Western Securities(SZ:002673) Western Securities·2026-01-26 06:32Report Summary 1. Report Industry Investment Rating No industry investment rating is provided in the report. 2. Core Viewpoints On January 23, 2026, the China Securities Regulatory Commission issued the “Guidelines for Performance Comparison Benchmarks of Publicly - Offered Securities Investment Funds” (hereinafter referred to as the “Guidelines”), and the Asset Management Association of China released the “Operating Rules for Performance Comparison Benchmarks of Publicly - Offered Securities Investment Funds” (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”). The implementation of the Guidelines starts on March 1, 2026, and a one - year implementation transition period is given for existing products with non - compliant performance comparison benchmark settings. The Guidelines aim to standardize the selection and use of performance comparison benchmarks for public funds, strengthen their role as an “anchor” for fund investment, and promote the high - quality development of the public fund industry [1][6]. 3. Summary by Directory Background The performance comparison benchmark is a reference standard set by fund managers for funds based on product positioning and investment objectives. It plays important roles such as determining product positioning, clarifying investment strategies, representing investment styles, measuring product performance, and restricting investment behaviors. Currently, there are problems in the performance comparison benchmarks of public funds, such as the lack of systematic regulatory systems, ineffective use and supervision by institutions, and “style drift” of funds. To address these issues, the China Securities Regulatory Commission issued the Guidelines to protect the legitimate rights and interests of investors [7]. Core Content - Selecting Benchmark Specifications: The selection of benchmarks should follow the principles of representativeness, objectivity, constraint, and persistence. The Asset Management Association of China is authorized to establish a benchmark element library, and fund managers can select benchmark elements from it [3][8]. - Strict Benchmark Change Requirements: Benchmarks should be persistent and cannot be changed casually. Specific situations and procedures for benchmark changes are clearly defined, and sales institutions are required to inform investors of benchmark changes in a timely manner [9][17]. - Enhanced Benchmark Information Disclosure: Information about benchmarks should be disclosed in fund legal documents and regular reports, and the fund trustee should strengthen the review and supervision of the disclosed content [9][10]. - Strengthened Benchmark Constraint: Fund managers should establish a full - process control mechanism for benchmarks, strengthen style stability management, and trustees should strengthen investment supervision responsibilities [10]. - Highlighted Benchmark's Role in Measuring Performance: Performance assessment, performance display, and fund evaluation should all be carried out in combination with the performance comparison benchmark, and different types of equity funds should not be directly ranked [11]. - Transition Period Settings: A one - year transition period is given for existing products with non - compliant benchmark settings. To ensure the objectivity and accuracy of related information, the relevant requirements are aligned with the one - year transition period. A six - month transition period is given for trustees to supervise the stability of fund investment styles [11]. Main Impacts - Fund Managers: They should establish an internal control and management system covering the entire process of benchmark selection, disclosure, monitoring, evaluation, correction, and accountability. Benchmark selection should follow four principles, and a department independent of the investment department should be established to monitor style stability. Information about benchmarks should be clearly stated in legal documents and regular reports, and the performance comparison benchmark should be displayed when showing past performance [12][14]. - Fund Trustees: They should carefully review the fund investment style library, establish a supervision mechanism for the stability of equity fund investment styles, and clarify rights and obligations with fund managers through agreements [14]. - Fund Evaluation Institutions: They should establish a fund evaluation system around the performance comparison benchmark, adjust the fund classification in a timely manner when the benchmark changes, and retain different stages of evaluation results [15]. - Fund Sales Institutions: When displaying a list of funds containing investment performance, they should distinguish funds of different investment styles based on the performance comparison benchmark and should not directly rank different types of equity funds [15].