Core Insights - Insurance capital is increasingly flowing into the technology innovation sector, with over 600 billion yuan invested in technology enterprises by the end of 2024, covering advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, semiconductors, new energy, and biomedicine [1][2][4] - The long-term nature of insurance capital aligns well with the development cycles of technology industries, making it a crucial force in transforming financial momentum into technological and industrial potential [1][7] Policy Support - Recent regulatory changes have optimized solvency standards, reducing risk factors for insurance investments in strategic emerging industries and technology stocks, thereby increasing the allocation space for insurance capital [2][3] - The implementation of the "High-Quality Development Plan for Financial Technology" encourages insurance institutions to diversify their investment tools and increase support for venture capital [3][4] Investment Strategies - Insurance capital is utilizing a dual approach of direct and indirect investments to support technology innovation, injecting capital into mature and growth-stage technology companies while also participating as limited partners in venture capital and private equity funds [4][5] - The long investment horizon and large scale of insurance capital are well-suited to the high investment demands and long cycles of technology innovation, allowing for sustained support through various investment vehicles [7][8] Market Dynamics - The technology innovation sector requires stable and continuous funding over extended periods, often 5 to 10 years, to manage technological iterations and market cultivation, which aligns with the characteristics of insurance capital [5][6] - As traditional investment channels face pressure from declining interest rates, insurance capital is seeking diversified and promising investment directions, with long-term equity investments in technology companies being a strategic choice [7][8]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the increasing interest of financial institutions in promoting alternative assets to individual investors, highlighting the potential for significant asset growth and management fee income if they can expand beyond institutional investors [1][2]. Group 1: Characteristics of Alternative Assets - Alternative assets, including hedge funds, venture capital, private equity, non-traded real estate, private credit, and infrastructure, are generally considered high-risk and misleading, with high fees, lack of transparency, and low liquidity, making them unsuitable for average investors [2][3]. - Private equity, as an example of alternative investment, is often perceived as lower risk due to infrequent price updates, leading to a false sense of security among investors [3][4]. Group 2: Fees and Transparency - The management fees for alternative assets can be exorbitantly high, often exceeding 7%, compared to as low as 0.04% for ETFs, which can significantly erode net returns for investors [5][6]. - The complexity of calculating returns and fees in private equity can make it challenging for even professional investors to fully understand, let alone individual investors [6]. Group 3: Liquidity Issues - Unlike publicly traded ETFs, private equity and most alternative assets typically have long redemption lock-up periods, which can lead to liquidity challenges for individual investors [7]. - Many private equity funds allow monthly subscriptions but restrict redemptions, which can create "redemption congestion" during high demand periods, making these assets more suitable for institutional investors with stable cash flows [7][8]. Group 4: Performance Comparison - Even top-performing university endowment funds, which have access to elite alternative asset managers, have reported lower annualized median returns compared to simple, low-cost index ETFs, with a median return of 6.7% over the past decade compared to 12.8% for the S&P 500 [8]. - The current landscape shows that many institutional investors are facing redemption challenges with private equity holdings, indicating that individual investors may inadvertently take on illiquid assets that institutions are struggling to exit [8].

| 11 2017 11:55 PM 11 | 24 | CT OU 70 23 4470 | 48.51 | alled the said to the comments of the comments of the comments of the within the within with the with the with the with the with the with the with the with the with the ware | 2 ind 1 1 1 1 1 11 - | 603 | 231 | 660 | 174 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 67.59 | 23 = 11 30 | 224 | 4.93 | o ose the 1 Plus 1 The ...