孙迪败走广发资源优选！“空降兵”苏文杰接管多基金迎战规模困局

Core Viewpoint - As of January 31, 2025, GF Fund's public fund management scale reached 1.39 trillion yuan, ranking third after E Fund and Huaxia Fund, but the company faces challenges in its active equity business due to declining performance of star fund managers [14][17]. Group 1: Fund Management and Performance - GF Fund has significantly increased its focus on index investment in recent years, yet it struggles to hide the decline in its active equity business scale [14][17]. - The resignation of star fund manager Sun Di from the GF Resource Selection fund is a notable event, with Su Wenjie taking over management responsibilities [6][12]. - Sun Di's management of the GF Resource Selection fund has resulted in a net value drop of 12.66% over the past year, significantly underperforming its benchmark by over 15 percentage points [7][10]. Group 2: Fund Manager Background - Su Wenjie, the new manager of GF Resource Selection, has a strong track record, achieving an annualized return of 19.92% while managing the Jiashi Resource Selection fund, ranking 19th among 305 similar funds [5][6]. - Su Wenjie has also managed the Jiashi Carbon Neutrality theme fund, which performed well, ranking 75th among 4,120 similar funds [5]. Group 3: Concentration and Strategy Issues - The GF Resource Selection fund has a high concentration in its top ten holdings, reaching 75.80%, which is significantly above the industry average [10][12]. - The fund's strategy has been criticized for its high turnover and reliance on a limited number of stocks, which can lead to increased risk, especially in a cyclical industry [10][12]. Group 4: Historical Context and Challenges - GF Fund was once known for its "internal star-making" strategy, successfully creating star fund managers, but this has shifted to a situation where many of these managers are now facing significant performance declines [14][17]. - The company has seen a notable decline in the performance of funds managed by key figures like Sun Di and Liu Gesong, leading to redemption pressures and a potential systemic risk due to over-reliance on star managers [16][17].