Group 1 - The current supply-side reform has transitioned from "Three Reductions and One Supplement" to a new paradigm of "Anti-Involution + Supply Optimization," with the core goal shifting from resolving excess capacity to enhancing total factor productivity [6][27][41] - The "Anti-Involution" reform is expected to reshape the long-term pricing logic of commodity markets, benefiting technology-intensive manufacturing and enterprises with strong "new quality productivity" [6][27][41] - The structural upgrade of excess capacity is evident, with new sectors such as new energy vehicles and photovoltaics becoming significant areas of concern, indicating a shift from primary products to complex manufactured goods [6][27][41] Group 2 - The 2015 supply-side reform primarily targeted excess capacity in basic raw material industries, while the current reform addresses structural excess capacity across the entire industrial chain [6][27][41] - The "Anti-Involution" policies are expected to lead to improved terminal profits through reduced downstream supply, which will drive upstream price declines, resulting in a transfer of industry profits to downstream sectors [6][27][39] - The head enterprises are likely to emerge from the downturn first, initiating an upward cycle in the market [6][27][39] Group 3 - The historical context shows that both the 2015 and current reforms were prompted by prolonged periods of negative PPI, indicating a persistent oversupply issue [41] - The current economic backdrop includes a decline in real estate and weak external demand, leading to structural overcapacity in various sectors, including traditional industries and emerging sectors [41][39] - The "Anti-Involution" reform aims to correct market failures and establish a unified national market, addressing issues of low-price disorderly competition and promoting high-quality development [27][28][39]

Investment Rating - The report maintains a "Recommendation" rating for the automotive industry, indicating a positive outlook for the industry's fundamentals [6]. Core Insights - Tesla's Q2 2025 performance met expectations, with a Non-GAAP net profit of $1.39 billion, reflecting a year-over-year decline of 23.1% but a quarter-over-quarter increase of 49.1% [3][5]. - Revenue for Q2 2025 was $22.5 billion, with automotive revenue at $16.66 billion, showing a year-over-year decline of 16.2% but a quarter-over-quarter increase of 19.3% [3]. - The gross margin was reported at 17.2%, exceeding market expectations of 16.5%, with automotive sales gross margin at 14.1% [3][5]. - The report highlights a recovery in profitability, with single-vehicle revenue at $41,000 and single-vehicle Non-GAAP net profit at $2,484, marking significant quarter-over-quarter increases [3][4]. Summary by Sections Financial Performance - Q2 2025 delivered a total revenue of $22.5 billion, with automotive business revenue at $16.66 billion, reflecting a year-over-year decline of 16.2% but a quarter-over-quarter increase of 19.3% [3]. - Non-GAAP net profit was $1.39 billion, with GAAP net profit at $1.17 billion, both meeting expectations [3][5]. - The gross margin was 17.2%, higher than the market expectation of 16.5%, indicating better-than-expected performance [3][5]. Delivery and Production - Tesla delivered 384,100 vehicles in Q2 2025, showing a year-over-year decline of 13.5% but a quarter-over-quarter increase of 14.1% [4]. - The report mentions the production of a low-cost vehicle starting in June, with a launch planned for Q4 2025 [10]. Future Outlook - The report discusses the introduction of the Optimus 3 prototype by the end of the year, with a production target of 1 million units annually within five years [6]. - The Robotaxi service aims to cover half of the U.S. population by the end of the year, pending regulatory approval [6]. - The report anticipates significant financial impacts from Robotaxi services by the end of next year [6].

Quantitative Models and Construction Methods 1. Model Name: CRR Pricing Model for Convertible Bonds - **Model Construction Idea**: The CRR pricing model uses a binomial tree framework to calculate the theoretical value of convertible bonds, incorporating embedded options, credit spreads, and other factors to improve pricing accuracy compared to traditional models like BSM[15][44]. - **Model Construction Process**: 1. Use the CRR binomial tree model to calculate the theoretical value of convertible bonds. 2. Define the "pricing deviation" as the difference between the CRR theoretical price and the market price. 3. Select bonds with the highest pricing deviation for portfolio construction. 4. Rebalance the portfolio monthly with equal weighting[15][44][45]. - **Model Evaluation**: The CRR model is more precise than traditional models like BSM due to its consideration of embedded clauses and credit spreads[15][44]. 2. Model Name: Low Valuation Momentum Strategy - **Model Construction Idea**: This strategy combines low valuation metrics (e.g., low conversion premium) with momentum indicators (e.g., short-term stock price trends) to identify undervalued convertible bonds with upward potential[48][49]. - **Model Construction Process**: 1. Screen bonds based on criteria such as credit rating (AA- or above), liquidity, and absence of negative historical events. 2. Classify bonds into equity-like, balanced, and debt-like categories based on parity levels. 3. Score bonds within each category based on valuation metrics and momentum indicators. 4. Select the top 10 bonds from each category for portfolio inclusion. 5. Rebalance the portfolio monthly with equal weighting[48][49][51]. - **Model Evaluation**: The strategy effectively combines valuation and momentum factors to capture both undervaluation and positive price trends[48][49]. --- Model Backtesting Results 1. CRR Pricing Model - **Absolute Return (June)**: 3.73% - **Annualized Return (Since 2017)**: 15.56% - **Maximum Drawdown**: 12.08% - **Return-to-Volatility Ratio**: 1.22 - **Return-to-Drawdown Ratio**: 1.29 - **Monthly Win Rate**: 62.22%[44][48]. 2. Low Valuation Momentum Strategy - **Absolute Return (June)**: 2.91% - **Annualized Return (Since 2017)**: 15.39% - **Maximum Drawdown**: 11.26% - **Return-to-Volatility Ratio**: 1.21 - **Return-to-Drawdown Ratio**: 1.37 - **Monthly Win Rate**: 65.56%[49][55]. --- Quantitative Factors and Construction Methods 1. Factor Name: Conversion Premium - **Factor Construction Idea**: The conversion premium measures the relative overvaluation of a convertible bond compared to its parity value, serving as a valuation indicator[13][15]. - **Factor Construction Process**: 1. Use a power function model to fit the relationship between parity value and conversion premium. 2. Calculate the median conversion premium for equity-like, balanced, and debt-like bonds. 3. Track changes in the conversion premium curve over time[13][15]. 2. Factor Name: Implied Volatility - **Factor Construction Idea**: Implied volatility reflects the market's expectations of future stock price fluctuations, derived from convertible bond prices using the BSM model[35][36]. - **Factor Construction Process**: 1. Use the BSM model to reverse-calculate implied volatility from convertible bond prices. 2. Aggregate implied volatility data to calculate the median and weighted average for the market. 3. Monitor changes in implied volatility over time to assess market sentiment[35][36]. --- Factor Backtesting Results 1. Conversion Premium - **Equity-like Bonds**: Median premium increased from 7.72% to 9.18% (+1.46%) - **Balanced Bonds**: Median premium increased from 23.67% to 26.05% (+2.37%) - **Debt-like Bonds**: Median premium increased from 57.49% to 62.77% (+5.28%)[15][18]. 2. Implied Volatility - **Market Median**: Increased from 32.25% to 35.35% (+3.10%) - **Weighted Average**: Increased from 28.93% to 35.24% (+6.41%)[35][36].

Core Insights - The report highlights a significant rebound in prices for black commodities, as well as the new energy and photovoltaic industry chains, driven by expectations of "anti-involution" policies [1][2][21] - Key price increases are observed in steel, coal, glass, and certain metals, with many currently at historical lows, indicating potential for recovery [2][21] - The report recommends focusing on sectors with high or improving sentiment, including coke, steel, building materials, non-ferrous metals, batteries, silicon materials, semiconductors, telecommunications, and securities [1][2][21] Industry Overview Upstream Resources - Recent price increases in steel, coal, and glass are attributed to "anti-involution" policies, with coke and coal futures rising by 13.1% and 22.7% respectively [13][21] - Steel prices have also seen a rise, with rebar prices increasing by 4.2% and steel billet prices by 6.1% [13][21] New Energy and Photovoltaics - The new energy and photovoltaic sectors have experienced rapid price increases, with DMC and lithium carbonate prices rising by 13.5% and 8.5% respectively [16][21] - The photovoltaic industry composite price index has increased by 16.2%, with silicon wafers and polysilicon prices rising by 39.4% and 19.5% respectively [16][21] Metals - Industrial metals such as copper, aluminum, zinc, and tin have generally increased in price, driven by robust downstream demand and supply constraints [14][21] - Precious metals have shown strong performance, with COMEX gold and silver prices rising by 3.4% and 4.4% respectively [14][21] Agricultural Products - Seasonal demand has led to a significant increase in egg prices, which rose by 14.8% [18][21] - High temperatures have impacted supply, resulting in increases in soybean and soybean oil prices by 2.3% and 2.1% respectively [18][21]

Investment Rating - The report maintains a recommendation for the securities and insurance sectors, indicating a positive outlook despite potential challenges from trade friction and economic pressures [6]. Core Insights - The non-bank financial sector saw a significant increase in holdings, with the insurance sector's holdings rising to 1.54%, up 0.63 percentage points from the previous quarter, while the brokerage sector's holdings reached 0.90%, up 0.36 percentage points [5][21]. - The total market value of public funds reached 6,285.3 billion, with a year-on-year increase of 10% and a quarter-on-quarter increase of 7% [2]. - The insurance sector is benefiting from a recovery in premium income, with a cumulative premium income of 30,602 billion from January to May, reflecting a year-on-year growth of 3.8% [20]. Summary by Sections Public Fund Market Size - In Q2 2025, the total net value of funds was 33.7 trillion, with a year-on-year increase of 10% and a quarter-on-quarter increase of 7% [10]. - The non-monetary fund scale was 19.5 trillion, up 11% year-on-year and 7% quarter-on-quarter [10]. High Dividend Stock Holdings Analysis - The holdings of banks, electric equipment, transportation, public utilities, oil and petrochemicals, and coal showed varied changes, with bank holdings increasing by 16% [16]. Non-Bank Sector Holdings Analysis Brokerage Sector - The brokerage sector's holdings increased to 0.90%, with a 58% rise in shareholding volume to 669 million shares [18][19]. - The average daily trading volume for equity funds reached 1.49 trillion, a year-on-year increase of 57% [18]. Insurance Sector - The insurance sector's holdings increased significantly, with a notable rise in individual stock holdings for major companies like China Ping An and China Taiping [21]. - The insurance sector's holdings are still below the standard allocation of 1.91%, indicating potential for further investment [21]. Investment Recommendations - The report suggests focusing on key brokerage firms such as CITIC Securities and Guotai Junan, as well as insurance companies like China Taiping and China Ping An, due to their potential for growth in the current market environment [6].

Report Summary 1. Investment Rating of the Reported Industry There is no information provided regarding the investment rating of the reported industry in the given content. 2. Core Viewpoints of the Report The report analyzes the performance, scale changes, and portfolio configurations of active equity - biased funds in Q2 2025. It shows that in Q2, the North -交所 continued to lead the gains, the large - cap value style was dominant, and the average return of active equity - biased funds was 2.9%. The scale of equity - biased funds declined, the new fund issuance market improved, and the overall stock positions of equity - biased funds increased. Additionally, the funds continued to increase their positions in Hong Kong stocks, with changes in market - value styles and industry distributions [1][4]. 3. Summary According to the Table of Contents I. Active Equity - Biased Fund Market Review - **Performance Overview**: In Q2, the North -交所 led the gains, the large - cap value style was dominant, and the average return of active equity - biased funds was 2.9%. 70% of the funds had positive returns, and most single - quarter returns were between 0% and 5%. Funds heavily invested in innovative drugs, computing power, and the North -交所 performed outstandingly. The Hang Seng Index rose 4.1%, while the Hang Seng Tech Index declined 1.7%. Industries such as comprehensive finance and national defense and military industry led the gains, while the food and beverage industry had a large decline [4][9]. - **Scale Change**: At the end of Q2, the scale of equity - biased funds declined again, decreasing by 1% compared to the end of the previous quarter. The decline was mainly due to the redemption of fund shares. Funds with relatively large scale increases were mainly those heavily invested in military industry, innovative drugs, computing power, and new consumption. The scales of top - tier funds over 20 billion yuan all shrank to varying degrees [4][19]. - **New Fund Issuance Market**: The new fund issuance market improved, with a significant increase in the number and scale of newly issued funds in 2025Q2. A total of 72 active equity - biased funds were established, with a total scale of 37.419 billion yuan. The largest - scale newly established fund in Q2 was Dongfanghong Core Value, with a scale exceeding 1.9 billion yuan [29][35]. II. Position Analysis - **Position Analysis**: At the end of Q2, the overall stock positions of common stock, equity - biased hybrid, flexible allocation, and balanced hybrid funds were 90.10%, 88.49%, 85.77%, and 65.99% respectively, increasing by 0.75, 0.33, 0.87, and 3.21 percentage points compared to the end of the previous quarter [4][38]. - **AH Market Selection**: Active equity - biased funds that can invest in Hong Kong stocks continued to increase their positions in Hong Kong stocks in Q2, with the proportion of Hong Kong stocks in the stock investment market value increasing by about 1.6 percentage points. The Hong Kong stock positions have been increasing for 6 consecutive quarters [4][46]. - **Market - Value Style**: The proportion of the main board continued to decline slightly, while the proportions of the Science and Technology Innovation Board and the Growth Enterprise Market increased. The proportion of small - and medium - cap stocks below 5 billion yuan further increased by 0.76 percentage points [4][51]. - **Industry Distribution**: Active equity - biased funds increased their positions in TMT and financial real estate sectors and reduced their positions in consumption and mid - stream manufacturing sectors. Among the first - tier industries, the industries with the largest increase in heavy - position market value were communications, banking, and national defense and military industry, while the industries with the largest decrease were food and beverage, automobiles, and power equipment and new energy [4][56]. - **Heavy - Positioned Stocks**: At the end of Q2 2025, Tencent Holdings remained the largest heavy - positioned stock of active equity - biased funds, followed by CATL and Kweichow Moutai. Tencent Holdings was significantly reduced, while Inphi and Xinyisheng received the most increases in positions [4][64].

证券研究报告 | 行业点评报告 2025 年 07 月 22 日 2025 年 2 季度基金持仓点评 有增持，更欠配 总量研究/银行 公募基金发布二季度重仓持股数据，主动偏股基金银行股仓位上升，由"量增+ 价涨" 共同推动，但欠配幅度也有所扩大。我们解读如下（详细图表见正文）： 银行股仓位上升，主动偏股基金进一步增持：25Q2 主动偏股基金持有银行股的 比例为 4.87%，为 2021 年 2 季度以来的的最高水平，环比一季度提升 1.12pct， 仓位增幅显著。这一变化由"量增"与"价涨"共同推动：一方面，二季度银 行板块跑赢大盘（中信银行指数上涨 12.62%，分别跑赢万得全 A、沪深 300 全 收益指数 8.76、10.24 个百分点），带动基金持仓市值被动扩大；另一方面， 基金主动增持趋势明确，二季度末主动基金持有上市银行流通股数达 48.7 亿股， 环比增持 6.5 亿股，增幅 15.3%。值得注意的是，银行仓位 30%左右的升幅已 超过板块相对收益，进一步印证基金主动加仓是银行仓位提高的主要动力。 不过主动偏股基金对银行板块的欠配幅度也在进一步扩大。以沪深 300 为例， 25Q2 主动基金相对 ...

1. Report Industry Investment Rating - No industry investment rating is provided in the report. 2. Core Viewpoints of the Report - The personal pension fund market is developing steadily, and the scale of FOF funds has rebounded. The new - issue market is warming up, with a relative concentration in low - risk FOF products. The market concentration of fund companies has slightly decreased. In Q2 2025, FOF funds of different risk levels achieved positive average returns, and medium - risk FOF funds outperformed their benchmark public funds in terms of both returns and risks. FOF funds significantly increased their allocation to bond - type funds in Q2 2025 [3][7][19][26][31][38][46]. 3. Summary According to Relevant Catalogs 3.1 FOF Fund Market Review - **Personal pension fund development is stable, and FOF scale rebounds**: As of June 30, 2025, the number of personal pension funds increased to 212, and the average return of 132 Y - share personal pension funds that have been operating since 2023 was 3.61%. The total number of public FOF funds in the market was 518, with a total management scale of 165.706 billion yuan, an increase of 6 funds and 14.627 billion yuan compared to the end of Q1 2025, a 9.68% quarter - on - quarter increase. In terms of different types, ordinary FOF funds had an advantage in scale, accounting for over 60%, but fewer in number than pension - target FOF funds. In terms of risk types, low - risk FOF funds were the most numerous, with a scale accounting for 56.07% [7][10]. - **The new - issue market is warming up, relatively concentrated in low - risk FOF products**: In Q2 2025, 15 new FOF funds were issued, with a total issuance scale of 18.604 billion yuan, a 31.51% increase compared to the previous quarter. Among them, ordinary FOF funds accounted for 73% in terms of the number of new - issues and 87% in terms of the scale. Low - risk FOF funds dominated the new - issue scale, accounting for 94.57% [19]. - **The market concentration of fund companies has slightly decreased**: As of the end of Q2 2025, 93 fund companies had deployed FOF funds, with 2 participants reduced in Q2. The combined market share of the top - ten fund companies in terms of scale was 60.97%, a 4.69% decrease compared to the previous quarter [26]. 3.2 FOF Fund Performance Review - **In Q2, the equity market rose overall, and FOF funds of different risk levels achieved positive average returns**: In Q2 2025, the equity market rose overall, with the Hang Seng Index leading the gains, rising 4.12%. Low, medium, and high - risk FOF funds achieved average returns of 1.26%, 2.09%, and 2.71% respectively. The top - performing FOF funds of different risk types all achieved positive returns in Q2 [31]. - **Medium - risk FOF funds outperformed their benchmark public funds in terms of returns and risks in Q2**: In Q2 2025, medium - risk FOF funds outperformed their benchmark public funds, with a quarterly return of 2.09%. High - risk FOF funds underperformed active equity funds, and low - risk FOF funds slightly underperformed fixed - income + funds. In terms of maximum drawdown, FOF funds of all risk levels were better than their benchmark public funds. Since the beginning of the year, medium - risk FOF funds have also outperformed balanced hybrid funds [38]. 3.3 FOF Fund Positioning Analysis - **FOF heavy - position fund type distribution**: In Q2 2025, FOF funds' heavy - position in bond - type funds had the largest scale, with a total heavy - position scale of 42.913 billion yuan, accounting for 51.37%, a 4.61% increase compared to the previous quarter. The heavy - position scale of passive funds was 16.431 billion yuan, accounting for 19.67%, remaining basically the same as the previous quarter. The scale proportion of hybrid funds decreased [46]. - **Fixed - income funds with top heavy - position and increased - position scale and frequency**: For fixed - income funds, in terms of heavy - position scale, Boshi Credit Preferred had the highest scale, and in terms of heavy - position frequency, E Fund Sui Feng Tian Li and Fullgoal Global Bond RMB were the most frequently heavy - held. In terms of external heavy - position, Fullgoal Global Bond RMB ranked first in both scale and frequency. The fixed - income funds with top increased - position scale and frequency in Q2 2025 included Huataibao Xing Zunhe, Invesco Great Wall Jingtai Pure Income, etc. [50][52][53]. - **Active equity funds with top heavy - position and increased - position scale and frequency**: Among active equity funds, Dacheng Gao Xin, E Fund Ke Rong, etc. were among the top in heavy - position scale. Dacheng Gao Xin was the most frequently heavy - held, with 53 times of external heavy - holding. FOF's preference for active equity funds had diverse styles. The active equity funds with top increased - position scale and frequency included Fullgoal Shanghai - Hong Kong - Shenzhen Performance Driver, Golden Eagle Technology Innovation, etc. [55][56][57]. - **Passive funds with top heavy - position scale and frequency**: For passive funds, funds themed on credit bonds, interest - rate bonds, gold, and Hong Kong - stock technology were among the top in both heavy - position scale and frequency. The passive funds with top increased - position scale and frequency were themed on interest - rate bonds, credit bonds, gold, and US stocks [61][62][63].

Group 1 - The "national team" continued to increase its holdings, with an estimated total purchase of over 200 billion in ETFs during the second quarter [3][11][12] - The public funds' allocation to Hong Kong stocks reached a historical high, with the proportion of Hong Kong stocks in actively managed equity funds reaching 16.85%, a quarter-on-quarter increase of 1.12% [13][15] - Tencent has become the largest holding for public funds for two consecutive quarters, with four Hong Kong stocks among the top ten holdings [13][14] Group 2 - The second quarter saw a significant increase in the holdings of ETFs, particularly in the CSI 300, SSE 50, CSI 1000, and CSI 500 ETFs [11][12] - The public funds that can invest in Hong Kong stocks have increased to 50.97%, with the proportion of Hong Kong stocks in these funds reaching 33% [15][16] - The net inflow of funds in the secondary market has turned into a slight net inflow, with financing balances rising and net purchases of financing reaching 265.9 billion [32][41] Group 3 - The market sentiment has shown increased trading activity, particularly in the healthcare, TMT, and ChiNext indices [52][56] - The sectors that attracted significant net inflows included computer, non-bank financials, and media, while sectors like healthcare and electric equipment experienced net outflows [56][57] - The overall market performance indicated a preference for large-cap growth stocks over small-cap value stocks [6]

Report Title - Analysis of the Second Quarter Report of Industry-themed Funds in 2025 [1] Report Industry Investment Rating - Not Available Core Viewpoints of the Report - In the second quarter of 2025, most major industry-themed funds saw an increase in the number and scale. The total scale of technology and communication, and national defense and military industry funds rose significantly, while that of new energy (vehicles) and consumer industry funds shrank [3]. - Except for new energy (vehicles) and midstream manufacturing, other major industry-themed track funds recorded average positive returns. National defense and military industry funds had a relatively high increase, with an average increase of about 12.54% [3]. - In most tracks, active funds outperformed passive funds in terms of excess returns. However, in new energy (vehicles) and large manufacturing tracks, active funds underperformed passive funds [3]. - The trading activity of most major track ETFs decreased, except for the medical and biological, and national defense and military industry tracks, where the average daily trading volume increased by over 60% [3]. - The net capital flow status of major industry-themed track funds varied. The technology and communication track had a relatively large net capital inflow, while the new energy (vehicles) track had a relatively large net capital outflow [3]. Summary by Directory Quantity & Scale Changes - Most major industry-themed funds saw an increase in quantity and scale compared to the end of the previous quarter. The technology and communication industry had the largest increase in total fund scale, up about 7.8% or 26.61 billion yuan, and the national defense and military industry also had a significant increase, up 35.7% or 24.99 billion yuan. In contrast, the total scale of new energy (vehicles) and consumer industry funds shrank by over 900 million yuan each [3][11]. - In the second quarter of 2025, the pharmaceutical and biological industry had the most new funds in the industry fund category, with 7 new funds, and the large manufacturing and large technology theme funds had the most new funds in the theme fund category, with 6 new funds each [3]. - The new funds in the pharmaceutical and biological industry and large manufacturing theme were mostly passive management funds. The average fundraising scale of new industry funds in the second quarter was about 2.2 billion yuan, slightly lower than the previous quarter [16]. - A total of 15 major industry-themed funds expired in the second quarter of 2025, with 4 each in the large manufacturing and new energy (vehicles) theme tracks [25]. Performance - In the second quarter of 2025, the A-share market was volatile, and most major industry-themed track funds, except for new energy (vehicles) and midstream manufacturing, recorded average positive returns. National defense and military industry funds had a relatively high increase, with an average increase of about 12.54%, while midstream manufacturing and new energy (vehicles) industry funds declined, with average declines of 3.52% and 0.90% respectively [27]. - Active funds outperformed passive funds in terms of excess returns in most tracks. The active funds in the pharmaceutical and biological industry had an excess return of about 7.3% [29]. - In the consumer industry, the quarterly average return of consumer industry funds was about 1.56%. Active funds performed better, with an average return of about 3.0% [33][37]. - The pharmaceutical and biological industry continued its upward trend, with an average quarterly return of 9.61%. Active funds had stronger performance elasticity, with an average return of about 12.6% [42][44]. - In the technology and communication industry, the average quarterly return of technology and communication industry funds was about 1.51%. Active funds had little advantage, with an average return of about 1.54% [48][50]. - The midstream manufacturing industry showed significant internal differentiation, with an average quarterly return of about -3.52%. Passive funds had an average return of about -3.5% [55][57]. - The national defense and military industry had excellent performance, with an average quarterly return of about 12.54%. Active funds performed better, with an average return of about 13.3% [62][64]. - In the cyclical industry, the performance differentiation of sub - industries converged. The average quarterly return of cyclical industry funds was about 3.21%. Active funds performed better, with an average return of about 4.1% [71][74]. - The financial and real estate industry showed significant internal differences. The average quarterly return of financial and real estate funds was about 7.68%. Active funds had a larger increase, with an average return of about 10.3% [79][80]. - The new energy (vehicles) theme funds performed poorly, with a decline compared to the previous quarter. Active funds had an average return of about -1.1% [83]. - The large technology theme funds' performance declined. Active funds had an average return of about 3.0% [84]. - The large manufacturing theme funds' performance declined. Passive funds had an average return of about 2.6% [91]. - The ESG theme active funds performed well, with an average return of about 2.7%. Passive funds' performance recovered, with an average return of about 2.0% [95] Trading Situation & Capital Changes - In the second quarter of 2025, the total average daily trading volume of technology and communication ETFs remained at the highest level, and the trading was relatively active [96]. - The net capital flow status of major industry-themed track funds varied. The technology and communication track had a relatively large net capital inflow of 20.551 billion yuan, while the new energy (vehicles) track had a relatively large net capital outflow of -8.335 billion yuan [100]. - Except for the medical and biological, national defense and military industry, and large manufacturing tracks, the average daily trading volume of other major track ETFs decreased, and the trading activity declined overall. The average daily trading volume of medical and biological, and national defense and military industry track ETFs increased by over 60% [102]. - In terms of trading, sub - theme ETFs such as Hong Kong brokerage, Hong Kong Internet, semiconductor chips, and Hong Kong innovative drugs were relatively more active [106]. - In terms of capital flow, sub - theme products such as Hong Kong large technology, Hong Kong innovative drugs, semiconductors, and national defense and military industry had relatively large net capital inflows, while sub - themes such as large medicine, brokerage, biomedicine, large consumption, and new energy had relatively large net capital outflows [109] Position Changes - Compared with the end of the previous quarter, active funds in each industry-themed track made the following major changes to their top ten heavy - position stocks: significant increases in holdings of certain stocks and significant decreases in holdings of others in different industries such as consumer, pharmaceutical and biological, technology and communication, etc [114]