首批浮动费率基金发行！宏利基金孟杰“7管5亏”能否胜任

Core Viewpoint - The introduction of new floating-rate funds by various fund companies, including Manulife, aims to address long-standing issues in the public fund industry, particularly the "guaranteed returns" problem, by linking management fees more closely to performance [5][22]. Group 1: New Floating-Rate Funds - The first batch of 26 new floating-rate funds received approval from the CSRC on May 23, 2025, with issuance starting on May 27, 2025 [1][5]. - These funds have a tiered management fee structure with three levels: 1.2% for the base rate, 1.5% for the upper tier, and 0.6% for the lower tier, depending on performance relative to a benchmark [1][3]. - The management fee will be adjusted based on the fund's annualized return compared to the performance benchmark after one year of holding [1][5]. Group 2: Fund Managers and Performance - The appointment of experienced fund managers for these new funds is seen as a strategic endorsement of the new model, with managers like Zhou Yun from Dongfanghong Core Value having over 10 years of experience [5][7]. - However, some fund companies are criticized for appointing managers with less impressive track records, raising concerns about their ability to generate significant returns under the new fee structure [7][12]. - Manulife's fund manager Meng Jie has a mixed performance record, with five out of seven funds he manages showing negative returns, leading to skepticism about the company's research capabilities [12][22]. Group 3: Industry Context and Challenges - The introduction of floating-rate funds is part of a broader initiative to improve the quality of public funds, as outlined in the "Public Fund High-Quality Development Action Plan" [5][22]. - The industry has faced significant personnel changes, particularly at Manulife, which has seen a wave of departures among key investment personnel, raising questions about the stability of its investment research framework [21][22]. - The shift to a foreign-owned structure for Manulife has coincided with ongoing personnel turmoil, which may impact the company's ability to effectively manage complex products like floating-rate funds [22].