费上加费的私募信贷母基金，值不值得投？

Core Viewpoint - Private credit has become a popular asset class, but products like M Fund may mislead investors with unrealistic return expectations and complex fee structures [2][20]. Group 1: Return Expectations - The advertised annualized return of 9-12% for M Fund is hypothetical and lacks a verifiable track record [3][4]. - Investors should focus on actual net asset value performance and audited return data rather than simulated or projected figures [4][6]. Group 2: Fee Structure - M Fund has a complex fee structure that can significantly erode the actual returns received by investors [9][10]. - The fund charges fees at both the mother fund and sub-fund levels, leading to a "double fee" scenario [10][11]. - High redemption fees (up to 5%) further limit investor liquidity and choice [11]. Group 3: Risk and Return Disparity - There is a significant asymmetry between risk and return, where investors bear all losses while the fund company collects fees regardless of performance [12][14]. - This structure undermines the alignment of interests between the fund and its investors, with the fund benefiting at the investors' expense [14][13]. Group 4: Liquidity Issues - Private credit inherently has poor liquidity, and M Fund's structure compounds this issue, locking investors' funds [15][19]. - Historical examples show that even large institutions can face liquidity crises when overly invested in illiquid assets [15][16]. Group 5: Target Audience - Private credit may be suitable for institutional investors with long-term capital and the ability to conduct due diligence, rather than ordinary individual investors [21].