Investment Rating - The report maintains an "Overweight" rating for the industry [2] Core Insights - The first batch of floating management fee public funds has been launched, with approximately 70% of new products being floating fee funds, aligning with the "Action Plan for Promoting the High-Quality Development of Public Funds" [5][8] - The floating management fee model links fees to fund performance and investor holding periods, emphasizing investor protection over manager incentives [13][15] - The average management fee across the 24 floating fee funds is 1.27%, with 40% of funds charging 1.2% and 52% charging 1.5% [20] Summary by Sections 1. Floating Fee Fund Management Fee Methods and Historical Comparisons - The floating management fee structure is designed to align with fund performance, reducing fees when performance is below benchmarks and increasing fees when performance exceeds benchmarks significantly [14][15] - The historical fee rates for floating fee funds are consistent with previous fund fee structures, with a 0.2% custody fee across all funds [17] 2. Overview of Pilot Fund Companies and Fund Managers - The 25 fund managers of the floating fee funds have an average tenure of 6.51 years, with a history of managing an average of 7.08 funds [18][20] - The historical performance of these fund managers is generally better than their peers, with an average annualized return of 5.89% [20][22] 3. Comparison of Floating Fee Fund Benchmark Indices - The floating fee funds utilize 17 benchmark indices, with stock indices accounting for 79.08% of the benchmarks, primarily including the CSI 300 and CSI 800 [29][32] - The allocation to the CSI 300 has decreased compared to historical benchmarks, while allocations to the CSI 800 Growth and CSI A500 have increased [32] 4. Investment Recommendations - The report suggests focusing on underrepresented sectors such as non-bank financials, recommending stocks like New China Life Insurance and China Pacific Insurance for potential growth [36]