"买基金就是买基金经理"，这句曾被奉为圭臬的投资信条，如今正面临前所未有的挑战。 一方面，部分在上一轮牛市中登顶"神坛"的明星基金经理，其产品业绩一度大幅回撤，至今仍未回本，投资者纷纷对明 星基金经理去魅；另一方面，近年来行业内掀起了一股明星基金经理的离职潮，他们或奔向私募，或暂别投研一线，给 持有人和所在的公司带来了巨大的不确定性；值得一提的是，以ETF为代表的指数化投资浪潮汹涌而至，凭借其低费率、 高透明度和分散化的优势，不仅侵蚀着主动权益基金的领地，更挑战着主动基金经理的地位。 在多重夹击下，监管层多次强调行业要"回归本源"，摒弃"明星基金经理现象"；基金公司则纷纷探索"团队作战"的新模 式，力求以更持续、更稳定的方式为投资者创造价值。这场深刻的变革，不仅关系到基金公司的未来竞争力，更将重塑 整个行业的生态格局。 投资者对明星基金经理 祛魅 "如果要问今年业绩最好的基金经理，很多人不知道具体姓名，只是大概知道来自哪家公司，是什么投资风格。"华东一 位公募人士直言，"这和以往的牛市有很大区别，说明现在明星经理的光环已经明显弱化。" 回溯上一轮牛市，2019年至2021年初，消费、医药、新能源等赛道行情火爆 ...

截至8月29日，全市场共有817只主动权益基金（以普通股票基金和偏股混合基金为统计口径，不同份额合并统计，下 同）累计净值在1元以下，其中有726只基金成立于2020年至2022年期间，占比超过88%。 那三年里，权益市场出现过消费白酒、医药、新能源等极致赛道行情，高位发行的多只大规模"爆款"基金在随后的下跌 中受到重创，至今仍未恢复。 最新发布的2025年基金中报数据显示，和成立时相比，这些基金的整体规模和持有人均出现明显减少。其中，648只偏股 权益基金的规模缩水逾万亿元，持有人户数从5111.53万下降到2405.36万户，降幅超过50%。 业内人士表示，今年以来，创新药等主题基金迎来新一轮上涨。对于当下热门的赛道类基金，投资者切不可一味追涨， 防止被套。 年内涨幅显著，成立以来依然浮亏 根据Wind统计，截至8月29日，全市场有94只普通股票型基金的最新累计净值在1元以下。这94只基金中，有78只成立于 2020年至2022年三年间，占比达到82.98%。 具体看，有三只募集规模在160亿元以上，出自华南和上海的三家头部公募。其中一只名为开放视野的基金在2020年7月 成立时，募集规模接近170亿元。 ...

Core Insights - The public fund industry is experiencing an unprecedented "talent migration" in 2025, with 231 fund managers leaving their positions, marking a five-year high [2] - The departure trend is characterized by a significant increase in well-known fund managers and a prevailing shift from public to private funds [2][5] Group 1: Talent Migration - A total of 231 fund managers have left 108 public fund institutions this year, surpassing the 210 departures in the same period of 2024 and reaching the highest level since 2018 [2] - Notable fund managers such as Zhai Xiangdong, Bao Wuke, and Zhou Haidong have transitioned from public to private fund sectors [2] - Eight companies, including Yongying Fund and Shenwan Hongyuan Fund, reported more than five departures each [2] Group 2: Industry Changes - The transformation of the public fund industry ecosystem is a core driver of talent outflow, influenced by regulatory changes aimed at reducing reliance on star managers [2] - The reform of the public fund compensation system is accelerating, with new regulations linking fund manager pay to long-term performance and prohibiting short-term incentives [2] Group 3: Private Fund Dynamics - Private funds offer a more flexible incentive mechanism, with an average commission rate of 15%-20%, compared to the 3%-5% management fee split in public funds [3] - Among the 863 private fund managers with public backgrounds, only 36 work for firms managing over 10 billion, indicating a pyramid-like distribution and challenges for star managers in the private sector [3] - The market environment is changing, with a 3.2% average return for private funds this year, compared to 4.8% for public equity mixed funds [3] Group 4: Differentiated Strategies - Some former public fund managers are exploring differentiated paths, such as forming teams to create private funds focused on "fixed income plus" strategies, leveraging their previous collaborative research experience [4] Group 5: Industry Evolution - The talent migration is reshaping the competitive landscape of China's asset management industry, with public funds moving towards a more robust research and investment system [5] - The entry of star fund managers into private funds brings brand effects but also management risks [5] - The industry is moving towards a more rational development cycle, emphasizing the stability of research systems and the sustainability of investment strategies over the allure of star managers [5]

Core Viewpoint - The public fund industry is accelerating the trend of "de-starring" fund managers, with an increasing number of co-managed products emerging, reflecting a shift towards team collaboration among fund managers [2][3]. Group 1: Fund Manager Changes - Since July, 109 public fund institutions have seen changes in over 400 fund products, indicating a significant turnover in fund management [1][2]. - As of July 30, 457 fund products have experienced changes in fund managers, covering various types such as passive index funds and mixed equity funds [2]. - The changes in fund managers are primarily categorized into dismissals and new appointments, with a trend towards co-management for complementary advantages [2]. Group 2: Advantages of Co-Management - Co-management of fund products is seen to reduce decision-making biases, enhance decision-making scientificity, and support stable fund operations [1][3]. - The team management approach allows for broader asset coverage, risk diversification, and mitigates the impact of individual decision-making errors [3]. - The "old brings new" model in co-management is beneficial for building talent pipelines within institutions [3]. Group 3: Expanding Investment Capabilities - Fund managers are encouraged to expand their investment capabilities to better capture industry rotation opportunities, especially in a rapidly changing market [4]. - For instance, a fund manager who previously focused on the renewable energy sector has diversified into new consumer and internet sectors, indicating a shift in strategy [4]. - The core competencies of fund managers are identified as stock selection ability, continuous tracking of corporate dynamics, and deep value assessment capabilities, which are crucial for long-term competitive advantage [4].

Group 1 - The core point of the news revolves around the speculation regarding the departure of star fund manager Zhai Xiangdong following the announcement of the appointment of a co-manager, Lu Wenkai, for the fund "Zhaoshang Advantage Enterprise Mixed" [2][5] - Zhai Xiangdong's management performance has been notable, achieving a return of 115.81% since taking over the fund in April 2022, with the fund's scale growing from less than 40 million to over 10 billion by Q4 2024 [3] - However, the fund's scale decreased by nearly 20% from 10 billion to 8 billion in Q2 2025 due to underperformance in certain sectors, which Zhai attributed to not participating in high-performing segments [3] Group 2 - The personnel changes at Zhaoshang Fund have been significant, with a new general manager and three vice presidents appointed in 2023, alongside a notable turnover of 10 fund managers, ranking fourth in the industry [4] - The industry is shifting towards a "de-starization" approach, emphasizing team-based operations over individual influence, as evidenced by the increasing number of fund managers transitioning from public to private funds [4][5] - The market's speculation about Zhai Xiangdong's potential departure is influenced by an unwritten "rule" in the industry where co-management precedes resignation, raising concerns about talent retention at Zhaoshang Fund [5]

Core Viewpoint - The public fund industry is experiencing a significant wave of fund manager changes, driven by various factors including market conditions, industry competition, incentive mechanisms, the trend of "de-starring," and personal career planning [2][12]. Group 1: Fund Manager Changes - As of June 24, nearly 200 public fund products have announced fund manager changes this month, indicating a trend of frequent adjustments within the industry [2][5]. - The changes in fund managers can be categorized into three main types: new appointments, simultaneous appointments and dismissals, and departures [6][10]. - The increase in fund manager dismissals is attributed to work needs and performance evaluations, with companies adjusting their fund manager assignments based on product style and performance benchmarks [9][11]. Group 2: Industry Changes - The public fund industry is gradually moving away from reliance on "star fund managers" and is transitioning towards a team-based and institutionalized approach [14]. - Talent mobility within the industry is accelerating, with competition shifting from mere salary comparisons to diverse dimensions such as equity incentives and differentiated assessments [14]. - The industry is evolving from extensive growth to high-quality development, emphasizing long-term performance, risk management, and effective communication with investors [14]. Group 3: Team Management Model - The implementation of a team management model for fund managers is expected to increase, as highlighted in the new regulations aimed at enhancing core investment research capabilities [15]. - The team management model allows for resource integration and improved investment quality, while also posing challenges such as decision-making conflicts and coordination costs [16][17]. - This model reduces dependency on individual fund managers and enhances the stability of performance, but it requires careful management to avoid potential pitfalls [17].

Core Viewpoint - The departure of fund manager Zhou Haidong from Huashang Fund marks a significant event in the industry, reflecting broader trends of "de-starring" and fee reform within the fund management sector [1][9]. Group 1: Zhou Haidong's Departure - Zhou Haidong has resigned from his position as fund manager for six funds due to personal reasons and will not take on any other roles within Huashang Fund [1][3]. - Zhou was recognized as a "dark horse" fund manager, achieving both performance and scale growth, with management assets exceeding 35 billion yuan at one point [1][5]. - His management style focused on a diversified investment approach, which helped him avoid losses during market downturns [7]. Group 2: Fund Management Transition - Following Zhou's departure, other experienced fund managers will take over the management of the funds he previously oversaw, ensuring continuity in management [4]. - Huashang Fund has emphasized its commitment to building a robust research and investment team, having trained a team of 65 members with an average of 8.59 years of experience [10]. Group 3: Industry Trends - The fund management industry is experiencing a shift towards index funds, which are gaining popularity due to lower fees and reduced reliance on individual fund managers [10][11]. - The trend of "de-starring" fund managers is becoming more common, with several notable fund managers leaving their positions in recent years [9]. - The industry is entering a "thin profit, high sales" phase, which may lead to a less exciting investment environment unless active equity funds can regain their footing [11].