公募基金大整风：“挂羊头卖狗肉”不行了

Core Viewpoint - The recent changes in public fund performance benchmarks signify a shift towards greater transparency and accountability in the investment industry, addressing long-standing issues of "benchmark manipulation" and enhancing investor trust [2][5][9]. Group 1: Changes in Performance Benchmarks - Multiple fund companies, including GF Fund and Penghua Fund, have announced changes to their performance benchmarks, with over 119 funds making adjustments this year alone, reflecting a 75% increase compared to the previous year [1][3]. - The changes include adjustments to tracking indices, weights, and the introduction of composite indices, aimed at better aligning benchmarks with the funds' investment strategies [3][4]. - The shift is driven by the need to correct the "virtual benchmark" issue, where funds previously set low benchmarks to create an illusion of superior performance [5][6]. Group 2: Regulatory Impact - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has introduced a new action plan to promote high-quality development in public funds, linking performance against benchmarks to fund managers' compensation and company revenues [6][8]. - This regulatory change emphasizes the need for benchmarks to accurately reflect the risk-return characteristics of funds, compelling fund companies to reassess their product positioning and management capabilities [6][7]. Group 3: Implications for Fund Management - The new floating management fee structure will tie fund performance to management fees, encouraging fund managers to focus on long-term performance rather than short-term gains [8][9]. - Fund companies are expected to shift from a marketing-driven approach to a capability-driven one, enhancing the alignment between product offerings and research capabilities [9][10]. - The overall industry may see a trend towards passive investment strategies, with a potential increase in the allocation to low-volatility, high-dividend stocks, particularly in the banking sector [10][11].