Number of direct shareholders in the UK

[Grumpsimus]

Does anyone know the number of individuals who directly hold shares in the UK? By directly hold shares, I would exclude those holding collective investments i.e. Unit Trusts, Oeics and Investment Trusts.

I have tried to look this up, but have found almost no meaniful information on this.

[johnhemming]

Lists of shareholders are available via companies house. However, there are shares in listed companies and also shares in unlisted companies.

There are people who might hold one or two listed shareholdings then there are active traders (which is what TMF was about and hence TLF really tends in its membership towards those who are active traders).

These people may have an idea:
http://www.uksa.org.uk/

or these
https://www.sharesoc.org/

It might be worth asking them.

[swill453]

There are people who might hold one or two listed shareholdings then there are active traders (which is what TMF was about and hence TLF really tends in its membership towards those who are active traders).

I don't think that's the case. What's your source for that assertion? (regarding both TMF and TLF)

Scott.

[johnhemming]

The Motley Fool forums were based upon the Motley Fool website.
https://www.fool.co.uk/

That was about shares and holding shares. Hence it attracted people who were interested in discussing those issues. TLF was developed when TMF shut down its forums. I would not say that everyone involved is interested in those issues, but clearly there is a bias towards people who buy and sell investments personally (aka active traders).

[swill453]

The Motley Fool forums were based upon the Motley Fool website.
https://www.fool.co.uk/

That was about shares and holding shares. Hence it attracted people who were interested in discussing those issues. TLF was developed when TMF shut down its forums. I would not say that everyone involved is interested in those issues, but clearly there is a bias towards people who buy and sell investments personally (aka active traders).

Disagree. I was an active member for the best part of 20 years, and rarely posted or read about individual shares. It was about much more than that.

Even for those that discussed shares, it was more LTBH than "active traders".

Scott.

[UncleEbenezer]

Lists of shareholders are available via companies house. However, there are shares in listed companies and also shares in unlisted companies.

That leaves a huge hole around nominee accounts if (as I suspect) the OP meant to include them.

There are people who might hold one or two listed shareholdings then there are active traders (which is what TMF was about and hence TLF really tends in its membership towards those who are active traders).

Based on that and subsequent posts, I think your use of the term "active traders" differs from mine and others here.

[Dod101]

It is pretty well impossible to answer the OP because so many individuals hold their shares via a pooled nominee (ISAs and SIPPs primarily but also via a broker's 'Trading Account' or whatever title they care to give it). I have heard an estimate though of something like 10/12% of shares are held ultimately for the benefit of individuals.

Dod

[johnhemming]

Based on that and subsequent posts, I think your use of the term "active traders" differs from mine and others here.

Let me use alternative phraseology. Rather than "Active Traders" I would say: People who have accounts with stockbrokers through which they buy and sell shares (and bonds etc for themselves and sometimes others who are family members or otherwise associated with them)

There are, of course, people who hold listed securities who don't have broker accounts.

I think an accurate description of someone who has a broking account and uses it is an "active trader". That would be different to a day trader. They actively trade in stocks (to the extent of having an account to enable them to do this).

[Slarti]

I'm not sure that this would be possible, due to people having multiple holdings, some holdings being individual, some joint and people being recorded with different forms of their names in different shareholdings.

Plus how do you differentiate between William Smith and William Smith, even though they are 2 different people?


Slarti

[Alaric]

They actively trade in stocks (to the extent of having an account to enable them to do this).

I don't think one trade a month on average really should be described as "active". Brokers use the word "frequent" when offering concessions on commission rates for volume.

The use of nominee accounts, which is forced for ISAs and SIPPs and becoming normal practice for taxed accounts, makes these statistics difficult to establish. HMRC probably know, if they bothered to investigate.

[johnhemming]

If we use the definition of "participating or engaged in a particular sphere or activity." then someone who has an account open that they use from time to time would be active. They may not be frequent traders, but unless their broking account is dormant it would be active. If their trading account is active then they would ipso facto be active traders.

Consider the antonyms of dormant:
http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/dormant

(one of which is active).

[dionaeamuscipula]

Does anyone know the number of individuals who directly hold shares in the UK? By directly hold shares, I would exclude those holding collective investments i.e. Unit Trusts, Oeics and Investment Trusts.

I have tried to look this up, but have found almost no meaniful information on this.

https://www.sharesoc.org/investor-acade ... tatistics/

is probably as good as any. Suggests around 20% of households.

DM

[k333]

<<https://www.sharesoc.org/investor-acade ... tatistics/

is probably as good as any. Suggests around 20% of households.

DM>>

Thanks DM. That article was very useful. But I think it indicates that the number of people who have shares and trade (if only occasionally) will be more in the hundreds of thousands. I don't believe that many have the skills to be able to do it, or the inclination, given the risks involved. That's why around 84% of the money goes into unit trusts and OIECs and so on rather than direct shares, much to the glee of the finance guys.

- K (who has done rather well out of direct shares but starting in the 80's with a kick start of privatisations was a great help)

[Breelander]

...I think it indicates that the number of people who have shares and trade (if only occasionally) will be more in the hundreds of thousands...

...according to a joint report by think-tank ResPublica and the Co-operatives UK group ... 19 per cent of adults own shares now, it says.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/inve ... dream.html

[k333]

k333 wrote:
...I think it indicates that the number of people who have shares and trade (if only occasionally) will be more in the hundreds of thousands...



...according to a joint report by think-tank ResPublica and the Co-operatives UK group ... 19 per cent of adults own shares now, it says.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/inve ... dream.html

Well if you include small holdings (say 1-3 shares) then the figure would a lot higher, but I can't really see it being as high a 9 million. But the estimate came from UKSA who wouldn't have access to quality data, unlike Equiniti who probably would. A lot would depend on how many people still have their shares from the 80's and 90's sell-offs, free shares from former building societies and Aviva, and company share option schemes.

I would guess that at most only one person in 50 would have their own share portfolio of a reasonable size (say a minimum of five shares but more likely ten or more). Hence my figure of under a million.

-K