# If i had 1 share of a company and the price i bought it for doubled wouldni then have 2 shares or just 2 shares worth of money

Say i bought a share for \$100 flat and then a week later the price of the share went up \$200 would i then technically own 2 shares or should i sell \$100 of my \$200 thats in the company and wait for the price to go down and invest the \$100 i took out again? What im basically asking is if at the beginning i have 1.000% of a share if the price of the stock goes up will the % of my share also go up If this is confusing or a dumb question im sorry

New contributor
Idk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
• You would have one share that you could sell for twice the original amount of money (unless the price changes again). You don't have money until you sell the share Commented 2 days ago

The number of shares, and the percentage ownership of the company it represents, does not change just because the price changes. If your 1 share represents 1% of the company, it will always be 1% of the company regardless of the price. The only time the number of shares changes is when there is a split - but even then the percentage does not change. If you had one share worth 1% and it split 2:1, you now have 2 shares worth 0.5% each, so you still have 1%. What changes is the market's value of the entire company that changes the price of 1 share.

Your middle question is a bit confusing, but say you bought 1,000 shares for \$1 each, or \$1,000. The price per share then goes up to \$2. yes you could sell 500 shares for \$1,000 and reinvest it into something else (this is sometimes called "playing with house money" since you got your whole original investment back). But there's no rule of thumb to say whether you should or not. A better question might be "If I had \$2,000 - would I buy shares of this company? Why or why not?".

For an analogy, consider that you buy a baseball card (or a Pokemon card if you're not as old as I am) for \$100 that only has 100 copies in existence. If the "value" (what someone is willing to pay to buy it) of that card goes up to \$200 - you have to sell the card to get any of that increase in value. It's still just 1 card and it still represents 1% of the overall existence. It's now just "worth more" because someone will buy it for more. Why someone would buy it for more (and how it's worth is determined) would be very different between the two cases, but fundamentally the analogy is the same. If you had 100 cards instead, you could sell half of them and get your original investment back, but that's a decision you'd have to make at that time.

• A split shouldn't affect the math, since after a 2-for-1 split you now have 2 shares, but each share is only worth 0.5% of the company. Commented 2 days ago
• True - I was meaning to indicate that the percentage of one share changes with a split, but I'll clarify that. Commented 2 days ago

It can help to use an analogy in the real world. One might be:

You've bought a house and over the next year, it increases 100% in value (lucky you!). You still only have one house, it's just worth more.

Taking this a little further:

You've bought a house with your wife/husband and each of you owns half of the property (a 50% share, akin to owning 1 share each). If that house increases in value by 100% each of you still only owns half, it's just that each half increased in value.

Buying shares in a business is just buying ownership in something so the above analogy does a decent job of representing the situation.

New contributor
Wes Nolte is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
• Consider re-writibg the phrase "each half got a lot bigger" with reference to a house. Neither half (not the whole house itself) "got a lot bigger"; the house is still the same size, it it just "worth" more. Commented yesterday