RSS订阅 加入收藏  设为首页
当前位置:首页 > 金沙正网官方网站

金沙正网官方网站:Restore the public sector non-monetary fund rankings 7 companies ranked the top ten in recent three years

时间:2017/12/25 15:13:20  作者:  来源:  浏览:0  评论:0
内容摘要: Since the beginning of this year, a series of regulatory policies for theMonetary Fund , after various types of media articles have been fe...

Since the beginning of this year, a series of regulatory policies for the Monetary Fund , after various types of media articles have been fermented, do not know how many investors have hesitated to make such products: after all, many people just realized it because of Yu Bao Public funds that have developed nearly 20 years of public financial management varieties.

In fact, the risk that management is concerned about is nothing but the liquidity risk of the Monetary Fund after it is large in scale. The instability mainly comes from the institutional holder. As the old saying goes, investing is risky, but we should be rational about risk and not blindly blind. Especially in the financial field, the risk can only be described as high or low. What needs attention is how to prevent the risks, divert the risks, balance the risks with the benefits, and not to imagine the risk-free vacuum. This does not exist.

If the liquidity risk is strictly controlled and the monetary fund is rationally developed, the IMF will still be a good cash management tool. Ordinary investors can rest assured. Therefore, regardless of the weakening of the monetary fund publicity at this stage, or no longer including the IMF in the overall size of the fund rankings, it is in fact all out of safeguarding the safe development of the monetary fund and is a risk-averse approach. And risk management is not only in the monetary fund, we are familiar with the bank financial products, the future in the background of large-scale assets have to break the just cashed, which is also its size is too large, a mismatch of funds a correction. As early as the end of 2015, China Securities Investment Fund Association (hereinafter referred to as the Association) has announced the top 20 fund management companies non-monetary public fund management scale, but the list at the time the degree of importance may not be as good as the overall rankings. Journalists of the Daily Economic News may wish to take you to review the non-monetary scale of public funds in the recent three years.

As can be seen from the table on the right, except for the Monetary Fund, the top 20 fund companies have not changed much in the recent three years. In the past three years, there are 17 companies in the top 20, including Bo Shi, Wells Fargo, ICBC Credit Suisse, GF, Cathay Pacific, Hua An, Huaxia, Huitianfu, Harvest, Jianxin, Nanfang, Penghua, E Fund, Yinhua, Merchants, Central Europe, Bank of China. Among them, there are seven in a row in the top ten in the past three years, namely ICBC Credit Suisse, Huaxia, Huitianfu, Castrol, South, E Fund and China Merchants.

However, from the absolute value of the scale, from 2015 to the third quarter of 2017, not every company is growing all the way. The big market in 2015 caused a number of fund companies to step up the scale of their equity products. However, the turmoil in 2016 dropped again, picking up again in the first three quarters of 2017. The highest scale in 2015 was 270.4 billion yuan, the top 20 average size of 125.946 billion yuan; the highest scale in 2016 was 218.278 billion yuan, the top 20 average size respectively 122.684 billion yuan; as of the third quarter of 2017, the highest scale of 248.32 billion The yuan, temporarily below the 2015 high, but the average size has risen to 150.924 billion yuan. As a whole, the growth of non-monetary funds is much slower than that of monetary funds. The top 20 locations are relatively stable, which also reflects the difficulty of overtaking customers who want to overtake the scale of equity products. However, at this stage of the profit mechanism and examination mode, the scale of the fund company's significance will be greater than the investor. Investors really need to evaluate the system more scientifically as an investment reference, and to obtain information in a more professional opinion environment.

On Dec. 8, the Association made four suggestions on the fund evaluation business symposium: First, the fund managers should continuously improve the core competitiveness based on the active investment management capability. According to their own risk control capabilities, the fund managers should be reasonable We will develop money market funds and vigorously develop equity funds to create long-term good returns for the vast number of investors and contribute to the healthy development of our real economy. At the same time, we will no longer promote the ranking and yield of money market funds through various channels. Second, the shareholders of fund management companies should design a more scientific and reasonable performance appraisal system, and gradually weaken the role of the rank in the appraisal system. Third, the relevant agencies should objectively report the size of the raised funds and conduct a benign guidance. Fourthly, institutions that do not meet the requirements of the Interim Measures for the Administration of the Evaluation of Securities Investment Funds may not release the evaluation results of funds such as the ranking of fund size in a public manner. The fund manager Fund Sales The institution and the designated information disclosure media of CSRC, Do not quote or publish the fund evaluation results provided by the above institutions.

It is not difficult to conclude that regardless of the fund or the bank's financial management, the supervision of the asset management industry will become more and more detailed and strict in the future. However, as long as the direction is correct and the system is reasonable and the immediate interests are sacrificed for long-term development, People are a good thing.





所有信息均来自:百度一下 ( 金沙正网官方网站)