90%基金用错基准？你看到的“超额”可能只是假象

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of using appropriate performance benchmarks for funds, highlighting that many funds currently use price indices, which may misrepresent their performance compared to total return indices [1][22][49]. Group 1: Investment Returns - Investment returns primarily come from three components: price returns, dividend returns, and reinvestment returns [3][4][5]. - Price returns reflect market price changes, while dividend returns include cash earnings from stocks and bonds, and reinvestment returns generate additional earnings through compounding [3][4][5]. Group 2: Impact of Dividends on Returns - The difference in returns between price indices and total return indices is significant; over the past 20 years, the annualized return for the CSI All Share Total Return Index was 10.84%, compared to 9.31% for the price index [15]. - In bond investments, the annualized return for the CSI Comprehensive Bond Wealth Index was 4.19%, while the net price index only yielded 0.39% [15]. - The contribution of dividends and reinvestment to total returns is substantial, accounting for approximately 30% of stock investment returns and over 90% of bond investment returns over the past 20 years [19]. Group 3: Inappropriate Benchmark Selection - Approximately 75% of funds use price indices as their performance benchmarks, which is inappropriate since fund returns are essentially total returns [22][25]. - The issue is particularly pronounced in equity and mixed funds, with almost no funds using total return indices as benchmarks [25]. Group 4: Lowered "Passing Line" - Using price indices as benchmarks lowers the difficulty of outperforming the benchmark, creating a misleading perception of fund performance [30]. - For instance, 68% of actively managed equity funds outperformed the CSI 300 price index over the past five years, but this figure dropped to 55% when using the total return index [30]. Group 5: "Inflated" Excess Returns - Many index funds and ETFs appear to generate excess returns compared to their benchmarks, but this is largely due to the use of price indices, which overlook dividends and reinvestment [37][40]. - If benchmarks were switched to total return indices, many funds' reported excess returns would significantly decrease or even disappear [40]. Group 6: Need for More Standardized Benchmark Usage - The article calls for the industry to adopt total return indices as performance benchmarks to provide a clearer and more objective assessment of fund performance [49][50]. - The current regulatory focus aims to enhance the role of performance benchmarks in determining product positioning, clarifying investment strategies, and measuring performance [49][50].