Core Insights - Despite the active performance of sectors like technology, new consumption, and pharmaceuticals, investors have found it challenging to achieve ideal returns, with the CSI 300 index showing a mere 0.03% increase year-to-date as of June, contrasting sharply with the nearly 8% rise in the Wind Active Equity Mixed Fund Index, highlighting the scarcity of professional research capabilities in volatile markets [1] Group 1: Fund Performance - In Q2, public funds achieved a total profit of 386.3 billion yuan, with Fuqun Fund ranking fifth in the industry with a profit of 19.492 billion yuan. For the first half of the year, Fuqun Fund generated 29.832 billion yuan for investors, placing it fourth overall [2] - Fuqun Fund's active equity research strength is a core competitive advantage, with 11 of its equity funds ranking in the top 10 of their categories over the past year. Notably, Fuqun Medical Innovation Stock A and Fuqun Active Growth One-Year Regular Open Mixed Fund both exceeded 40% in returns [2][3] Group 2: Long-term Performance - Over the past five and seven years, Fuqun Fund has had 5 and 10 products, respectively, ranking in the top 10 of their categories. Fuqun New Vitality Flexible Allocation Mixed A achieved returns of 67.84% and 175.32% over the past five and seven years, respectively, ranking first in its category [4] - Fuqun Global Consumer Selection A, managed by a Hong Kong fund manager, has shown impressive long-term performance with returns of 86.16% and 70.68% over the past two and three years [3] Group 3: Fixed Income and Quantitative Strategies - In the fixed income sector, Fuqun Fund's products have maintained a "steady" approach despite market challenges. Fuqun Strong Return Regular Open Bond A achieved returns of 13.03%, 23.28%, and 45.09% over three, five, and seven years, respectively, ranking in the top 9% of its category [5] - Fuqun Fund's quantitative strategies have also performed well, with 10 of its quantitative funds ranking in the top 10 of their categories over the past year. The classic broad-based ETF, the Shanghai Composite Index ETF, has consistently ranked in the top 5 over three, five, and seven years [6]

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]