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
23 June 2025 - The global proxy system is at a crossroads. Frustrations from investors and issuers in the proxy process are leading to frequent headlines from both camps calling for reform, but solutions have been elusive. Furthermore, frustrations with the proxy process are often cited as one of the reasons companies question the need to be publicly listed, especially given the rise of private markets investing in the last decade.
In the News
12 June 2025 - In response to multiple, concurrent crises, MFS believes investors should look beyond external factors like interest rates and geopolitical risks that are out of their control – and instead adopt an approach that enables them to not just cope, but rise above the current noise and build resilience, says Carol Geremia, President of MFS and Co-Head of Global Distribution.
In the News
12 June 2025 - Coca-Cola, BP, HSBC and countless others are dropping environmental goals, highlighting the inadequacy of voluntary action.