Core Viewpoint - The performance of the Invesco Great Wall Emerging Growth Fund has lagged behind the CSI 300 Index, with a year-to-date return trailing by 6 percentage points and a three-year decline of nearly 30%, reflecting a significant disconnect between the fund manager's investment style and market trends [2][3]. Group 1: Fund Performance - As of July 28, 2025, the fund's net value growth rate has fallen behind the CSI 300 Index by 6 percentage points, with a cumulative decline of approximately 30% over the past three years [3]. - The fund's top holdings, including Kweichow Moutai and Wuliangye, have not seen a deterioration in fundamentals, but the market's valuation premium has vanished, with the liquor sector's price-to-earnings ratio dropping from 40 times in 2021 to around 20 times currently [2][3]. Group 2: Market Trends - The shift in market focus towards emerging industries such as AI and low-altitude economy has diminished the attractiveness of traditional blue-chip stocks, leading to a structural underperformance of the fund [2][3]. - The stock price of Kweichow Moutai has fluctuated around 1400 yuan since peaking at 2600 yuan in February 2021, while stocks like CATL have surged over 200% during the same period [3]. Group 3: Fund Management Strategy - The fund manager's decision not to invest proprietary funds into the fund has raised concerns about confidence in future performance, contrasting with other leading public funds that have announced buybacks at market lows [4][5]. - The fund manager maintains a narrative of confidence in economic recovery, citing that once asset prices stabilize, domestic demand will rebound, but this strategy risks missing short-term opportunities and could lead to further investor attrition [5][6]. Group 4: Investment Style and Challenges - The fund's portfolio remains heavily weighted in traditional blue-chip stocks, despite some adjustments towards consumer upgrade targets, which has been characterized as "overly defensive" by industry experts [5][6]. - The broader public fund industry faces challenges in adapting to rapidly changing market dynamics, particularly for large fund managers with over 50 billion in assets under management, as they navigate the balance between investment philosophy and evolving market styles [5][6].

Core Viewpoint - The article provides a comprehensive overview of the updated active fund manager pool information, focusing on various metrics such as investment style, stock allocation, industry preference, turnover rate, valuation of major holdings, concentration of holdings, and fund size [3][32]. Group 1: Fund Manager Information - The article lists various fund managers along with their respective funds, categorized by investment style such as value, growth, and balanced [2][4]. - It highlights the experience of fund managers, indicating that many have been in the industry for several years, which is crucial for navigating different market cycles [39][41]. Group 2: Fund Metrics - The article discusses key metrics to consider when evaluating funds, including stock allocation, which typically ranges from 85% to 90% for active funds [43][44]. - It emphasizes the importance of industry preference, noting that fund managers often focus on specific sectors where they have expertise [48][50]. - The concentration of holdings is also addressed, with a higher concentration indicating greater potential volatility [53]. Group 3: Valuation and Performance Indicators - The article mentions the valuation of major holdings, suggesting that growth-style funds tend to have higher valuations compared to value-style funds [58]. - It discusses turnover rates, indicating that a turnover rate below 200% is considered low for active funds, which can be influenced by changes in fund size [61][62]. - Fund size is highlighted as a critical factor, with larger funds potentially facing challenges in achieving excess returns due to management difficulties [63][68]. Group 4: Fund Reports and Insights - The article outlines the types of periodic reports available for funds, with annual reports containing the most comprehensive information [32]. - It suggests focusing on factors that impact fund performance, such as investment style, industry preference, and the fund manager's insights on market conditions [32][66].

今年6月末，叶才接任董事长的信号就已出现，当时他已进入景顺长城基金董事会名单。一位知情人士 向《国际金融报》记者表示，这应该是景顺长城基金的正常换届。此前，新任董事长履职资格在办理手 续流程，其间由康乐暂时代理董事长职务，在流程完成后便正式上任。 又一家头部基金公司高管发生变更。 8月5日晚间，景顺长城基金发布董事长变更公告，公司新任命叶才为董事长，任职日期为8月4日。 5月29日，该公司原董事长李进因届满离任，由总经理康乐暂代其职。 资料显示，景顺长城基金成立于2003年，截至今年二季度末，旗下公募产品规模为6460.04亿元，排在 行业前20名。 新高管来自华能集团 时隔两个多月，景顺长城基金董事长一职终于落定。 根据景顺长城基金公告，出身于"华能系"的叶才于8月4日担任公司董事长一职。至此，总经理康乐不再 代理董事长一职，前任董事长李进在今年5月因任期届满离任。 资料显示，叶才曾在中国华能集团有限公司担任多个要职，曾任北方联合电力有限责任公司总会计师， 华能资本服务有限公司总经理、党委副书记，以及兼任中国华能财务有限责任公司董事、永诚财产保险 股份有限公司董事、华能天成融资租赁有限公司董事长、党委书记， ...

Core Insights - The article discusses the performance and investment strategies of Liu Yanchun, a fund manager overseeing several large-scale funds, particularly focusing on the second quarter of 2025 and the challenges faced by his flagship fund, Invesco Great Wall Emerging Growth A [1][5]. Fund Performance - Liu Yanchun manages six funds with a total scale of 36.43 billion yuan, but all have shown poor performance, with year-to-date returns mostly negative and rankings in the bottom 10%-5% of their categories [1][2]. - The flagship fund, Invesco Great Wall Emerging Growth A, has declined by 2.35% year-to-date and 5.46% in the second quarter, ranking at the bottom among its peers [1][2]. - Over the past two years, the fund has experienced a drop of over 19%, with specific declines of 20.11% for Invesco Great Wall Dingyi Mixed A and 19.31% for Invesco Great Wall Performance Growth Mixed A [1][2]. Investment Strategy - The fund's top ten holdings remain unchanged, focusing on leading companies in consumption and healthcare, including Haida Group, Kweichow Moutai, and Mindray Medical [3]. - Despite maintaining these positions, the fund has reduced its stakes in several key holdings, including Haida Group and Kweichow Moutai, indicating a cautious approach amid market volatility [3]. Economic Outlook - Liu Yanchun highlights the uneven resilience of the Chinese economy, with strong manufacturing and export performance but pressure on prices, leading to a "price for volume" scenario [5][6]. - The real estate sector continues to be a significant drag on investment, which remains in double-digit negative growth, compounded by cautious local government actions [6]. - There is an expectation of a shift in policy focus towards long-term transformation and high-quality development, with a warning about potential impacts from overseas monetary easing on China's export structure and capital market liquidity [7]. Market Sentiment - Despite ongoing challenges such as weak domestic demand and prolonged low prices, there is a growing confidence in the prospects for economic transformation, with expectations that the real estate sector's negative impact will diminish over time [7][8]. - The fund manager expresses a commitment to the equity market, particularly favoring high-quality companies that may experience valuation compression in the short term, emphasizing the importance of a company's competitive edge and management capabilities for long-term value [8].

Core Viewpoint - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) aims to address the issue of high management fees in public funds despite poor performance through a floating management fee mechanism, highlighting the industry's pain points [1] Group 1: Fund Performance and Management Fees - The fund "Guangfa High-end Manufacturing A" has the lowest three-year return at -53.01% but has collected management fees totaling 456 million yuan over the past three years [3] - "China Europe Medical Health A," with a scale of 31.179 billion yuan, has seen a decline of 32.55% in three-year performance while collecting 2.2 billion yuan in management fees [3] - Other large funds like "Jingshun Longcheng Emerging Growth A" and "Ruiyuan Growth Value A" also exhibit a pattern of larger scale, greater losses, and higher fees [3] Group 2: Fund Manager Performance - Fund manager Liu Yanchun has a three-year return index of -24.44%, significantly underperforming the CSI 300 index, with total managed assets of 41.020 billion yuan as of Q1 2024 [4] - Despite poor performance, Liu remains optimistic about future economic conditions and potential policy adjustments that could benefit the market [13] Group 3: Industry Trends and Future Outlook - The implementation of the floating management fee reform is expected to shift the focus of fund companies from merely pursuing scale to emphasizing investment returns, marking a significant industry transition [13] - The public fund industry may see a trend where stronger firms thrive while smaller institutions face accelerated elimination, making investment research capabilities and risk control systems increasingly critical [13]

Core Viewpoint - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) aims to address the issue of high management fees in public funds despite poor performance through a floating management fee mechanism, highlighting the industry's long-standing problem of "guaranteed returns" regardless of fund performance [1]. Group 1: Fund Performance and Management Fees - The report indicates that the fund "Guangfa High-end Manufacturing A" has the worst three-year return at -53.01%, while it collected management fees totaling 456 million yuan over the same period [3]. - "China Europe Medical Health A," with a scale of 31.179 billion yuan, experienced a 32.55% decline in three-year performance but still charged 2.2 billion yuan in management fees [3]. - The trend shows that larger funds tend to incur greater losses while charging higher fees, raising concerns about the reasonableness of fees relative to fund managers' performance [3][4]. Group 2: Fund Manager Performance - Fund manager Liu Gesong's funds have underperformed, with a three-year return of -27% and a two-year return of -17%, significantly lagging behind the CSI 300 index [4]. - The total assets under Liu's management decreased by 5.7% to 32.171 billion yuan as of the end of the first quarter of 2024 [4]. - The floating management fee reform may lead to a significant reduction in management fee income for fund managers like Liu, as poor performance could result in a "double whammy" effect [4]. Group 3: Industry Outlook - The CSRC's reform is expected to shift the focus of fund companies from merely pursuing scale to emphasizing investment returns, marking a significant change in the industry [11]. - The industry may witness a trend where stronger firms thrive while smaller institutions face accelerated elimination, making investment research capabilities and risk control systems increasingly critical [11]. - In the long run, more competitive products are likely to attract additional capital and new investors, benefiting investors and promoting sustainable industry development [11].

Core Viewpoint - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) aims to address the issue of high management fees in public funds despite poor performance through a floating management fee mechanism, highlighting a significant industry pain point [1] Group 1: Fund Performance and Management Fees - The fund "Guangfa High-end Manufacturing A" has the lowest three-year return at -53.01% but has collected management fees totaling 4.56 billion yuan over the past three years [3] - "China Europe Medical Health A" has a fund size of 311.79 billion yuan and a three-year performance decline of 32.55%, yet it has still charged 2.2 billion yuan in management fees [3] - The trend of larger funds experiencing greater losses while charging higher fees is evident in funds like "Jingshun Changcheng Emerging Growth A" and "Ruiyuan Growth Value A" [3] Group 2: Fund Manager Performance - Fund manager Ge Lan's funds have shown significant losses, with "China Europe Medical Health A" losing 68.33 billion yuan last year and 178.2 billion yuan in 2022, while still collecting 22 billion yuan in management fees [4] - Ge Lan's overall fund manager index return is -31.77% over three years, with a slight decrease in managed public fund size to 404.47 billion yuan [5] - The potential implementation of the floating management fee reform could drastically reduce management fee income for funds like "China Europe Medical Health A," which may lead to accelerated fund outflows if performance remains poor [5] Group 3: Future Outlook - Ge Lan maintains an optimistic outlook on the continuous breakthroughs in innovative drugs and the recovery of the consumer medical sector, despite the challenges posed by the floating management fee reform [8] - The upcoming reform may pose significant challenges for high-profile fund managers as management fees become closely tied to benchmark returns, potentially impacting their career trajectories [8]

Core Viewpoint - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) aims to reform the public fund industry by implementing a floating management fee mechanism to address the issue of high management fees despite poor fund performance [1][7]. Group 1: Fund Performance and Management Fees - The performance of equity funds over the past three years has shown a significant decline, with many funds experiencing substantial losses while still charging high management fees [1][4]. - For instance, the fund "Guangfa High-end Manufacturing A" reported a return of -53.01% over three years, yet collected management fees totaling 4.56 billion yuan during the same period [4]. - "China Europe Medical Health A," despite a 32.55% decline in net value, managed to collect 2.2 billion yuan in management fees over three years, indicating a disconnect between performance and fees [4][5]. Group 2: Impact of the Reform - The proposed floating management fee reform is expected to shift the focus of fund companies from merely pursuing scale to emphasizing investment returns, thereby aligning the interests of fund managers and investors [7]. - The reform aims to create a virtuous cycle of increased returns, inflows of funds, and market stability, which could lead to a more sustainable growth model for the industry [7]. - The CSRC's initiative is seen as a critical step towards normalizing the equity market and addressing the long-standing issue of funds profiting from poor performance [7]. Group 3: Industry Challenges - The current model has led to a situation where larger funds often incur greater losses while still charging higher fees, creating a "vicious cycle" [5][6]. - Notable fund managers, such as Guo Lan and Liu Ge Song, have seen their fund sizes shrink significantly while their performance remains below market benchmarks, raising concerns about their future management fee income [6]. - The industry is facing a transformation as it moves away from the "scale-driven" model towards a performance-driven approach, which may result in short-term challenges for fund managers [7].