Not all shareholders are created equal— at least when it comes to voting rights. While some companies take a “one share, one vote” approach to shareholder decision-making, others give disproportionate voting rights to founders or choose to offer multiple share classes, each with different voting power.
Companies have been offering shares with different voting rights for decades. Multi-class shares are common around the world, not just a phenomenon of Silicon Valley.
Strong arguments can be made on both sides of this issue: in favor and against the practice of offering shares with differential voting rights. Ensuring that founders and key decision-makers have extra voting heft might insulate them from short-term market demands, thus helping them focus on long-term goals. Yet, concentrating voting power in a few hands could also become a way for insiders to entrench their positions and suppress legitimate concerns from other owners.
FCLTGlobal is particularly interested in testing the oft-used argument that multi-class shares promote long-term behavior and outperformance. Absent definitive evidence, arguments on this topic often focus disproportionately on the most high-profile, recent examples of companies using multiple share classes, which makes it hard to appreciate the full breadth, history, and market impact of differential voting rights.
To enrich the debate, FCLTGlobal partnered with researchers at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business, who have a unique dataset covering companies that issue shares with different voting rights. We found that:
Power Play: The Long-term Impact of Multi-class Shares provides a fuller explanation of these findings, beginning with a broader look at the practice of issuing multiple share class—and followed by a detailed account of FCLTGlobal’s statistical approach and findings.
Investor-Corporate Engagement | Article
26 November 2025 - Without disciplined capital allocation, buybacks can signal weakness, not strength. According to a recent MarketWatch article, analysts have labeled Apple’s $100 billion announcement “disappointing” — not because it was small, but because it failed to set a new record.
Risk and Resilience | Article
25 November 2025 - Which is worse: missing a major disruption that creates a new long-term equilibrium, or overreacting to a temporary event that soon reverts to prior conditions? Long-term investors dislike feeling exposed, underprepared, or unaware of potential risks. Fortunately, there are steps they can take to prepare their organizations for geopolitical turbulence.
Innovation | Podcast
17 November 2025 - “The scientific method is pretty helpful when you think about investing — the accumulation of knowledge and insight, the fact that nothing’s ever black and white, and that you look at things on a probability-driven basis.”