Core Viewpoint - The new performance evaluation guidelines for public funds shift from a framework-based approach to rigid constraints, emphasizing the priority of investor interests and addressing long-standing industry issues such as scale orientation and profit imbalance [2][5][11] Summary by Sections Performance Evaluation Guidelines - The new guidelines, titled "Performance Evaluation Management Guidelines for Fund Management Companies (Draft for Comments)," aim to enhance the performance evaluation system by quantifying assessment indicators and strengthening salary constraints [2][5] - The previous version released in June 2022 introduced innovative requirements such as deferred performance compensation and self-purchase by executives and fund managers, which received mixed reactions from the market [2][5] Key Changes in Guidelines - The core assessment focus has shifted to prioritize investor returns, with all indicators designed around "actual returns for holders" [5] - Long-term assessment requirements have transitioned from "principle-based" to "rigid constraints," mandating that long-term investment returns account for at least 80% of quantitative assessment indicators [6] - Differentiated assessment requirements for various roles have been established, with specific weightings for executives, fund managers, and sales personnel [7] - The self-purchase requirement for fund managers has increased to a minimum of 40% of their annual performance, with a holding period of at least one year [8] - A tiered salary adjustment mechanism has been introduced, linking performance directly to salary changes, with specific thresholds for reductions based on performance relative to benchmarks [9] - Shareholder dividend constraints have been formalized, requiring adjustments based on fund performance and investor losses [10] - The guidelines address internal salary distribution fairness, aiming to reduce disparities between executive and employee compensation [11] - The scope of the guidelines has been expanded to include subsidiaries and key personnel involved in public fund operations, ensuring comprehensive regulatory coverage [11] New Indicators Introduced - Five new key indicators have been introduced to provide precise quantitative measures for performance evaluation, including fund profit margin and the definition of actively managed equity funds [12][14] - The profit margin indicator measures net returns relative to average net asset value, enhancing the focus on actual profitability [12] - The definition of actively managed equity funds has been clarified to include specific fund types, ensuring rigorous assessment in high-impact areas [14] - The proportion of profitable investors is now a key metric, shifting focus from product performance to actual investor outcomes [14] - A salary total determination mechanism has been established, linking salary adjustments to various performance and operational factors [15] - Deferred payment timelines for performance compensation have been clarified, ensuring alignment with performance verification periods [15] Detailed Assessment Scenarios - The guidelines address common issues in the industry, such as fund managers managing multiple products and the potential for performance manipulation [17] - A dual-weighted assessment approach based on fund size and management duration has been introduced to ensure fair evaluations [17] - The guidelines prohibit the evasion of assessments through increased concurrent roles, promoting specialization and preventing conflicts of interest [18]