Core Insights - The article discusses the concept of arbitrage between off-market and on-market funds, emphasizing that not all off-market funds can be converted to on-market for profit. Successful arbitrage requires selecting the right funds with both "off-market subscription and redemption" and "on-market trading" attributes [1] Group 1: Fund Types and Selection Criteria - LOF funds (Listed Open-Ended Funds) are highlighted as the primary targets for off-market to on-market arbitrage, suitable for individual investors due to their dual functionality [3] - Key selection criteria for LOF funds include: 1. Support for transfer custody, prioritizing A shares as C shares often do not allow on-market trading [3] 2. Presence of arbitrage space, with a recommended premium rate of 2%-3% to cover costs [3] 3. Sufficient liquidity, with daily trading volume exceeding 10 million yuan to avoid difficulties in selling [3] Group 2: Case Studies and Practical Tips - A recent example is the Guotou Ruijin Silver Futures LOF (161226), which saw a peak premium rate exceeding 57%, allowing investors to profit from the price difference after purchasing at net value [3] - Practical tips for LOF arbitrage include prioritizing "premium arbitrage" (off-market subscription followed by on-market sale) and avoiding "discount arbitrage" due to high redemption fees [3] Group 3: ETF and QDII Fund Insights - ETFs can only be traded on-market, but ETF-linked funds allow indirect participation through off-market subscription and on-market trading, leveraging price differences [4] - For QDII funds operating as LOFs, high premium rates can occur due to foreign exchange limits, with an example showing a premium rate of 25.9% [5] Group 4: Cost and Risk Management - Investors must calculate costs to ensure profits exceed subscription fees and commissions, with a warning that low premium rates (below 2%) likely lead to losses [6] - Time risk is significant, as the period from subscription to sale can lead to changes in premium rates, potentially erasing profit opportunities [6] - It is crucial for the off-market fund account and securities account to have matching identification information for successful transfer custody [6]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the concept of "offshore fund arbitrage," emphasizing that it is not a speculative tactic but a strategy to profit from price differences or time windows in fund trading rules. Group 1: Offshore Fund Arbitrage - Offshore fund arbitrage is based on the principle of "buy low, sell high" or "earning time differences through rules," but it is important to note that there is no risk-free arbitrage [1]. - All operations must account for costs and control risks, ensuring that profits exceed costs before proceeding [1]. Group 2: LOF Fund Arbitrage - The easiest arbitrage method for individual investors involves LOF funds (Listed Open-Ended Funds), which can be traded both off-market at net value and on-market at market price [3]. - When the on-market trading price exceeds the off-market net value, a "premium arbitrage" opportunity arises, allowing investors to buy low off-market and sell high on-market for profit [3]. Group 3: Practical Steps for LOF Arbitrage - Step 1: Select targets by using tools like Jisilu to find LOF funds with a premium rate of at least 3% and a daily trading volume over 10 million, avoiding those with suspended subscriptions [4]. - Step 2: Purchase the selected LOF A shares through platforms like Alipay or Tian Tian Fund, and after confirmation (usually T+2 days), initiate a "cross-system transfer" to a brokerage [4]. - Step 3: After the transfer application is submitted, the shares will arrive in the securities account on T+2 days, and investors can sell them like stocks [5]. Group 4: Example of LOF Arbitrage - An example is provided where a certain S&P 500 LOF has a premium rate of 25.9%, with an off-market purchase net value of 1 yuan and an on-market trading price of 1.259 yuan, leading to a potential profit of approximately 0.2 yuan per 1 yuan invested after deducting fees [6]. Group 5: ETF Arbitrage - ETF arbitrage was traditionally exclusive to institutions, but individual investors can participate through offshore ETF linked funds, which invest primarily in corresponding ETFs [7]. - The core logic involves taking advantage of the lag in net value response of linked funds when ETFs are at a premium or discount [7]. Group 6: Directions for ETF Arbitrage - Premium arbitrage occurs when the on-market price of an ETF exceeds its net value, allowing for off-market purchases of linked funds, followed by redemption for profit once the net value rises [8]. - Discount arbitrage happens when the on-market price is lower than the net value, allowing for redemption of linked funds and re-purchase at a lower net value for profit [9]. Group 7: Key Considerations for Arbitrage - It is crucial to calculate costs accurately, ensuring that arbitrage profits cover all fees, as a premium rate below 3% may lead to losses [11]. - Control time risks, as the transfer and confirmation processes require time, during which market fluctuations may erode profit margins [12]. - Confirm liquidity by selecting LOF/ETF targets with high daily trading volumes to avoid difficulties in selling once transferred to the market [13]. - Adhere to rules, ensuring accounts are in the same name and that shares are in whole numbers during transfers to avoid arbitrage failures [14]. - Avoid excessive greed; new investors are advised to start with small amounts to familiarize themselves with the process before scaling up [15].

来源：Y趣理说 港股昨日下午进入圣诞假期，暂停交易。但是内地ETF正常交易，我们看到部分港股ETF出现了较高的 溢价。同时部分场外买联接基金的投资者就发现，ETF联接的涨幅似乎跟不上场内ETF，究竟是怎么回 事？ 为什么ETF联接和ETF的涨跌会有差异？ ETF有净值和交易价格两个价格指标，而ETF联接的净值确认依据ETF的净值，所以ETF联接基金的涨 跌幅以ETF的净值涨跌幅为基准，而非ETF交易价格的涨跌。 当市场情绪高涨，ETF的交易价格很有可能会大于IOPV，这时候，ETF的价格涨幅就会高于净值的涨 幅，自然也会高于ETF联接基金的净值涨幅。 其次，又因为ETF联接对指数是间接跟踪，仓位限制和资金申赎也会导致ETF联接和ETF的涨跌幅差 异，具体来看： 仓位限制：作为场外基金，ETF联接需要留有部分现金来应对投资者的赎回，所以仓位一般不会超过 95%，就造成了ETF联接与ETF表现的差异； 资金申赎：当行情火热时，当日申购联接基金的资金可能没办法立即投入到ETF中，而联接基金的净值 又会因为份额的增加被分摊，涨幅就可能跟不上标的ETF。 跨境ETF联接是否更为特殊？ 整体而言，ETF联接基金和ETF的 ...

一、交易提示 年末指数震荡，商业航天、可控核聚变、无人驾驶、海南自贸港、新零售等概念却批量创新高，呈现"一半是海水，一半是 火焰"的极端分化。资金调仓叠加产业事件催化造就主题狂欢，策略上有的顺势追趋势，有的坚守低估值，共识在于以AI为 核心的产业机遇值得多层次提前布局，等待盈利与估值的再平衡。 12月24日,A股三大股指早盘窄幅震荡,午后有所回升,截止收盘,沪指涨0.53%报3940.95点,深成指涨0.88%报13486.42点,创业板 指涨0.77%报3229.58点,科创50指数涨0.9%报1352.13点;沪深两市成交额1.88万亿,全市场超4100只个股上涨。 二、基金要闻 （1）12月24日新发基金共有5只，主要为股票型基金和ETF联接基金基金，其中易方达中证800指数增强A募集目标金额达 80.00亿元；基金分红28只，多为债券型，派发红利最多的基金是景顺长城中证500指数增强型证券投资基金，每10份基金 份额派发红利2.5760元。 （4）全球配置需求升温，跨境ETF继续"一马当先"。截至12月18日，全市场跨境ETF总规模9241亿元，较年初翻至1.18 倍，占被动权益产品增量首位。火热申购 ...

随着利好政策接连落地，商业航天热度持续升温。截至12月19日收盘，近一年来，国证航天航空指数涨幅达22.79%。 嗅觉敏锐的公募基金早已提前卡位。Wind数据显示，截至10月29日，全市场已成立23只航空航天主题基金，包括14只ETF（交易型开放式指数基金）、7 只ETF联接基金、2只普通指数基金。 目前仍有一些上报等待获批和成立的基金。根据证监会官网消息，截至11月17日，年内共有33只航空主题基金完成了上报。 图片截自：证监会官网 按照目前已成立的航空航天主题基金计算，规模合计近60亿元，单只基金最大规模为21.38亿元。虽然整体规模仍小，但多家公募已在今年抢先落子，明 年赛道仍有可观的想象空间。 业内人士表示，政策持续催化、技术加速突破，航空航天主题投资吸睛十足。商业航天板块有望延续高景气，但仍需警惕技术落地不及预期及国际竞争加 剧的风险。 公募抢占新赛道 航空航天赛道正逐渐"挤满"公募的主题基金。数据显示，截至10月29日，今年市场新成立了23只航空航天主题基金，包括普通指数基金、ETF、ETF联接 基金。其中，ETF数量占比最多，共有14只；ETF联接基金共有7只；普通指数基金共有2只。 具体来看， ...

Core Viewpoint - The Chinese public fund issuance market is experiencing a significant recovery and structural characteristics in 2025, driven by policy guidance and market demand, with a notable increase in the number of new non-money market funds and a shift towards equity funds as the main focus of new issuances [1][3]. Group 1: Market Performance - As of December 4, 2025, the total number of new non-money market funds reached 1,476, a substantial increase from 1,134 in 2024, marking a three-year high [1]. - Among the new issuances, equity funds (including stock funds and mixed funds with at least 70% equity allocation) accounted for 1,066 new products, up 47.9% from 721 in 2024 [1]. - The issuance of bond funds (including bond funds and mixed funds with at least 50% bond allocation) remained stable at 360, compared to 366 in 2024 [1]. Group 2: Differentiation in New Issuance - There is a clear differentiation in new issuance performance between leading and smaller fund companies, with top firms capturing nearly half of the total new issuance volume and initial scale [5][6]. - Leading fund companies, such as Huaxia Fund, Fuguo Fund, and Yifangda Fund, dominate the market with 71, 60, and 54 new products respectively, significantly exceeding the industry average of 11 new products [7][9]. - Smaller fund companies typically adopt a focused strategy, averaging around 4 new products, concentrating on specific asset types or niche areas to differentiate themselves [9]. Group 3: Active vs. Passive Fund Dynamics - In 2025, passive products, particularly ETFs, became a focal point in the public fund industry, with 601 of the 1,066 new equity funds being passive, including 282 ETFs and 197 ETF-linked funds [10][14]. - Active fund issuance remains dominated by leading companies, with Huaxia Fund leading with 33 new active products, while smaller firms struggle to match the scale of larger competitors [14]. - The issuance of "fixed income plus" products in the active bond category saw a significant increase, with the number rising from 97 in 2024 to 154 in 2025, indicating a growing trend in this segment [14]. Group 4: Pricing of New Products - The pricing of new products reflects the fee reform initiated by the China Securities Regulatory Commission, with management and custody fees generally lower across the board [17][19]. - Active equity funds typically have management fees around 1.20% for non-index enhanced products and 0.80% for index-enhanced products, while passive funds have significantly lower fees [19][20]. - The average management fee for newly issued passive equity funds is around 0.37%, while bond passive products average 0.16%, indicating a trend towards lower costs in the industry [20]. Group 5: Strategic Differentiation - The public fund market in 2025 showcases strategic differentiation based on resource endowments, with leading firms expanding through a platform-based approach while smaller firms focus on specialization [21]. - Investors are encouraged to consider the investment objectives and strategies of new funds rather than solely chasing brand names or market trends, highlighting the importance of rational asset allocation [21].

Core Viewpoint - Public funds are pioneers in personal pension initiatives and play a crucial role in the personal pension ecosystem, with the introduction of pension-targeted funds in 2018 and personal pension funds in 2022 [1] Product Matrix Expansion - As of now, a total of 1,246 personal pension products have been issued, including 466 savings products, 437 insurance products, 306 fund products, and 37 wealth management products [2] - The number of personal pension funds has expanded from 129 to 302 by the end of September 2025, with pension-targeted FOF products accounting for nearly 70% of the total [2] - By the end of the third quarter of 2025, the total scale of personal pension fund Y shares exceeded 15 billion yuan, growing over 65% since the beginning of the year [2] Performance and Growth - As of November 25, 2025, 120 out of the first 129 funds achieved positive returns, with a positive return rate of 93% and an average return of 9.14% [7] - The overall market performance of personal pension funds is strong, with an average return of 13.33% since inception, and over 90% of funds showing net value growth [7] - The largest pension FOF Y share fund, Xingquan Antai Active Pension, achieved a net value growth rate of 25.38%, surpassing its performance benchmark by 10.52 percentage points [7] Investor Engagement and Education - Companies emphasize the importance of educating investors about long-term pension planning and the need for personalized investment strategies based on individual circumstances [8] - Fund companies are focusing on enhancing investor experience and maintaining strategy stability while innovating product offerings to meet diverse investor needs [9]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights the significant increase in trading activity and premium risks associated with cross-border ETFs, with over 300 risk warning announcements noted in November alone [2] - The article explains the relationship between ETF trading prices and net asset values (NAV), emphasizing that the high premiums have become a norm in the market [2][3] - It discusses the differences in performance between ETFs and their corresponding linked funds, particularly how market sentiment can lead to discrepancies in price movements [8][9] Group 2 - The article outlines the mechanisms behind ETF pricing, where the price is influenced by supply and demand, while the NAV reflects the underlying asset values [4][5] - It details the scenarios of price and NAV alignment, including conditions of premium and discount states, which indicate market demand [6] - The differences in performance between ETFs and linked funds are attributed to factors such as cash reserves and redemption processes, which can affect the tracking of the underlying index [8][9] Group 3 - The article notes that cross-border ETF linked funds often exhibit larger discrepancies in performance due to trading time differences between markets [9] - It emphasizes the unique advantages of ETF linked funds, such as lower investment thresholds, ease of operation, and the absence of premium/discount risks [10][12][14] - The article concludes that the choice between ETFs and linked funds should be based on individual investor preferences and circumstances [15]

Core Viewpoint - Recent regulatory measures aim to optimize the fund sales settlement mechanism to prevent "money market fund enhancement" arbitrage, which has harmed investor interests [1][2] Group 1: Regulatory Changes - The regulatory body has issued guidelines to improve the fund sales settlement mechanism, requiring fund managers to send confirmation and clearing data by 10:00 AM on the confirmation day, and sales institutions to transfer successful subscription funds by 4:00 PM the same day [2] - Previous delays in fund settlement allowed some sales channels to exploit time differences for arbitrage, leading to a dilution of returns for money market fund holders [2][3] - The new mechanism aims to eliminate the time lag in fund transfers, allowing subscription funds to enter the fund's custody account by T+1, thus addressing the systemic loophole [4] Group 2: Impact on Money Market Funds - The optimization is expected to enhance the accuracy of money market fund yields, allowing them to better reflect actual investment performance [4] - The changes do not directly increase yield sources but rather restore fairness and authenticity to the yield by closing arbitrage loopholes [4][5] - The average fund settlement time has been reduced from 1-2 business days to the same day, increasing the actual investment days and improving fund utilization efficiency [5] Group 3: Focus on ETF Linked Funds - Following the optimization of money market funds, there is a call for similar improvements in the settlement mechanisms for ETF linked funds to reduce tracking errors [5] - Faster settlement for ETF linked funds would allow fund managers to execute trades more promptly, minimizing opportunity costs, especially in volatile market conditions [5][6] - Current settlement for ETF linked funds is T+1, which can lead to significant tracking errors if the market moves sharply on the day of subscription [5][6] Group 4: Short-Duration Bond Funds - New regulations state that for funds other than money market and interbank certificate funds, redemption funds will not be transferred to sales institutions before the next trading day after the redemption request is confirmed [7] - This may temporarily affect the liquidity advantage of short-duration bond funds, but their competitiveness is not solely reliant on redemption speed [7] - Short-duration bond funds still hold appeal for yield-sensitive investors as long as they maintain significantly higher yields compared to money market funds [7]

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory authorities have taken action to optimize the fund sales settlement mechanism to prevent "money market fund enhancement" arbitrage, which has harmed investor interests [2][3]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes - Recent regulatory updates require fund managers to send confirmation and settlement data to sales institutions by 10:00 AM on the fund share confirmation day, with successful subscription funds transferred to the fund's registration account by 4:00 PM the same day [4]. - The previous slow settlement process allowed sales channels to exploit the time difference for arbitrage, leading to a dilution of returns for money market fund holders [5][6]. Group 2: Impact on Money Market Funds - The optimization of the settlement mechanism is expected to significantly reduce the time funds remain in transit, allowing for a more accurate reflection of the actual investment performance of money market funds [9]. - The new rules eliminate the previous T+2 settlement delay, allowing subscription funds to enter the fund's property account by T+1, thus enhancing the efficiency of fund operations [10][11]. Group 3: Call for Further Optimization - Industry experts are advocating for similar optimizations in the settlement mechanisms of ETF-linked funds to reduce tracking errors and improve fund performance, especially in volatile market conditions [12]. - Faster settlement for ETF-linked funds would allow fund managers to execute trades more efficiently, minimizing opportunity costs associated with idle funds [12]. Group 4: Effects on Short-Duration Funds - The new regulations may impact the liquidity advantages of short-duration funds, as redemption funds will not be transferred to sales institutions until the next trading day after the redemption request is confirmed [14]. - Despite potential liquidity constraints, short-duration funds may still attract yield-sensitive investors if they maintain significantly higher returns compared to money market funds [15].