FOF Fund'S Great Asset Allocation Has Been Constantly Optimized.

Now that we have entered the era of FOF, there will be a lot of FOF products coming out in the future. We should seriously study the trend of the A share market. In the future, this kind of pactional players, that is to say, the survival space of technology analysis will be smaller and smaller.

In addition, the era of value investing is coming, and the disposition of some high-quality stocks, as well as the disposition of some high-quality companies, will have the most important impact on the performance of your fund.

These should be a very good era for our professional institutional investors and professional institutions.

In this way, the generation of FOF should raise the scale of public fund management and the level of the whole industry.

Since the establishment of the first public offering fund in March 1998, we should say that the varieties of public offering funds are very rich. Now the total number of public funds has exceeded 3000, and the total amount of stocks is only 3000. The number of funds has exceeded the number of shares. It is very difficult for investors to choose the best fund and let him pick up a good stock.

It can be said that FOF may become the largest single fund in the future. Any fund company should actively embrace the FOF era.

In the case of so rich fund varieties and A share ups and downs, the introduction of FOF is also the trend of the times, and it also complies with the needs of the market.

In the US, FOF is a relatively mature product. According to statistics, the total amount of FOF issued in the US has reached US $1 trillion and 700 billion, which accounts for 10% of the total public offering fund.

At present, the domestic public offering fund is about 8 trillion yuan. If it is calculated by 10%, it should have a scale of 800 billion. It should be said that the development space of the public offering of FOF products is very large, and the number of public offering FOF is still zero.

The SFC issued a draft of public offering FOF in the first two months, and now FOF has entered the era of public offering.

Only by offering FOF products by the public offering fund can FOF become a mainstream investment type and play a key role in asset allocation.

The introduction of FOF is the two big problem to solve customers.

The first is about timing.

Because FOF allows professional investment managers to help investors decide the allocation ratio of stock funds, bond funds or commodity funds.

When to buy a stock fund and when to redeem it is the first thing for FOF's investment manager to do.

The second is to help investors to choose better funds in the market.

Therefore, the emergence of FOF is in this background, that is, fund varieties are particularly rich, while domestic investors are not enough to buy funds and funds.

FOF solved this most difficult problem.

Our company is also actively greeting the FOF era, and is also researching and reporting some public offerings of FOF products.

In addition, my business department also starts from FOF, and will issue more FOF products through some channels recently.

I think the emergence of FOF will change the habit of many people investing.

Domestic investors should say that the number of people who lose money is a lot of money. In fact, there are many people who have lost money. This is not the fact that the fund itself does not make money. According to my statistics, from 2006 to now, the index has increased by 50% from 2000 points to 3000 points now, but the average return of equity funds is about four or five times. Of course, some funds may have more than a dozen times of returns, and most of the active funds have largely won the index.

But many investors who buy funds do not earn money or even lose money.

The most typical example is that in the past year, the market in 2015 could be said to be a downward trend, and many investors were losing money. However, as a whole, the fund still had an average return of 40%, while the fund with good performance last year had more than one hundred percent of the proceeds.

Investors lose money because he is not sure about the timing of the purchase and redemption of the fund. At the beginning of last year, he held a 100 thousand yuan fund. When it reached 5000, it increased to 1 million. When it later fell, it not only lost the proceeds of the previous fund, but also lost its principal.

Therefore, domestic investors do not make money to buy funds, not the problem of the fund itself, but the time when investors buy and redeem the fund.

What does FOF's performance depend on? I think the most important aspect is the ability of fund managers to manage their assets.

The ability of asset allocation in foreign countries is not only reflected in the allocation ratio of stock funds, but also in the allocation ratio of bonds and commodities, but in China, most of them depend on the judgement of the trend of A shares and the proportion of stock fund allocation.

The volatility is too big.

{page_break}

We see that the trend of the US market basically belongs to a slanting oscillation, and there are retracement in the middle, but there are few retracement.

Therefore, in the US market, public funds are no concept of positions. They must be full of positions. Fund managers do not need to do the judgment of positions. Because he can not make bands, they can only choose long-term holdings of companies, and get excess returns through Alfa. This band can not be done, and the fluctuation rate of a year may be less than 10%.

But A shares are not the same. A shares 80% of investors are scattered, "herding effect" is particularly obvious, when it rises, it will go too far, and when it falls, it will overshoot, so the trend of A shares is pulsatile, like a mountain trend.

In this case, professional investors have the opportunity to embody their own advantages.

If we can grasp the big band of the market, escape the roof or copy the bottom, this excess return is very huge.

I think that the investment manager of FOF or FOF fund company must choose a more accurate grasp of the trend of the market. For those fund companies with relatively strong asset allocation capability, FOF's performance will probably outperform the index and win the majority of funds.

The volatility of A shares has reached 40% in one year, while the bonds are

Probably less than 10%.

The volatility of the A shares is 4 times that of the bonds. In this case, you may think that the bond yields will be five or six per year, but the stock may have been finished one day after the last 1000 shares were down.

So in A shares to do asset allocation, in fact, is the market judgment for the A share, which is the most important, which is also the most important point to determine the performance of FOF.

Before the public offering of FOF, some brokerages and private placements made some FOF in the past few years, but their performance was not satisfactory.

This also affects everyone's view of FOF.

In fact, I think this is a misunderstanding of FOF.

Because FOF really does well, it is to do some big bands for A shares. If at last year's 5000 point, FOF's fund managers did not help investors to reduce the positions of stock funds, then what is the difference between investors and their own investors in buying stock funds? The difference between the stock fund itself is not big. During the bull market, some funds increased by 150%, and some funds rose 100% or 50%.

Some of the original FOF did not do well, because the investment manager did not grasp the trend of A shares very well, and did not control the positions for customers, so the performance of FOF was very unsatisfactory.

We also know through media reports that Qianhai open source fund company at the end of May last year, when the high point, successfully reduced the position close to the empty warehouse, after the Spring Festival, the success of the bottom position, because the position control is better, so the performance of our fund is generally leading, since this year, almost all stock funds are positive returns.

We have calculated the weight of the average position of Qianhai's open-source fund for three years to make a FOF.

On the choice of ETF such as CSI 300 or CSI 500, we do not need to choose the active fund. The revenue of FOF is far better than that of the CSI 500, and it will win the performance of all Taurus funds.

That is to say, if you do well in FOF, if you have a good grasp of the allocation ratio of the stock fund, you will win the overwhelming majority of the funds, because you are equivalent to making an overall position control on the basis of these funds.

I think this is the key to success in FOF.

Domestic public fund managers are always jumping around and affecting the stability of FOF portfolio. How can we avoid this problem? I have thought about this issue. We are now doing the issue of FOF, which is likely to be issued by banks and brokerages in September. The scale is expected to be small. Indeed, there is such a problem when choosing the prime manager. That is, the performance of the fund is relatively short. Originally, we wanted to set up a product of fund managers who worked for more than 5 years. As a result, there were few, unable to choose, and finally changed to 3 years. The amount of 3 years was relatively small, and finally had to be changed to 2 years or more.

Although Qianhai's open source has been established for 3 years, its performance is very good. From half a year report, in the first half of the year, the top 15 of the mixed base, Qianhai's open source accounted for 6, and the first was Qianhai's open source gold and silver jewelry.

This is related to the control of the positions. It escaped the January fuses. The two stock market crash last year also escaped. This shows that the position control can bring profits, and the other direction is more accurate and the gold in the direction is matched. So Qianhai's open source jewellery has the highest profit this year, reaching 40%.

Indeed, our national conditions are like this. Fund managers have a relatively short serving time, so when choosing, I think they should pay more attention to fund managers rather than fund products.

First of all, you have to choose a strong investment fund manager and follow him to invest. For example, he is managing the product better now. Once you change the fund manager, you have to consider whether you want to adjust the position. Do you want to consider replacing other fund managers, or your original authorized manager, jump to a new company to take over a new fund, are you going to see it?

For example, Wang Yawei, he left his original fund, you do not know whether the next person will do so well, after the replacement of fund managers, performance persistence is often bad, so we have to recognize this fund manager, not just the product.

So I think we can see from the experience of fund managers in managing funds, for example, his experience has exceeded 5 years, so that we can set a better position, rather than say that this product is over 5 years.

Another is that when we choose funds, we can not just look at the short-term performance, because A shares do exist. This year's performance is ranked first, next year is the last countdown, and it is particularly obvious. For example, the fund managers in front of 2015 are almost all behind this year. But you can't do it in turn. The worst fund in the year is allocated. Maybe he is worse in second years. This possibility is also there. Some fund managers have been poor for several years. So I think it's best to look at the performance above two years or more than three years, which can be ranked in the front 1/3, so it can be better.

There is also a look at his biggest retracement. If the maximum retracement is more, he will be cautious even if he has done well over the past three years, because you may be unlucky. After you have made the product, its withdrawal is just on your lap.

So I think we need to look at fund managers and look at the performance of three years, and then we need to see a relatively small fund withdrawal.