Group 1: Active Equity Funds "Asset-Liability" Positive Cycle - In Q3 2025, the stock position of active equity funds rose to 87.26%, primarily driven by an increase in A-share allocation, while Hong Kong stock allocation slightly decreased but remained at historical highs [2][10] - The median performance of active funds in Q2 2025 was approximately 22.05%, marking a new quarterly high since Q2 2019, with over 75% of active funds outperforming their benchmarks [2][15] - The net outflow from active equity funds increased significantly from 91.60 billion yuan in Q2 2025 to 217.85 billion yuan in Q3 2025, indicating a growing redemption pressure [2][21] Group 2: Active Equity Fund Positioning and Performance - Active equity funds have shown a renewed concentration in holdings, particularly increasing allocations to large-cap growth and mid/small-cap value stocks, with TMT sector allocation exceeding 40%, a historical high [3][18] - The performance of top-performing funds in Q3 2025 exhibited significant exposure to growth factors, high valuations, and strong momentum, indicating a trend of "stronger getting stronger" alongside some reversal characteristics [3][19] - The proportion of active equity funds reaching new net asset value highs has significantly increased, suggesting a potential shift in the underlying assets [3][24] Group 3: "Fixed Income+" Funds - The scale of "Fixed Income+" funds continued to rise significantly in Q3 2025, with stock positions reaching relatively high levels since 2024 [3][28] - "Fixed Income+" funds also increased allocations to electronic, medical, electric new energy, and communication sectors, mirroring trends seen in active equity funds [3][30] Group 4: Individual Investors as Incremental Capital - Since October 2025, individual investors, including those participating in margin trading and personal ETFs, have remained the primary source of incremental capital in the market [4][31] - The active equity funds have experienced a decline in performance since October, with new equity fund issuance also decreasing, indicating a critical point in the quest for "pricing power" [4][33]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the report indicates that in Q2 2025, actively managed equity funds showed good performance but have not yet entered a positive "asset-liability" cycle, where good performance attracts new funds to reinforce performance trends [2][3][4] - In Q2 2025, the stock position of actively managed equity funds rose to 85.76%, with A-shares at 71.30% and Hong Kong stocks at 14.45%, continuing the trend of "reducing A and increasing Hong Kong" [2][11] - The median return for actively managed equity funds in Q2 2025 was approximately 1.8%, with over 50% of funds outperforming their benchmarks, although this proportion decreased from 72% in Q1 2025 [2][15][17] Group 2 - In Q2 2025, actively managed equity funds continued to increase their positions in mid-cap and small-cap growth stocks, as well as small-cap value stocks, while reducing positions in food and beverage, automotive, machinery, and home appliances [3][16] - The report highlights that the active funds have shifted from underweight to overweight in the telecommunications sector, while their overweight in food and beverage has dropped to the lowest level since 2017 [3][16] - The performance of actively managed equity funds continues to exhibit a "stronger gets stronger" characteristic, with top-performing funds showing significant exposure to high valuation, low dividend yield, small to mid-cap stocks, high gross margin, and low ROE [2][22][23] Group 3 - The "fixed income plus" funds also increased their allocations to financials, TMT, military, and medical sectors in Q2 2025, mirroring the trends seen in actively managed equity funds [4][29] - Since July 2025, individual investors have re-emerged as the main source of incremental funds, leading to a continued rise in the positions of actively managed equity funds and a return of capital from northbound investments [4][30] - The report notes that the overall net inflow of equity funds (both active and passive) has resumed, but the divergence between active and passive funds has widened, with active funds experiencing net outflows while passive funds saw significant inflows [2][3][4]