展望2026年，兴业证券表示，海外算力有望进入"空中加油"新阶段：从2026年海外算力光模块订单指引、英伟达GPU在手订单以及北美CSP厂商资本开支指 引来看，算力基础设施投入节奏仍未放缓，在过去三年高增长基础上有望实现增速提升。光模块及配套产业链或存在预期差，Blackwell推动数据中心进 入"加速兑现期"，Rubin进展顺利，1.6T光模块明年有望成为主力需求，龙头公司明年业绩有望维持高增长。 把握以光模块为核心的算力机会，建议重点关注全市场首只创业板人工智能ETF（159363）及场外联接（A类023407、C类023408），标的指数重点布局光 模块龙头"易中天"，光模块含量最新超56%。从赛道分布看，逾七成仓位布局算力，超两成仓位布局AI应用，能够高效捕捉AI主题行情。（截至 2025.11.30） 同类对比看，截至12月23日，创业板人工智能ETF华宝（159363）最新规模超38亿元，近1个月日均成交额超6亿元，在跟踪创业板人工智能指数的7只ETF 中排行第一！ 数据来源：沪深交易所等。注："全市场首只"是指首只跟踪创业板人工智能指数的ETF。 风险提示：创业板人工智能ETF华宝被动跟踪创业板 ...

Core Insights - The Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) and the iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) target developed markets outside the U.S. but differ in index rules, impacting portfolio construction [1][10] - VEA has a lower expense ratio and broader country coverage, while IEFA offers a higher dividend yield [2][4] Cost & Size Comparison - VEA has an expense ratio of 0.03% and assets under management (AUM) of $260.0 billion, while IEFA has an expense ratio of 0.07% and AUM of $160.6 billion [3][4] - The one-year return for VEA is 29.1%, compared to IEFA's 25.8%, and the dividend yield for VEA is 2.7% versus IEFA's 2.93% [3][4] Performance & Risk Metrics - Over five years, VEA's maximum drawdown is 29.71%, while IEFA's is 30.41% [5] - A $1,000 investment in VEA would grow to $1,324, while the same investment in IEFA would grow to $1,284 over five years [5] Holdings & Sector Allocations - IEFA holds 2,593 stocks with significant allocations in Financial Services (22%), Industrials (20%), and Healthcare (10%), with top positions including ASML Holding and Roche Holding [6] - VEA includes 3,873 companies, with sector weights of 24% in Financial Services, 19% in Industrials, and 11% in Technology, featuring top positions in ASML Holding and Samsung Electronics [7] Investment Implications - The choice between VEA and IEFA hinges on how investors define developed markets, with VEA including Canada and South Korea, while IEFA adheres to the MSCI EAFE framework [11]

公募年度"成绩单"即将落定 主动权益领涨2025年 长期业绩成关注重点 进入12月下旬，2025年公募年度"成绩单"也将迎来落定。统计数据显示，2025年以来，在市场整体复苏 背景下，主动权益类基金在迎来九成以上实现正回报率，39只净值"翻倍基"的同时，还"包揽"了年度排 名前列。从长期业绩来看，一批基金产品近三年内回报亮眼，在结构性行情凸显的市场中实现了稳健收 益。展望2026年，公募机构普遍认为，市场风格或迎来进一步平衡，企业盈利修复将成为核心关注要 素。（经济参考报） 股票型ETF月内净申购超400亿份 宽基ETF受资金青睐 12月份以来，股票型ETF呈现资金净买入状态，月内净申购份额达400.96亿份。在股票型ETF中，宽基 ETF受到投资者青睐。数据显示，截至12月22日，宽基ETF月内净流入金额超100亿元，达111.37亿元。 中证A500、中证500、科创50等重要宽基指数相关ETF获资金积极布局。（证券日报） 内外资共振可期 2026年中国股票或迎"增量资金潮" 近期，多家知名机构研判，2026年A股与港股市场有望迎来内外资共同驱动的"增量资金潮"。这不仅反 映了资金面的预期改善，更映射出在 ...

转自：证券时报 外资重估中国资产。 据最新消息，高盛分析师表示，预计2026年，中国企业盈利可能增长14%，2027年或将增长12%，有助 于提振中国股市表现。另外，摩根士丹利、摩根大通和瑞银近日也相继发表了对中国股票的看涨观点。 资金方面，外资正持续扫货中国资产。据华泰证券的最新报告，截至12月20日，2025年以来全球投资于 中国资产的ETF累计获得831亿美元的资金净流入。就行业分布来看，科技板块获外资流入最多，达95 亿美元，主要来自美国和欧洲地区。 高盛最新预判 华泰证券在最新发布的研究报告中指出，2025年以来，外资显著流入中国科技资产ETF，尤其是科技板 块。 报告显示，截至12月20日，2025年以来全球投资于中国资产的ETF累计获得831亿美元的资金净流入。 其中，境内ETF累计获资金流入786亿美元，境外ETF则累计净流入约45亿美元。从总体数值来看，外 资买入中国资产占比较小；然而，就内部分化情况来看，2025年以来外资对境内资产的配置存在显著倾 向性：就行业分布来看，科技板块获外资流入最多，达95亿美元，主要来自美国和欧洲地区；就具体产 品而言，外资流入排名前10的ETF中有六只为科技 ...

Key Points VCLT charges a lower expense ratio and offers a higher yield than LQD LQD has outperformed VCLT over the past year and experienced a smaller five-year drawdown VCLT holds far fewer bonds, with sector tilts and an ESG screen, while LQD is much broader These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › The iShares iBoxx Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) and the Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF (VCLT) differ most in cost, yield, sector exposure, and risk profile, wit ...

- The report does not contain any quantitative models or factors related to quantitative finance[1][2][3]

Core Insights - The Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) and Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) both target U.S. companies with above-average dividend yields but differ in their strategies and characteristics [1][2]. Cost and Size Comparison - FDVV has an expense ratio of 0.15% and assets under management (AUM) of $7.7 billion, while VYM has a lower expense ratio of 0.06% and AUM of $84.6 billion [3]. - As of December 18, 2025, FDVV's one-year return is 10.62% compared to VYM's 9.99%, and FDVV offers a higher dividend yield of 3.02% versus VYM's 2.42% [3]. Performance and Risk Analysis - Over the past five years, FDVV experienced a maximum drawdown of -20.17%, while VYM had a drawdown of -15.87% [4]. - An investment of $1,000 in FDVV would grow to $1,754 over five years, compared to $1,567 for VYM [4]. Portfolio Composition - VYM tracks the FTSE High Dividend Yield Index with 566 holdings, primarily in financial services (21%), technology (18%), and healthcare (13%), featuring top stocks like Broadcom, JPMorgan Chase, and Exxon Mobil [5]. - FDVV has a more concentrated portfolio with 107 holdings, focusing heavily on technology (26%) and consumer defensive (12%) sectors, with major positions in Nvidia, Microsoft, and Apple [6]. Investment Implications - While FDVV offers a higher dividend yield, its higher expense ratio may offset some income benefits, making the net earnings from both funds relatively similar for most investors [7][8]. - The sector allocation indicates that VYM is more stable due to its focus on financial services, whereas FDVV's heavier tech exposure may lead to higher volatility and potential returns [9][10].

Core Insights - The Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF (VOOG) focuses on growth stocks within the S&P 500, while the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) tracks the entire S&P 500 index [2][10] Cost & Size Comparison - VOOG has an expense ratio of 0.07% and VOO has a lower expense ratio of 0.03% - As of December 17, 2025, VOOG's one-year return is 13.67% compared to VOO's 10.73% - VOO offers a higher dividend yield of 1.12% versus VOOG's 0.48% - VOOG has an AUM of $21.7 billion, while VOO has a significantly larger AUM of $1.5 trillion [3][4] Performance & Risk Comparison - Over five years, VOOG has a maximum drawdown of -32.74%, while VOO's is -24.53% - A $1,000 investment in VOOG would grow to $1,904 over five years, compared to $1,816 for VOO [5] Holdings & Sector Exposure - VOO holds all 505 stocks in the S&P 500, with a sector exposure led by technology at 37% - Top holdings in VOO include Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft, providing broad market exposure [6] - VOOG focuses on 217 growth-oriented stocks, with a heavier tilt toward technology at 45%, leading to higher returns but also increased volatility [7][11] Implications for Investors - VOOG has delivered higher one-year and five-year total returns but comes with deeper drawdowns and more volatility compared to VOO - VOO is broader, more diversified, and offers a higher dividend yield at a lower expense ratio - VOOG's concentration in growth names may lead to higher returns, but it also results in less diversification [9][11]

Core Insights - The Vanguard Small-Cap Value ETF (VBR) and iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) differ significantly in expense ratios, sector exposures, and recent performance, with IWN showing greater exposure to financials and a higher one-year return [2][3]. Cost & Size Comparison - VBR has an expense ratio of 0.07%, significantly lower than IWN's 0.24% - The one-year return for VBR is 10.1%, while IWN's is 14.5% - VBR offers a higher dividend yield of 1.97% compared to IWN's 1.57% - VBR has an AUM of $59.6 billion, whereas IWN has $11.8 billion [4][5]. Performance & Risk Analysis - Over five years, VBR has a max drawdown of -24.2%, while IWN's is -26.7% - An investment of $1,000 in VBR would grow to $1,687 over five years, compared to $1,555 for IWN [6]. Portfolio Composition - IWN tracks 1,407 U.S. small-cap stocks, with 26% in financial services, 12% in real estate, and 11% in industrials [7]. - VBR holds 841 stocks, with a focus on industrials (19%), financial services (18%), and consumer cyclicals (13%) [8]. Historical Performance - Since 2004, VBR has generated annualized total returns of 9.2%, outperforming IWN's 7.8% [10].

Subtle differences in cost, holdings, and risk profiles set these two emerging markets ETFs apart for globally minded investors.Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO +1.07%) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG +1.05%) differ on expense ratio, the number of holdings, and recent performance, with VMO offering broader stock coverage, while IEMG has delivered stronger one-year returns.Both VWO and IEMG are large, highly liquid exchange-traded funds tracking emerging market stocks, aiming to provi ...