Why do some companies have multiple share classes with different voting rights, and how should analysts think about this?
I noticed that many tech companies like those in Silicon Valley have Class A and Class B shares where founders keep super-voting shares. The CFA Level I material talks about this but I want to understand the analytical implications — does this affect valuation? Should investors demand a discount?
Dual-class and multi-class share structures are a hot governance topic in the CFA curriculum and in real markets.
How It Works: A company issues two (or more) classes of common stock with different voting rights. Typically:
- Class A: 1 vote per share — held by public investors
- Class B: 10 votes per share — held by founders/insiders
This lets founders maintain control even after selling a majority of the economic interest to public shareholders.
Example: Orion Technologies goes public with 100M Class A shares (1 vote each = 100M votes) and 20M Class B shares held by founder Priya Nakamura (10 votes each = 200M votes). Priya owns only 16.7% of total shares but controls 66.7% of votes.
Loading diagram...
Analytical Implications:
- Governance risk — Minority shareholders cannot vote out management or block value-destroying decisions
- Entrenchment — Founders may pursue pet projects, excessive compensation, or resist beneficial takeovers
- Valuation discount — Academic research suggests dual-class shares trade at a 5-15% discount to single-class peers
- Sunset provisions — Some structures automatically convert to single-class after a period (e.g., 10 years), which can be value-positive
For the Exam: Be prepared to calculate voting power vs. economic ownership, identify governance risks, and know that major index providers (like S&P) have debated excluding dual-class companies from indices.
Dive deeper into corporate governance with our CFA Level I Equity section.
Master Level I with our CFA Course
107 lessons · 200+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
Why does an early retirement provision lower risk tolerance but high turnover does not — both reduce liabilities, right?
Why does it matter if the pension fund is invested in stocks similar to the sponsor's business?
What is the rule about active vs retired lives and pension plan duration?
Why does the textbook recommend 100% equities for a young employee? That sounds extremely aggressive.
I run my own startup. My income is volatile and tied to my industry. Should I hold ZERO equities in my financial accounts?
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.