想赚1.5%管理费有多难？

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the competitive landscape of public funds in China, particularly focusing on the introduction of floating fee rate funds and the challenges faced by actively managed equity funds in outperforming benchmarks [1][2][16]. Group 1: Floating Fee Rate Funds - The first batch of 26 floating fee rate funds was quickly approved and reached a fundraising cap of 20 billion within a short period, indicating strong market interest [1]. - The fee structure of these funds is asymmetric, where higher management fees are charged when performance exceeds benchmarks, while lower fees apply when performance lags, aiming to align the interests of fund managers and investors [2][24]. - Despite the innovative fee structure, the average management fee for actively managed equity funds remains at 1.2%, as many investors do not hold funds for more than a year, limiting the potential for higher fees [5][29]. Group 2: Performance Challenges - A significant portion of investors (41%) hold funds for less than a year, which complicates the ability of fund managers to achieve the performance needed to charge higher fees [4][5]. - In the past year, only 24% of actively managed equity funds outperformed their benchmarks by 6 percentage points, highlighting the difficulty in consistently achieving superior returns [7][11]. - Over the past three years, only 259 actively managed equity funds have exceeded benchmark returns by 6%, while 2004 funds have underperformed by 3% or more, indicating a challenging environment for fund managers [11][14]. Group 3: Regulatory Context - The introduction of floating fee rate funds is part of a regulatory push to reduce the risk of significant underperformance relative to benchmarks, rather than merely to increase management fees [16][22]. - The regulatory framework aims to strengthen the binding nature of performance benchmarks and reduce the prevalence of style drift among fund managers, ensuring that funds are more aligned with their stated objectives [21][22]. Group 4: Market Sentiment and Historical Context - The market sentiment towards floating fee rate funds is cautious, as previous attempts to implement similar structures faced challenges and regulatory scrutiny [27][28]. - The article notes that while there is renewed interest in floating fee rate funds, they have not yet reached the marketing heights seen with other fund types, such as the A500 index funds [27][28].