Core Insights - The recent performance of active equity funds has been under scrutiny, with over 38% of these funds still in losses over the past five years despite a significant number achieving positive returns since 2025 [1][2][3] - Key factors contributing to the underperformance include high-level accumulation, frequent trading, and reliance on specific sectors, which have eroded fund values [1][5][7] Performance Overview - As of November 10, 2025, the Shanghai Composite Index has risen by 19.42%, while 97.45% of active equity funds reported positive returns [2][3] - However, 1019 active equity funds remain in losses, with 38% of the total, indicating a stark contrast in performance for investors who entered the market earlier [1][2] Fund Performance Analysis - Among the 2695 active equity funds with over five years of existence, 1676 have achieved positive returns, with six funds reporting over 200% returns [3] - Conversely, nearly 40% of active equity funds have not turned a profit in five years, with some funds experiencing maximum drawdowns starting in 2021 [3][4] Underperforming Funds - Notable underperformers include funds managed by well-known managers, with losses exceeding 30% over five years [4] - Specific funds like Tianzhi New Consumption and Fangzheng Fubang Innovation Power have reported losses of -65.25% and -62.32%, respectively [3][4] Trading Behavior - High average stock positions during market peaks have been linked to poor long-term performance, with funds showing an average stock position of 84.22% during critical periods [5][6] - Frequent trading has also negatively impacted fund performance, with an average turnover rate of 460.71% across all active equity funds, rising to 508.45% for those with over 30% losses [7][8] Sector Reliance - Many funds have shown over-reliance on traditional sectors, leading to underperformance despite being labeled as "new" or "growth" funds [8][9] - Funds like Tianzhi New Consumption and Invesco Great Wall New Growth have shifted their holdings but still struggle to achieve positive returns [8][9] Market Outlook - The active equity fund market is seeing a resurgence, with 1354 new funds launched in 2025, indicating renewed investor interest [11] - Fund managers are advised to focus on sectors with long-term growth potential, such as high-end manufacturing and new consumption, while being cautious of market volatility [12]

Core Insights - The article highlights the performance of active equity funds in the context of the Shanghai Composite Index surpassing 4000 points for the first time in a decade, revealing that over 97% of these funds achieved positive returns since 2025, yet 38% remain in losses over the past five years [1][2][3] - Key reasons for the underperformance of many active funds include high-level accumulation, frequent trading, and reliance on specific sectors, which have eroded fund values [1][5][6] Performance Overview - As of November 10, the Shanghai Composite Index closed at 4018 points, marking a significant recovery, with major indices like the Shenzhen Composite and ChiNext Index showing gains of 27.6% and 46.35% respectively since 2025 [2] - Despite a high percentage of active equity funds showing positive returns in 2023, the long-term performance reveals a stark contrast, with many investors experiencing losses since entering the market around the end of 2020 [2][3] Fund Performance Analysis - Among the 2695 active equity funds with over five years of existence, 1676 have achieved positive returns, while nearly 40% remain unprofitable, with some funds experiencing drawdowns exceeding 50% [3][4] - Notable underperformers include funds managed by well-known managers, indicating that even established names are not immune to market challenges [4] Causes of Underperformance - High-level accumulation during market peaks has been identified as a significant factor contributing to the long-term underperformance of active equity funds [5][6] - Frequent trading has also negatively impacted fund performance, with average turnover rates for underperforming funds significantly higher than the market average [7][8] Market Trends and Future Outlook - The article notes a shift in investor sentiment towards active management products, with a notable increase in the number of newly established funds and a doubling of issuance scale compared to the previous year [11] - Fund managers are advised to focus on sectors with long-term growth potential, such as high-end manufacturing and new consumption, while being cautious of over-reliance on specific themes or sectors [12]

Core Viewpoint - The new regulations on performance benchmarks for public funds in China aim to enhance the accountability of fund managers by linking their compensation to the performance benchmarks, promoting a return to the fundamental purpose of asset management, which is to provide stable long-term returns for investors [1][9]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) released an action plan in May to promote high-quality development in the public fund industry, emphasizing the importance of performance benchmarks [1]. - A draft of new regulations regarding performance benchmarks was published on October 31, which is expected to improve the discipline of active investment and stabilize investment styles [1][9]. - The introduction of a performance benchmark element library aims to standardize the selection of benchmarks and prevent arbitrary changes, enhancing the comparability and normativity of benchmarks [9][8]. Group 2: Fund Performance Analysis - As of November 4, 2023, 3731 active equity funds were analyzed, with an average return that lagged behind their benchmarks by 7.26%, and only 34% of these funds outperformed their benchmarks over the past three years [2]. - Among the top-performing funds, only 20 funds achieved over 100% excess returns, indicating that achieving superior performance under the new standards is challenging [2]. - Some high-performing funds may have misleadingly high returns due to benchmark mismatches, highlighting the importance of appropriate benchmark selection [2][3]. Group 3: Size and Performance Correlation - Larger active equity funds do not necessarily correlate with superior excess returns; only 40% of funds over 10 billion yuan in size outperformed their benchmarks [5]. - Smaller funds, with an average size of 30.57 million yuan, showed better excess return capabilities, supporting the notion that smaller funds can adapt more flexibly to market changes [6][5]. Group 4: Fund Manager Impact - The total management scale of fund managers influences their active management capabilities, with a significant number of successful funds managed by managers overseeing over 10 billion yuan [7]. - The average tenure of fund managers does not significantly correlate with their ability to generate excess returns, indicating that experience alone may not guarantee performance [7]. Group 5: Industry Evolution - The new regulations are expected to lead to a systematic restructuring of the public fund industry, with a one-year transition period for existing products to adjust their benchmarks [9][10]. - The emphasis on long-term performance and the establishment of a benchmark-linked compensation system for fund managers will promote more transparent and standardized investment behaviors [9][10].

Core Insights - The article discusses the performance of actively managed equity funds by various fund companies in China over different time frames, highlighting the top performers and their strategies in navigating market fluctuations [2][3]. Long-term Performance (Last 10 Years) - From October 1, 2015, to September 30, 2025, the top three fund companies in absolute returns are: - Caitong Fund with a return of 318.00% [5][6] - Wanji Fund with a return of 272.77% [7] - Yinhua Fund with a return of 240.05% [7] - The average return for equity funds over the last ten years was 318.00%, with larger fund companies outperforming smaller ones [7][12]. Medium-term Performance (Last 5 Years) - From October 1, 2020, to September 30, 2025, Dongwu Fund led with an average return of 161.33% [15][19]. - Other notable performers include Jinyuan Shun'an Fund with 126.99% and Huashang Fund with 120.39% [16][19]. - The average returns for large, medium, and small fund companies were 17.42%, 41.11%, and 27.31%, respectively [20]. Short-term Performance (Last 3 Years) - From October 1, 2022, to September 30, 2025, Dongwu Fund again topped the list with an average return of 121.85% [23][25]. - Huayuan Yuanda and Debang followed with returns of 119.57% and 85.28% [23][25]. - The average returns for large, medium, and small fund companies during this period were 19.08%, 27.20%, and 21.32%, respectively [27]. Recent Performance (First Three Quarters of 2025) - In the first three quarters of 2025, the best-performing fund company was Kaishi Fund with a return of 106.42% [29][30]. - Other strong performers included Zhonghang, Dongwu, and Hongtu Innovation, all exceeding 60% returns [29][30].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the news is the introduction of a new policy by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) aimed at enhancing the long-term performance of public fund managers by linking their compensation to the performance of their funds relative to benchmarks [2][3] - The policy targets fund managers whose products have underperformed their benchmarks by more than 10 percentage points over three years, leading to a significant reduction in their performance-based compensation [2][3] - The initiative is expected to align the interests of fund managers with those of investors, encouraging a shift away from short-term speculation towards a focus on long-term investment capabilities [2][3] Group 2 - As of May 21, 2023, there are 5,898 public funds managed by fund managers with over three years of experience, with 1,341 funds underperforming their benchmarks by over 10 percentage points [3][4] - Among these, 31 funds have underperformed their benchmarks by more than 50 percentage points, including notable funds managed by well-known managers such as Zheng Chengran from GF Fund and Yao Zhipeng from Harvest Fund [3][4][5] - The worst-performing fund, Morgan Small Cap A, managed by Guo Chen, has a cumulative return of -23.03% over three years, underperforming its benchmark by 127.69 percentage points [4][5] Group 3 - Conversely, there are 543 funds that have outperformed their benchmarks by over 10 percentage points, with 33 funds exceeding their benchmarks by more than 50 percentage points [7][9] - The top-performing fund, Huaxia North Exchange Innovation Small and Medium Enterprises Selected Fund, managed by Gu Xin Feng, achieved a cumulative return of 194.13%, surpassing its benchmark by 175.89 percentage points [9][10] - The North Exchange theme funds have emerged as a significant area for excess returns, with several funds exceeding their benchmarks by over 60 percentage points [10] Group 4 - In response to the new policy, many fund companies are adjusting their performance benchmarks to better reflect the risk-return characteristics of their funds [11][12] - Recent adjustments include changes to benchmarks for various funds, such as the adjustment of the performance benchmark for the浦银安盛稳健增利债券 from "CSI All Bond Index" to a more complex composite benchmark [11][12] - The trend of benchmark adjustments is expected to continue as fund companies seek to align their performance metrics with regulatory expectations and improve their competitive positioning [13][14]