9
3.4
4.3
5.0
3.9
5.8
5.2
5.3
3.4
4.0
4.5
2.5
3.2
4.2
4.6
4.6
3.4
4.9
4.2
9.2
11.1
4.9
3.4
2.7
3.8
3.5
2.6
2.9
2.6
3.2
2.2
2.3
3.5
4.5
2.4
3.0
1.9
2.0
13.0
42.1
32.8
33.0
78.0
4.4
3.6
3.6
4.5
5.8
3.5
3.2
5.2
Form of municipality:
Urban municipality
Densely populated municipality
Rural municipality
Unknown
512 992
95 864
78 043
14 035
* Includes Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen
13.7 %
10.7 %
9.7 %
36
TABLE 5. Share wealth by mother tongue at January 1, 2015
Mother tongue
Finnish
Swedish
Other
Number of
investors
630 349
66 656
3 901
Number of
investors /
Number of
inhabitants
12.9 %
22.9 %
1.2 %
Investors'
mean
wealth,
1000 €
37.0
74.5
30.2
Investment
wealth per
inhabitant,
1000 €
4.8
17.1
0.4
Sum of
investment
wealth, mill.
€
23 336
4 969
118
Proportion of
individuals'
total
investment
wealth
82.1 %
17.5 %
0.4 %
Proportion of
total number
of individual Proportion of
investors
millionaires
89.9 %
9.5 %
0.6 %
76.8 %
22.6 %
0.6 %
37
TABLE 6. Proportion of individuals' total share wealth owned by the richest
n% of individual investor at January 1, 2015
Percentile
0.01
0.1
0.5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Ownership (1000 €) at
percentile of the richest
n% of individual
investors
18 751.7
2 740.1
815.5
488.8
285.4
203.4
157.5
127.0
106.1
90.6
78.6
69.0
61.0
24.3
12.2
6.9
4.2
3.4
2.2
1.0
0.3
Cumulative proportion
owned by the richest n%
of investors
Cumulative proportion
owned by the richest n%
of individuals of the
population
12.4 %
25.2 %
38.6 %
46.4 %
55.6 %
61.6 %
66.0 %
69.6 %
72.5 %
74.9 %
77.0 %
78.8 %
80.4 %
89.9 %
94.2 %
96.5 %
97.8 %
98.7 %
99.4 %
99.8 %
99.96 %
23.5 %
43.3 %
65.5 %
76.5 %
86.7 %
91.7 %
94.6 %
96.3 %
97.5 %
98.3 %
98.9 %
99.4 %
99.8 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.0 %
100.00 %
38
TABLE 7. Distribution of the number of stocks in portfolio at January 1, 2015
Number of
stocks in
portfolio
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>10
Portfolio value, 1000 €
Individuals
Institutions
Mean
Median
Mean
Median
5.5
2.5
221.4
3.4
17.4
4.3
796.0
13.5
24.4
7.6
5 842.2
21.1
42.8
11.0
284.0
32.7
47.8
15.4
511.3
44.3
53.3
19.8
404.9
61.0
68.4
25.4
574.9
69.8
87.9
31.3
2 438.9
80.2
107.5
37.2
2 219.3
102.7
106.3
43.6
1 348.8
134.2
265.4
86.7
9 806.5
310.2
Proportion of investors
Individuals
Institutions
45.6 %
50.3 %
16.0 %
12.4 %
9.0 %
6.5 %
6.2 %
4.7 %
4.5 %
3.7 %
3.4 %
3.1 %
2.7 %
2.8 %
2.1 %
2.1 %
1.7 %
1.7 %
1.4 %
1.5 %
7.3 %
11.1 %
39
TABLE 8. Stock portfolio diversification by investor category at January 1, 2015
Investor category
Institutions, total
Corporations
Financial and insurance corporations
Government and municipalities
Non-profit institutions
Individuals, total
Men
Women
Investors' median
investment wealth, Mean number of
1000 €
stocks in portfolio
382.9
49.8
7965.8
27307.1
295.0
4.2
3.9
9.3
5.3
4.9
14.5
17.4
10.7
3.6
4.1
2.9
40
TABLE 9. The relationship between a stock's ownership structure and its industry, exchange
listing, dividend yield, and market capitalization at January 1, 2015
Dividend yield is calculated from dividends paid during the year 2014.
Equally weighted average proportion of
shares owned by
Foreign
Institutions
Individuals
investors
Equally
weighted
average
proportion of
individual
investors who
are men
Equally
weighted
average of
mean age
Number of
share
classes
Stock exchange listing
Main list
Basic materials
Consumer goods
Consumer services
Financials
Health care
Industrials
Oil & gas
Technology
Telecommunications
Utilities
45 %
43 %
44 %
58 %
53 %
31 %
43 %
62 %
40 %
53 %
59 %
34 %
25 %
32 %
34 %
28 %
49 %
34 %
12 %
45 %
27 %
8%
21 %
32 %
24 %
9%
19 %
20 %
23 %
25 %
15 %
21 %
33 %
72 %
73 %
72 %
65 %
68 %
65 %
75 %
69 %
75 %
58 %
68 %
54.3
55.2
54.2
57.0
55.2
54.2
53.8
56.5
51.3
60.7
53.8
129
14
14
13
16
7
43
1
18
2
1
First North Helsinki
47 %
40 %
13 %
82 %
48.3
10
Pre-list
27 %
72 %
0%
72 %
65.6
2
41 %
43 %
50 %
48 %
44 %
18 %
31 %
33 %
42 %
51 %
41 %
26 %
17 %
9%
5%
67 %
69 %
72 %
76 %
80 %
56.0
55.2
54.6
52.4
51.8
29
28
28
28
28
1 (largest)
2
3
4
5 (smallest)
44 %
38 %
53 %
42 %
48 %
32 %
36 %
22 %
36 %
36 %
24 %
26 %
25 %
21 %
16 %
70 %
69 %
72 %
70 %
71 %
54.6
55.3
55.1
55.6
54.0
20
20
19
19
19
No dividend in year 2014
45 %
40 %
15 %
77 %
52.0
44
Market capitalization quintile
1 (largest)
2
3
4
5 (smallest)
Dividend yield quintile
41
TABLE 10. Comparison of individual shareholders and bondholders at January 1, 2015
Number of
investors
Bondholders
Shareholders
23 420
700 934
Proportion of
Proportion of investors who
investors who are Swedish
are men
speaking
43 %
58 %
18.3 %
9.5 %
Proportion of
investors who
Proportion of live in densely
investors who populated
Mean age live in cities municipalities
64.6
56.4
63.6 %
71.6 %
17.6 %
14.1 %
Proportion of
investors who
live in rural
municipalities
17.7 %
11.8 %
42
TABLE 11. The influence of headquarters location on share and bond ownership
Summary statistics for the ratio Numerator/Denominator
Numerator = Firm i 's weight among investors in its headquarters
municipality or region
Denominator = Firm i 's weight among all investors in Finland
Investor in same
municipality as
Investor in same region as
headquarters
headquarters
Panel A: Shares
Individuals
Investor category
Individuals
Institutions
Median for firms of following type:
Helsinki area headquartered companies (N=93)
Rest of Finland headquartered companies (N=40)
All companies (N=133)
1.02
5.95
1.17
1.00
3.68
1.08
1.09
3.95
1.13
0.57
1.00
0.70
0.51
0.95
0.64
0.68
0.95
0.76
Helsinki area headquartered companies (N=32)
Rest of Finland headquartered companies (N=20)
1.59
21.56
1.28
7.31
1.03
7.35
Bond issuer is not a bank (N=23)
Bond issuer is a bank (N=29)
1.59
19.25
1.19
5.22
0.93
4.64
3.03
1.59
1.56
Helsinki area headquartered companies (N=32)
Rest of Finland headquartered companies (N=20)
0.53
0.85
0.53
0.85
0.44
0.95
Bond issuer is not a bank (N=23)
Bond issuer is a bank (N=29)
0.52
0.76
0.52
0.76
0.39
0.83
0.65
0.65
0.63
Fraction greater than 1 for firms of following type:
Helsinki area headquartered companies (N=93)
Rest of Finland headquartered companies (N=40)
All companies (N=133)
Panel B: Bonds
Median for firms of following type:
All companies (N=52)
Fraction greater than 1 for firms of following type:
All companies (N=52)
43
TABLE 12. Changes in individuals' share wealth by region
Proportion of total
investment wealth
Region:
Changes in the proportion of
total investment wealth
1995
2003
2015
1995-2003
2003-2015
Uusimaa
Greater Helsinki Area*
Varsinais-Suomi
Satakunta
Kanta-Häme
Pirkanmaa
Päijät-Häme
Kymenlaakso
Etelä-Karjala
Etelä-Savo
Pohjois-Savo
Pohjois-Karjala
Keski-Suomi
Etelä-Pohjanmaa
Pohjanmaa
Keski-Pohjanmaa
Pohjois-Pohjanmaa
Kainuu
Lappi
Ahvenanmaa - Åland
Unknown
55.3 %
47.7 %
7.9 %
2.6 %
1.7 %
6.9 %
2.5 %
1.8 %
1.5 %
1.3 %
1.9 %
1.2 %
2.2 %
1.8 %
2.7 %
0.9 %
2.5 %
0.6 %
1.4 %
1.3 %
2.0 %
55.3 %
46.1 %
6.8 %
2.1 %
1.6 %
6.4 %
2.2 %
1.5 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
2.1 %
1.3 %
2.1 %
1.8 %
2.6 %
0.5 %
4.5 %
0.5 %
1.1 %
2.7 %
2.6 %
51.5 %
42.4 %
8.1 %
2.7 %
1.7 %
6.6 %
2.5 %
1.7 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
2.8 %
1.3 %
2.3 %
2.4 %
2.9 %
0.6 %
4.3 %
0.5 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
2.9 %
0%
-3 %
-15 %
-21 %
-6 %
-7 %
-12 %
-18 %
-18 %
-7 %
10 %
7%
-4 %
2%
-6 %
-42 %
78 %
-9 %
-22 %
109 %
27 %
-7 %
-8 %
19 %
31 %
5%
4%
13 %
15 %
9%
14 %
33 %
-1 %
9%
31 %
10 %
14 %
-6 %
1%
19 %
-51 %
12 %
Totals
100 %
100 %
100 %
* Includes Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen
44
TABLE 13. Annualized growth rates in share wealth by sex and mother tongue
Annualized geometric growth rates calculated over 20 years by sex and mother tongue.
Sex
Panel A: 1995-2015
Number of investors
Average wealth
Total wealth
Wealth, least wealthy decile
Wealth, median investor
Wealth, wealthiest decile
Men
2.3 %
7.8 %
10.2 %
6.6 %
7.1 %
7.6 %
Panel B: 1995-2003
Number of investors
Average wealth
Total wealth
Wealth, least wealthy decile
Wealth, median investor
Wealth, wealthiest decile
Men
5.9 %
8.9 %
15.4 %
10.3 %
2.8 %
4.8 %
Panel C: 2003-2015
Number of investors
Average wealth
Total wealth
Wealth, least wealthy decile
Wealth, median investor
Wealth, wealthiest decile
Men
-0.1 %
7.0 %
6.9 %
4.2 %
10.1 %
9.5 %
Women
1.5 %
6.3 %
8.0 %
6.4 %
6.0 %
6.0 %
Mother tongue
Finnish
Swedish
1.9 %
2.4 %
7.6 %
5.7 %
9.6 %
8.2 %
7.4 %
1.2 %
7.0 %
3.1 %
7.4 %
4.0 %
Women
5.4 %
6.1 %
11.8 %
13.1 %
-1.2 %
2.4 %
Mother tongue
Finnish
Swedish
5.8 %
4.3 %
7.5 %
10.2 %
13.7 %
15.0 %
11.8 %
9.1 %
1.1 %
1.1 %
4.0 %
5.0 %
Women
-1.0 %
6.5 %
5.5 %
2.1 %
11.1 %
8.5 %
Mother tongue
Finnish
Swedish
-0.7 %
1.1 %
7.8 %
2.8 %
7.0 %
4.0 %
4.5 %
-3.8 %
11.0 %
4.5 %
9.8 %
3.3 %
Sex
Sex
45
APPENDIX 1. Descriptive statistics of the ownership of shares listed on the Nasdaq OMX Nordic Helsinki Stock Exchange at January 1, 2015
Share class
Proportion of shares owned by
Domestic
Proportion of individual
invstors who are
Finnish
Men
speaking Mean age
Market value,
mill. €
Number of
privately
registered
investors
Institutions
Individuals
Foreign
investors
83
314
7
1 488
162
1 293
460
1 976
10
1 462
1 042
1 313
4 454
7 108
4 025
10 918
1 202
33 171
3 815
38 046
11 248
66 010
2 830
29 594
30 095
7 249
28 279
89 389
5%
22 %
10 %
63 %
93 %
64 %
27 %
49 %
38 %
72 %
69 %
56 %
16 %
19 %
7%
54 %
83 %
16 %
6%
19 %
26 %
17 %
61 %
20 %
20 %
2%
4%
17 %
87 %
24 %
7%
21 %
0%
17 %
46 %
34 %
1%
8%
11 %
42 %
79 %
63 %
79 %
68 %
89 %
71 %
70 %
74 %
68 %
77 %
86 %
71 %
71 %
66 %
70 %
63 %
94 %
90 %
96 %
92 %
91 %
91 %
89 %
95 %
95 %
93 %
93 %
93 %
93 %
90 %
51
56
47
56
57
64
57
52
48
56
56
58
57
57
1 877
73
115
1 396
149
8
66
8
2 564
343
535
168
57
200
18 178
10 480
12 178
17 813
11 409
1 578
7 105
1 868
50 125
10 018
33 203
2 879
4 123
4 011
41 %
46 %
63 %
59 %
56 %
59 %
43 %
43 %
22 %
33 %
32 %
18 %
49 %
57 %
12 %
50 %
32 %
38 %
23 %
38 %
36 %
53 %
17 %
40 %
47 %
4%
41 %
14 %
47 %
4%
5%
3%
21 %
3%
21 %
3%
61 %
27 %
20 %
78 %
10 %
29 %
66 %
77 %
75 %
67 %
80 %
76 %
43 %
75 %
74 %
74 %
71 %
80 %
80 %
77 %
93 %
95 %
96 %
88 %
95 %
96 %
94 %
95 %
94 %
95 %
93 %
96 %
82 %
95 %
194
8 341
82 %
16 %
2%
70 %
97 %
Distance ratio (municipalities)
Households
Institutions
0.62
0.93
0.57
0.94
0.66
0.45
0.94
0.78
0.76
0.86
0.79
1.11
1.30
0.47
0.87
0.96
1.03
0.82
0.98
1.00
1.01
0.98
54
61
56
54
56
54
53
52
52
54
59
48
55
51
1.23
27.22
5.97
1.17
1.01
3.39
1.28
1.07
2.65
10.57
3.59
3.90
1.02
1.42
1.28
20.36
5.95
1.08
2.05
7.63
1.02
1.21
1.47
15.29
3.60
22.81
0.93
1.40
55
0.92
0.98
Main list
Basic Materials
Afarak Group Plc
Ahlstrom Oyj
Endomines AB
Kemira Oyj
Metsä Board Oyj A
Metsä Board Oyj B
Munksjö Oyj
Outokumpu Oyj
Sotkamo Silver AB
SSAB AB ser. A
SSAB AB ser. B
Stora Enso Oyj A
Stora Enso Oyj R
UPM-Kymmene Oyj
Consumer Goods
Amer Sports Corporation
Apetit Plc
Atria Oyj A
Fiskars Oyj
HKScan Oyj A
Honkarakenne Oyj B
Marimekko Oyj
Martela Oyj A
Nokian Renkaat Oyj
Olvi Oyj A
Raisio Oyj Vaihto-osake
Rapala VMC Oyj
Saga Furs Oyj C
Suominen Oyj
Consumer Services
Alma Media Oyj
46
Share class
Finnair Oyj
Ilkka-Yhtymä Oyj 2
Keskisuomalainen Oyj A
Kesko Oyj A
Kesko Oyj B
Pohjois-Karjalan Kirjapaino Oyj
Restamax Oyj
Sanoma Oyj
Stockmann Oyj Abp A
Stockmann Oyj Abp B
Talentum Oyj
Viking Line Abp
Proportion of shares owned by
Domestic
Proportion of individual
invstors who are
Finnish
Men
speaking Mean age
Market value,
mill. €
Number of
privately
registered
investors
Institutions
Individuals
Foreign
investors
312
40
49
889
2 026
77
58
716
188
244
40
172
15 072
7 903
1 999
7 242
34 967
872
763
27 636
9 845
51 384
2 763
3 163
81 %
42 %
9%
78 %
30 %
39 %
67 %
56 %
84 %
61 %
70 %
49 %
11 %
56 %
90 %
20 %
30 %
60 %
16 %
33 %
16 %
28 %
14 %
47 %
8%
2%
1%
2%
39 %
2%
16 %
11 %
1%
11 %
16 %
4%
72 %
69 %
66 %
61 %
59 %
67 %
76 %
67 %
51 %
41 %
75 %
64 %
94 %
98 %
99 %
94 %
91 %
98 %
98 %
94 %
83 %
88 %
94 %
35 %
384
213
65
1 532
133
9 330
106
53
40
20 977
77
1 025
7
394
68
83
43 715
716
6 795
7 660
3 232
193 149
5 539
5 558
3 488
82 707
1 365
8 827
153
7 391
5 545
8 323
83 %
99 %
58 %
11 %
79 %
41 %
23 %
34 %
36 %
28 %
84 %
40 %
73 %
52 %
67 %
41 %
15 %
1%
26 %
4%
21 %
55 %
47 %
64 %
64 %
11 %
15 %
8%
27 %
15 %
31 %
44 %
2%
0%
16 %
85 %
0%
5%
30 %
1%
0%
61 %
1%
53 %
0%
33 %
2%
15 %
63 %
70 %
77 %
76 %
73 %
54 %
59 %
76 %
79 %
67 %
78 %
70 %
73 %
77 %
51 %
54 %
51
88
160
348
999
2 512
114
6 835
16 041
11 101
23 671
17 322
40 417
5 455
25 %
23 %
48 %
47 %
31 %
11 %
31 %
71 %
25 %
49 %
34 %
67 %
33 %
61 %
4%
51 %
3%
19 %
2%
56 %
8%
72 %
78 %
54 %
56 %
57 %
58 %
79 %
Distance ratio (municipalities)
Households
Institutions
52
61
59
59
58
63
47
54
59
59
57
57
1.08
12.50
10.02
0.70
0.99
36.42
5.93
1.31
1.98
2.03
1.20
46.96
1.10
10.64
9.62
0.34
0.92
31.65
8.43
1.17
1.58
1.47
1.35
45.35
32 %
46 %
94 %
94 %
91 %
92 %
88 %
96 %
96 %
91 %
94 %
92 %
99 %
96 %
13 %
24 %
59
61
52
50
56
57
60
51
50
58
49
57
58
53
58
56
0.67
1.31
0.99
1.01
1.06
0.97
1.06
0.97
2.17
0.94
73.43
1.08
15.14
3.97
59.66
50.83
0.58
1.34
1.09
1.18
1.26
0.91
1.16
1.01
3.96
0.87
58.06
1.23
11.77
4.86
51.09
32.33
96 %
96 %
94 %
93 %
94 %
93 %
97 %
52
49
59
58
56
56
48
0.99
2.12
1.37
1.22
1.28
1.23
1.03
0.82
1.87
1.05
1.02
1.39
1.08
1.16
Financials
Aktia Bank Oyj A
Aktia Bank Oyj R
CapMan Oyj B
Citycon Oyj
eQ Oyj
Nordea Bank AB (publ) FDR
Norvestia Oyj
Orava Asuinkiinteistörahasto Oyj
Panostaja Oyj
Sampo Oyj A
Sievi Capital Oyj
Sponda Oyj
SSK S.Säästäjien Kiinteistöt Oyj
Technopolis Oyj
Ålandsbanken Abp A
Ålandsbanken Abp B
Health Care
Biohit Oyj B
Biotie Therapies Oyj
Oriola-KD Oyj A
Oriola-KD Oyj B
Orion Oyj A
Orion Oyj B
Revenio Group Corporation
47
Share class
Proportion of shares owned by
Domestic
Market value,
mill. €
Number of
privately
registered
investors
Institutions
Individuals
Foreign
investors
171
2
1 385
838
69
520
23
42
10
59
86
809
74
2 245
7
8
16 844
1 475
535
216
3 647
4
13
797
390
316
142
683
21
106
6
639
10
6
814
2
312
1 533
8 147
3 321
28 002
32 829
2 424
9 144
3 519
2 813
1 019
1 396
2 679
1 453
5 816
25 341
1 628
1 561
51 092
19 191
10 134
4 529
53 334
11 542
582
32 416
8 810
8 304
6 579
14 242
1 969
5 959
1 136
21 662
4 892
2 820
15 840
554
7 281
49 236
37 %
25 %
53 %
44 %
83 %
39 %
44 %
59 %
57 %
86 %
41 %
12 %
71 %
39 %
42 %
29 %
35 %
36 %
48 %
40 %
37 %
65 %
23 %
46 %
44 %
12 %
44 %
38 %
17 %
42 %
74 %
45 %
47 %
83 %
51 %
12 %
36 %
32 %
61 %
65 %
22 %
20 %
11 %
16 %
53 %
32 %
42 %
12 %
20 %
2%
26 %
17 %
16 %
68 %
14 %
14 %
31 %
47 %
14 %
34 %
77 %
17 %
24 %
84 %
9%
11 %
79 %
56 %
26 %
12 %
48 %
17 %
17 %
87 %
43 %
14 %
2%
9%
25 %
36 %
6%
45 %
3%
8%
1%
2%
39 %
87 %
3%
44 %
42 %
3%
51 %
50 %
21 %
13 %
48 %
1%
0%
36 %
31 %
3%
47 %
50 %
4%
1%
0%
43 %
5%
0%
32 %
1%
20 %
54 %
Proportion of individual
invstors who are
Finnish
Men
speaking Mean age
Distance ratio (municipalities)
Households
Institutions
1.02
0.89
1.10
1.05
1.08
1.10
0.89
1.06
0.91
0.90
31.75
4.55
10.81
1.52
1.79
1.12
0.55
6.42
1.20
5.11
1.07
1.21
1.01
0.13
1.39
1.13
0.88
34.00
1.25
0.87
9.69
1.01
2.83
1.04
26.76
0.84
0.95
5.88
1.32
1.01
1.30
1.15
1.20
1.50
61.97
17.24
25.34
1.50
1.66
0.96
0.71
7.93
1.16
2.08
1.29
1.13
1.01
0.13
1.90
1.04
1.09
56.88
1.18
0.69
4.20
1.26
1.87
1.04
30.79
1.16
0.68
4.34
1.44
1.05
Industrials
Aspo Oyj
Aspocomp Group Oyj
Cargotec Oyj
Caverion Oyj
Componenta Oyj
Cramo Oyj
Dovre Group Plc
Efore Oyj
Elecster Oyj A
Etteplan Oyj
Exel Composites Oyj
Finnlines Oyj
Glaston Corporation
Huhtamäki Oyj
Incap Oyj
Kesla Oyj A
KONE Oyj
Konecranes Oyj
Lassila &Tikanoja Oyj
Lemminkäinen Oyj
Metso Oyj
Neo Industrial Oyj
Nurminen Logistics Oyj
Outotec Oyj
PKC Group Oyj
Ponsse Oyj 1
Pöyry Oyj
Ramirent Oyj
Raute Oyj A
SRV Group plc
Takoma Oyj
Tikkurila Oyj
Tulikivi Oyj A
Turvatiimi Oyj
Uponor Oyj
Vaahto Group Plc Oyj
Vaisala Oyj A
Valmet Corporation
74 %
79 %
73 %
72 %
81 %
76 %
81 %
79 %
79 %
76 %
78 %
72 %
80 %
62 %
85 %
79 %
66 %
73 %
69 %
75 %
68 %
81 %
82 %
76 %
76 %
79 %
73 %
76 %
77 %
75 %
83 %
70 %
75 %
80 %
72 %
82 %
67 %
67 %
91 %
93 %
92 %
94 %
93 %
90 %
96 %
96 %
96 %
94 %
94 %
81 %
92 %
92 %
95 %
95 %
92 %
91 %
93 %
93 %
91 %
91 %
95 %
93 %
93 %
97 %
93 %
93 %
95 %
96 %
97 %
93 %
95 %
95 %
92 %
95 %
94 %
91 %
56
51
54
54
52
54
50
54
53
51
51
59
51
58
48
54
54
54
54
55
57
62
52
52
55
54
52
54
55
54
52
57
54
49
56
52
55
57
48
Share class
Cencorp Oyj
Wulff-Yhtiöt Oy
Wärtsilä Oyj Abp
YIT Oyj
Yleiselektroniikka Oyj E
Vacon Plc
Proportion of shares owned by
Domestic
Proportion of individual
invstors who are
Finnish
Men
speaking Mean age
85 %
95 %
49
78 %
93 %
53
65 %
84 %
57
75 %
94 %
51
79 %
91 %
56
77 %
85 %
49
Market value,
mill. €
8
6
7 199
528
10
1 020
Number of
privately
registered
investors
6 200
556
42 284
44 319
847
555
Institutions
61 %
31 %
31 %
38 %
15 %
94 %
Individuals
18 %
68 %
21 %
30 %
84 %
1%
Foreign
investors
21 %
2%
49 %
32 %
1%
5%
4 982
72 980
62 %
12 %
25 %
69 %
93 %
61
552
96
53
440
337
24
6
24 399
71
13
20
12
77
16
86
1 539
2
2 982
13 662
15 905
4 585
24 575
22 102
11 277
4 043
216 760
8 078
817
1 682
1 150
3 658
6 585
4 951
16 054
5 487
68 %
43 %
65 %
49 %
23 %
29 %
4%
52 %
13 %
44 %
49 %
38 %
44 %
35 %
26 %
70 %
31 %
34 %
16 %
31 %
29 %
44 %
70 %
61 %
86 %
41 %
10 %
40 %
40 %
61 %
52 %
64 %
68 %
25 %
11 %
65 %
16 %
26 %
6%
7%
7%
10 %
10 %
7%
77 %
17 %
11 %
1%
4%
1%
6%
5%
58 %
1%
79 %
63 %
67 %
77 %
74 %
71 %
77 %
84 %
67 %
79 %
81 %
77 %
81 %
81 %
79 %
77 %
69 %
75 %
3 669
23 725
214 319
109 209
33 %
73 %
30 %
23 %
38 %
3%
15 724
109 417
59 %
8%
13
134
3 971
9 624
35 %
20 %
65 %
80 %
Distance ratio (municipalities)
Households
3.41
1.04
1.20
0.92
1.09
13.10
Institutions
7.47
1.41
1.25
1.00
1.12
6.31
56
0.90
0.98
95 %
91 %
91 %
95 %
95 %
94 %
93 %
95 %
93 %
96 %
96 %
96 %
96 %
96 %
94 %
94 %
93 %
94 %
50
53
55
51
54
51
53
47
52
50
47
53
47
48
51
55
55
51
1.11
1.20
0.97
0.93
4.07
1.02
0.81
0.82
0.98
1.29
0.97
2.59
0.87
1.14
1.04
4.25
1.34
0.99
1.28
1.23
0.92
0.99
4.30
0.96
0.97
1.03
1.00
1.02
1.46
3.13
1.46
1.20
1.52
2.29
1.35
1.18
50 %
66 %
94 %
93 %
64
57
1.62
1.51
33 %
68 %
93 %
54
0.98
0.96
0%
0%
69 %
75 %
100 %
91 %
67
64
14.64
2.36
15.46
13.29
Oil & Gas
Neste Oyj
Technology
Affecto Oyj
Basware Oyj
Comptel Oyj
Digia Plc
Elektrobit Oyj
F-Secure Oyj
Innofactor Oyj
Ixonos Oyj
Nokia Oyj
Okmetic Oyj
QPR Software Oyj
Solteq Oyj
Soprano Oyj
SSH Communications Security Oyj
Tecnotree Oyj
Teleste Oyj
Tieto Oyj
Trainers´ House Oyj
Telecommunications
Elisa Oyj
TeliaSonera AB
Utilities
Fortum Oyj
Pre-list
Ilkka-Yhtymä Oyj 1
Raisio Plc K
49
Share class
First North
Verkkokauppa.com Oyj
Zeeland Family Oyj
SAV-Rahoitus Oyj
Taaleritehdas Oyj
United Bankers Oyj
Herantis Pharma Oyj
Nexstim Oyj
Cleantech Invest Oyj
Nixu Oyj
Siili Solutions Oyj
Proportion of shares owned by
Domestic
Market value,
mill. €
Number of
privately
registered
investors
Institutions
Individuals
Foreign
investors
228
2
2
55
51
28
44
5
25
26
744
287
131
815
668
439
216
724
794
1 441
22 %
45 %
70 %
37 %
56 %
69 %
36 %
50 %
35 %
52 %
54 %
44 %
29 %
47 %
37 %
23 %
4%
48 %
63 %
48 %
24 %
11 %
1%
16 %
7%
8%
60 %
2%
2%
0%
Proportion of individual
invstors who are
Finnish
Men
speaking Mean age
85 %
88 %
64 %
82 %
77 %
79 %
84 %
85 %
85 %
86 %
94 %
95 %
99 %
98 %
83 %
85 %
94 %
96 %
97 %
98 %
47
48
45
49
51
51
52
48
48
44
Distance ratio (municipalities)
Households
Institutions
1.28
1.41
2.80
1.42
1.85
1.34
1.74
2.34
1.37
2.12
50
APPENDIX 2. Share wealth by institutional status, 1995-2015
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Domestic
Institutions
Individuals
Foreign
52.2 %
15.1 %
32.7 %
52.6 %
14.0 %
33.5 %
47.9 %
13.6 %
38.5 %
42.0 %
13.6 %
44.4 %
37.4 %
9.3 %
53.3 %
27.2 %
7.9 %
65.0 %
18.5 %
7.6 %
73.9 %
20.9 %
8.1 %
71.0 %
25.2 %
9.3 %
65.5 %
29.5 %
11.3 %
59.1 %
31.0 %
12.8 %
56.2 %
31.2 %
12.0 %
56.8 %
30.9 %
12.6 %
56.4 %
27.8 %
10.4 %
61.7 %
30.5 %
12.7 %
56.8 %
36.2 %
16.4 %
47.4 %
38.4 %
17.5 %
44.2 %
41.0 %
18.3 %
40.7 %
40.5 %
19.0 %
40.6 %
37.1 %
17.7 %
45.1 %
35.6 %
17.0 %
47.4 %
Totals
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
51
APPENDIX 3. Number of individual inves tors by s ize of s tock portfolio, 1 99 5 -20 15
Value classes are n o n -cum ulat iv e, e.g. 0 .5 in cludes in v est o r s wh ich h av e p o r t fo lio v alue great er t h an 0 .5 m illio n , but less t h an o n e m illio n . A ll f igur es are f ro m Jan uar y 1 .
P o rtfo lio
v a lu e ,
m ill. €
< 0.0 1
19 9 5
19 96
19 9 7
4 10 2 12
42 6 4 67
3 93 3 18
19 99
2000
2001
2 0 02
2003
2 0 05
2006
2 00 7
2 0 08
2009
2 0 10
2 0 11
2 0 13
2 014
2 0 15
4 18 0 3 1 46 2 7 26
19 9 8
543 990
577 780
6 08 9 37
6 14 6 16
5 8 0 4 7 1 5 50 6 23
20 0 4
507 878
4 6 5 60 6
4 4 9 03 1
5 09 4 71
5 0 0 2 14
4 8 1 3 50
5 24 5 4 1 5 2 0 28 7
2 0 12
4 92 9 08
4 69 2 17
0 .01
6 17 3 5
58 531
72 336
9 14 8 0
111 6 74
17 1 7 18
14 9 4 2 6
12 3 86 1
111 3 3 3
12 9 0 2 5
14 0 8 2 8
15 2 6 7 5
16 2 4 0 5
157 9 9 2
12 3 9 8 2
16 4 8 6 3
180 2 0 7
16 3 6 0 9
17 3 4 9 4
192 6 6 0
189 16 4
0 .1
3 868
3 5 94
5 4 01
7 274
8 8 98
16 4 2 0
12 6 14
10 7 62
9 574
11 5 7 5
13 8 20
16 8 6 0
19 2 6 4
18 72 1
11 3 9 8
18 4 0 0
22 6 72
17 9 6 6
2 0 06 3
2 3 818
23 527
0 .2
1 14 8
1 0 87
1676
2 281
3 0 89
5 358
4 552
3 714
3 18 5
3 695
4 3 26
5 6 18
6 802
6 6 62
3 678
6 16 2
8 195
5 830
6 93 3
8 5 58
8 4 16
0 .3
464
4 44
760
1081
1 4 46
2 865
2 424
1 8 84
1 5 10
1 7 11
2 0 97
2 760
3 332
3 4 40
1726
3 021
3 9 49
2 827
3 27 5
4 0 79
4 087
0 .4
253
2 73
420
605
9 23
1659
15 2 8
1 183
896
10 3 7
1 172
1534
1 9 19
1 8 99
988
1701
2 3 00
1578
1 9 14
2 3 27
2 358
0 .5
203
17 1
250
367
5 35
1 18 0
10 4 2
7 65
626
657
7 68
994
1 29 3
1 3 03
609
1 03 9
1 4 50
952
1 13 7
1 5 46
1478
19 1
177
298
457
6 90
1792
16 6 8
1 0 85
734
822
9 04
1 15 4
1 47 5
1 5 98
704
1 14 3
1 612
1056
1 29 0
1 7 05
1643
409
1
2
54
54
91
115
184
611
5 13
319
211
209
219
3 14
392
45 1
18 2
321
4 49
290
37 7
4 33
3
29
17
43
54
81
2 81
260
144
95
10 2
102
141
19 7
177
96
13 1
199
14 0
15 0
20 1
19 7
4
10
12
17
30
48
13 4
13 4
70
55
53
65
70
10 1
126
54
79
107
74
10 9
116
10 8
5
18
28
36
70
103
242
2 13
153
98
12 0
119
16 4
208
2 06
10 8
16 6
20 1
15 3
15 5
189
18 4
10
9
11
24
41
50
16 4
16 3
91
62
74
87
10 8
14 6
149
62
115
159
10 2
12 3
147
14 6
4 7 8 19 4
49 0 8 66
474 670
5 2 18 8 6
59 0 4 47
7 46 4 14
7 5 2 3 17
7 52 9 68
742 995
729 551
7 15 130
690 270
6 6 3 14 0
6 4 1 7 55
653 058
6 9 7 35 5
7 02 8 50
7 19 118
729 307
7 28 6 8 7
700 934
T o ta ls
52
APPENDIX 4. Proportion of individuals' total share wealth owned by the richest n% of individual investors, 1995-2015
Gini coefficients are calculated separately for investors and for the population.
Cumulative proportion owned by the richest n% of investors
Percentile
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
0.01
7.7 %
8.4 %
9.2 %
10.7 %
9.9 %
14.9 %
15.6 %
14.9 %
16.1 %
18.8 %
17.8 %
16.2 %
15.4 %
14.9 %
14.9 %
15.5 %
14.7 %
13.3 %
11.8 %
11.6 %
12.4 %
0.1
20.3 %
21.8 %
23.0 %
25.4 %
25.2 %
30.9 %
32.4 %
31.0 %
31.0 %
32.7 %
31.1 %
29.8 %
29.5 %
28.8 %
28.7 %
28.8 %
27.9 %
26.7 %
25.3 %
24.7 %
25.2 %
0.5
35.3 %
37.1 %
38.2 %
40.4 %
42.0 %
48.4 %
50.4 %
48.1 %
46.9 %
46.8 %
44.7 %
43.6 %
43.5 %
43.4 %
42.7 %
42.0 %
41.5 %
40.4 %
39.4 %
38.4 %
38.6 %
1
43.7 %
45.6 %
46.7 %
48.7 %
51.0 %
57.0 %
59.1 %
56.7 %
55.2 %
54.4 %
52.2 %
51.3 %
51.2 %
51.4 %
50.4 %
49.5 %
49.1 %
48.0 %
47.2 %
46.2 %
46.4 %
2
53.4 %
55.4 %
56.4 %
58.0 %
60.8 %
65.6 %
67.7 %
65.6 %
64.3 %
62.8 %
60.8 %
60.1 %
60.0 %
60.4 %
59.3 %
58.3 %
58.1 %
57.0 %
56.4 %
55.5 %
55.6 %
3
59.6 %
61.5 %
62.6 %
63.9 %
66.6 %
70.5 %
72.5 %
70.8 %
69.7 %
68.1 %
66.3 %
65.6 %
65.6 %
66.1 %
64.9 %
64.0 %
63.9 %
62.9 %
62.4 %
61.5 %
61.6 %
4
64.2 %
66.1 %
67.1 %
68.1 %
70.8 %
73.8 %
75.8 %
74.4 %
73.6 %
71.9 %
70.3 %
69.7 %
69.7 %
70.2 %
69.1 %
68.2 %
68.2 %
67.2 %
66.9 %
66.0 %
66.0 %
5
67.9 %
69.8 %
70.7 %
71.5 %
73.9 %
76.4 %
78.2 %
77.1 %
76.6 %
74.9 %
73.4 %
72.9 %
73.0 %
73.4 %
72.3 %
71.6 %
71.6 %
70.6 %
70.4 %
69.5 %
69.6 %
6
70.9 %
72.7 %
73.6 %
74.2 %
76.4 %
78.4 %
80.2 %
79.2 %
79.0 %
77.3 %
76.0 %
75.5 %
75.6 %
76.0 %
75.0 %
74.3 %
74.4 %
73.5 %
73.3 %
72.4 %
72.5 %
7
73.5 %
75.2 %
76.1 %
76.5 %
78.5 %
80.2 %
81.8 %
81.0 %
81.0 %
79.3 %
78.1 %
77.7 %
77.8 %
78.2 %
77.2 %
76.6 %
76.7 %
75.8 %
75.7 %
74.9 %
74.9 %
8
75.7 %
77.3 %
78.2 %
78.4 %
80.3 %
81.7 %
83.2 %
82.6 %
82.7 %
81.0 %
80.0 %
79.6 %
79.7 %
80.1 %
79.1 %
78.6 %
78.7 %
77.9 %
77.8 %
77.0 %
77.0 %
9
77.6 %
79.2 %
80.0 %
80.1 %
81.8 %
83.1 %
84.4 %
83.9 %
84.1 %
82.5 %
81.6 %
81.2 %
81.3 %
81.7 %
80.7 %
80.3 %
80.5 %
79.6 %
79.6 %
78.9 %
78.8 %
10
79.2 %
80.8 %
81.6 %
81.6 %
83.1 %
84.2 %
85.4 %
85.0 %
85.4 %
83.8 %
82.9 %
82.7 %
82.7 %
83.1 %
82.2 %
81.8 %
82.0 %
81.2 %
81.1 %
80.5 %
80.4 %
20
89.3 %
90.4 %
90.8 %
90.5 %
90.9 %
90.7 %
91.6 %
91.6 %
92.6 %
91.4 %
91.1 %
90.9 %
90.9 %
91.1 %
90.6 %
90.7 %
91.1 %
90.4 %
90.4 %
90.1 %
89.9 %
30
93.9 %
94.7 %
94.9 %
94.6 %
94.5 %
93.5 %
94.5 %
94.6 %
95.7 %
94.8 %
94.7 %
94.6 %
94.6 %
94.7 %
94.4 %
94.6 %
95.0 %
94.4 %
94.5 %
94.4 %
94.2 %
40
96.5 %
97.0 %
97.1 %
96.9 %
96.5 %
95.2 %
96.2 %
96.3 %
97.3 %
96.6 %
96.6 %
96.5 %
96.5 %
96.6 %
96.4 %
96.7 %
97.0 %
96.6 %
96.7 %
96.7 %
96.5 %
50
98.0 %
98.3 %
98.4 %
98.2 %
97.8 %
96.7 %
97.3 %
97.4 %
98.3 %
97.7 %
97.7 %
97.7 %
97.7 %
97.7 %
97.6 %
97.9 %
98.1 %
97.8 %
97.9 %
98.0 %
97.8 %
60
98.9 %
99.1 %
99.2 %
99.0 %
98.8 %
98.1 %
98.4 %
98.3 %
98.8 %
98.4 %
98.5 %
98.5 %
98.5 %
98.5 %
98.5 %
98.7 %
98.8 %
98.7 %
98.8 %
98.8 %
98.7 %
70
99.5 %
99.6 %
99.6 %
99.5 %
99.4 %
99.1 %
99.2 %
99.2 %
99.3 %
99.2 %
99.2 %
99.2 %
99.2 %
99.3 %
99.2 %
99.4 %
99.4 %
99.4 %
99.4 %
99.4 %
99.4 %
80
99.8 %
99.8 %
99.8 %
99.8 %
99.7 %
99.6 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.7 %
99.8 %
99.8 %
99.8 %
99.8 %
99.8 %
99.8 %
90
99.95 %
99.96 %
99.96 %
99.94 %
99.94 %
99.92 %
99.93 %
99.94 %
99.94 %
99.93 %
99.93 %
99.93 %
99.94 %
99.94 %
99.95 %
99.95 %
99.96 %
99.96 %
99.96 %
99.96 %
99.96 %
Gini coefficients
Investors
0.860
0.870
0.875
0.875
0.879
0.876
0.889
0.886
0.895
0.883
0.878
0.877
0.876
0.878
0.873
0.874
0.877
0.871
0.871
0.868
0.866
Population
0.988
0.988
0.987
0.986
0.984
0.984
0.983
0.985
0.983
0.983
0.984
0.984
0.985
0.984
0.983
0.984
0.983
0.982
0.982
0.983
0.987
53
APPENDIX 5. Individuals' share wealth by region, 1995-2015
Region:
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Uusimaa
55.3 %
55.0 %
54.5 %
54.4 %
54.0 %
59.9 %
60.1 %
58.8 %
55.3 %
55.5 %
54.5 %
54.4 %
55.2 %
54.4 %
53.6 %
52.5 %
51.7 %
52.0 %
51.8 %
51.1 %
51.5 %
47.7 %
46.9 %
45.9 %
45.2 %
45.2 %
50.3 %
50.4 %
48.8 %
46.1 %
46.4 %
45.5 %
45.9 %
46.8 %
45.9 %
44.7 %
43.8 %
43.0 %
42.8 %
42.5 %
42.0 %
42.4 %
Varsinais-Suomi
Greater Helsinki Area*
7.9 %
8.3 %
9.6 %
10.2 %
8.7 %
6.4 %
6.6 %
6.7 %
6.8 %
6.5 %
6.9 %
7.1 %
7.0 %
7.2 %
7.3 %
7.3 %
7.4 %
7.6 %
8.0 %
8.1 %
8.1 %
Satakunta
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.7 %
2.6 %
2.3 %
1.9 %
1.8 %
1.9 %
2.1 %
2.1 %
2.3 %
2.4 %
2.6 %
2.4 %
2.4 %
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.8 %
2.8 %
2.7 %
Kanta-Häme
1.7 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.5 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.7 %
1.7 %
1.7 %
Pirkanmaa
6.9 %
6.7 %
6.4 %
6.0 %
7.7 %
6.9 %
6.8 %
6.7 %
6.4 %
6.1 %
6.2 %
6.3 %
6.3 %
6.5 %
6.5 %
6.4 %
6.5 %
6.5 %
6.6 %
6.7 %
6.6 %
Päijät-Häme
2.5 %
2.4 %
2.4 %
2.4 %
2.2 %
1.8 %
1.9 %
2.1 %
2.2 %
2.0 %
2.2 %
2.1 %
2.3 %
2.4 %
2.5 %
2.4 %
2.5 %
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.5 %
2.5 %
Kymenlaakso
1.8 %
1.7 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.5 %
1.3 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.5 %
1.4 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.5 %
1.6 %
1.6 %
1.7 %
Etelä-Karjala
1.5 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.1 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
Etelä-Savo
1.3 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.1 %
1.1 %
1.1 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
Pohjois-Savo
1.9 %
2.2 %
2.1 %
2.1 %
2.1 %
1.6 %
1.7 %
1.8 %
2.1 %
2.3 %
2.6 %
2.9 %
2.8 %
2.9 %
2.5 %
2.6 %
2.8 %
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.8 %
2.8 %
Pohjois-Karjala
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.2 %
1.3 %
1.0 %
1.0 %
1.1 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.4 %
1.5 %
1.2 %
1.3 %
1.4 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.4 %
1.4 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
Keski-Suomi
2.2 %
2.1 %
2.0 %
1.9 %
1.9 %
2.0 %
1.8 %
2.0 %
2.1 %
2.1 %
2.3 %
2.3 %
2.2 %
2.2 %
2.3 %
2.3 %
2.3 %
2.4 %
2.4 %
2.3 %
2.3 %
Etelä-Pohjanmaa
1.8 %
1.9 %
1.9 %
2.0 %
1.8 %
1.4 %
1.5 %
1.6 %
1.8 %
1.8 %
2.0 %
2.2 %
2.2 %
2.2 %
2.4 %
2.5 %
2.6 %
2.5 %
2.5 %
2.5 %
2.4 %
Pohjanmaa
2.7 %
2.8 %
2.7 %
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.4 %
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.6 %
2.5 %
2.6 %
2.7 %
2.8 %
2.8 %
2.8 %
2.8 %
2.9 %
3.0 %
3.2 %
3.3 %
2.9 %
Keski-Pohjanmaa
0.9 %
0.8 %
0.7 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.4 %
0.4 %
0.4 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.6 %
0.5 %
0.6 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.6 %
0.6 %
0.6 %
0.6 %
0.6 %
0.6 %
Pohjois-Pohjanmaa
2.5 %
2.4 %
2.3 %
2.4 %
3.1 %
3.0 %
2.5 %
2.4 %
4.5 %
5.5 %
4.8 %
4.1 %
3.6 %
3.5 %
3.6 %
3.8 %
3.7 %
3.7 %
3.7 %
4.2 %
4.3 %
Kainuu
0.6 %
0.7 %
0.5 %
0.6 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.4 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
0.5 %
Lappi
1.4 %
1.3 %
1.2 %
1.1 %
1.1 %
1.0 %
1.0 %
1.0 %
1.1 %
1.1 %
1.2 %
1.1 %
1.2 %
1.1 %
1.2 %
1.3 %
1.4 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
Ahvenanmaa - Åland
1.3 %
1.8 %
1.8 %
1.8 %
1.7 %
1.9 %
1.9 %
2.2 %
2.7 %
2.5 %
2.2 %
1.9 %
1.8 %
2.1 %
2.5 %
2.1 %
1.7 %
1.6 %
1.4 %
1.3 %
1.3 %
Unknown
2.0 %
2.0 %
2.1 %
2.4 %
2.8 %
2.9 %
3.0 %
2.8 %
2.6 %
2.4 %
2.2 %
2.3 %
2.2 %
2.3 %
2.4 %
3.3 %
3.6 %
3.0 %
2.8 %
2.5 %
2.9 %
Totals
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
* Includes Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen