Edit - lost reply, replying to @tigers2008 post above.I think at...

Edit - lost reply, replying to @tigers2008 post above.

I think at least some of what you are seeing across the pond is being driven by short covering. For example, according to the latest data on shortman, in the last month IMU shorts have reduced over 1% of SOI and PNV shorts have reduced around 3.5% of SOI, and probably more on both counts in recent days given their solid performance. This has added minimum (and likely more) 60 million shares and 23 million shares respectively to buying demand in those stocks. When this buying demand is accompanied by traders, momentum chasers, FOMO, etc., in addition to any regular buying, it helps to explain their recent outperformance of RAC, which as we know has no (or very little) stock sold short. Even after this covering, IMU and PNV still have 5% and 8% respectively of SOI shorted, so this could continue on for a while yet.

What would happen to demand for RAC if it had 5% of SOI shorted and someone was now needing to start buying 8 million shares to cover those? I think this lack of shorting was probably one of the reasons RAC was outperforming most biotechs until recently, when it eventually rolled over and followed everyone else down, but unfortunately it is also one of the reasons RAC is lagging in recovery.

Lastly, I've read here some people compare BG's daily 15% of sales as similar to having a shorter pushing the stock down. I'm not going to argue the accuracy of the analogy but at least one major difference is that BG never has to buy those shares back again, whereas a shorter must cover at some point.