On the face of it, it is confusing.Until you understand what...

On the face of it, it is confusing.

Until you understand what Perpetual consists of, and its (sometime) opposite actions.
Perpetual Ltd manages some thousands of underlying funds - some public and some private.
And each fund will have its mandates and underlying investment objectives for the owners of each fund.
And some might be "shorting" funds and some might be "long only" funds.
Different analysts within Perpetual will deal with different funds.

In the first column of the Notice, you will see for which account a sale or purchase is for.
eg PFSL could be subsidiary called Perpetual Financial Services Ltd
PIL could be Perpetual Investment Ltd
PIML could be Perpetual Investment Management Ltd
PTCO could be ........
So, Perpetual Limited has hundreds of subsidiaries, each with a different purpose.

Each account therefore would be for a separate underlying fund (or multiple funds).
It is therefore possible that some funds may be sellers at a price and some might be buyers.

And it is only when the aggregate shareholding goes above 5% is a Notice lodged (covering ALL shares managed by Perpetual)
Similarly when the aggregate shareholding goes below 5% (it might be 4.999%) then a "Cease being Substantial Shareholding" notice is lodged.

So when you ask "Are they winning on each activity ?", it is impossible to tell unless you know what the underlying fund's objectives are.
eg If my "family office" gave Perpetual $10m to invest in shortselling fossil fuel stocks, Perpetual might shortsell STO. Whereas if my mates family office gave Perpetual $10m to invest in the ASX100, Perpetual might buy some STO.
Alas, Perpetual could be a simultaneous buyer and seller.

As for the other institutions on your list ...
State Street is a worldwide fund manager and is similar to Perpetual Limited and has thousands of underlying accounts/funds - sometimes buyer, sometimes seller.
Vanguard is mainly an ETF manager and has public ETF's which track benchmarks (eg USow, US:S&P50, AUS:AllOrds, etc etc). Here, as STO's % share of the AUS:AllOrds changes, then the underlying shareholding will need to be bought or sold to reflect the correct new % share.

So, in conclusion, it is not surprising to see these names on a list of major shareholders - sometimes coming and sometimes going.
Indeed, it would be surprising to NOT see these names on any major Australian company shareholding lists.

But assigning a trade as "profitable" or not is impossible without more info.

Trust this helps.