According to astronomical statistics, Huaxia Fund ranked first in total profit in the first quarter, with a profit of 6.673 billion yuan. E Fund, Harvest, Huitianfu and Jing Shun Great Wall ranked second to fifth respectively, and their profits in the first quarter were 5.299 billion yuan, 3.408 billion yuan, 3.206 billion yuan and 2.990 billion yuan respectively.
However, according to the expected annualized expected rate of return on investment, in the first quarter of this year, Huashang Fund, Jing Shun Great Wall and TEDA Manulife ranked among the top three in the earning list, earning 9868 1 10,000 yuan, 7,359,800 yuan and 7,347,900 yuan for investors for every 654,380+0 billion yuan of assets respectively.
Obviously, the gap between the two rankings is huge. For investors, the latter ranking is more valuable, because the first ranking is easily affected by the size of the total assets of the fund. For example, 1000 yuan can get 50 expected annualized expected returns with an expected annualized rate of return of 5%, while 100 yuan has only 5 expected annualized expected returns with an expected annualized rate of return of 5%. This comparison is unfair.
The expected annualized expected rate of return directly represents the return that investors can get for each dollar, which can be compared among different funds. But the total assets of the fund are also directly related to the expected annualized rate of return of the fund. Generally speaking, the larger the scale of fund assets, the more difficult it is to obtain high expected annualized expected returns. Under the premise that domestic financial derivatives are not abundant at present, fund position adjustment can only be realized by buying and selling stocks directly. As the saying goes, "the boat is small and easy to turn around", it is relatively less difficult for small funds to adjust their positions in the short term according to market conditions, so it is easier to give play to the fund manager's ability to choose stocks at the right time.
Then, is it reliable for investors to choose fund managers according to the expected annualized expected rate of return? Not necessarily. In fact, there are many aspects to consider when choosing a fund manager, including analyzing whether the expected annualized expected return of the fund manager comes from his investment ability or accidental good luck, which has become a historical achievement and can be continued in the future.
* * * The same fund pursues the relative expected annualized expected rate of return, so it is valuable to compare the performance of fund managers with their respective benchmarks, rather than simply looking at the absolute expected annualized expected rate of return. Because the expected annualized expected rate of return of the fund may be due to the overall rise of the market, rather than the investment ability of the fund manager. That is, if in a certain period, the expected annualized rate of return on investment obtained by the fund manager is 10%, and the market rises by 15%, the expected annualized excess rate of return of the fund manager (the expected annualized rate of return of the fund manager-the expected annualized rate of return of the market) is negative, which is not worth choosing at all. Therefore, when choosing a fund manager, we can start from the following aspects:
The first thing to consider is the fund manager's sustainable performance ability. Studies have shown that in the ranking of fund managers in the United States, none of the fund managers who expect annualized expected returns are still in the top ten five years later. Looking at the ranking of fund managers in China in the past few years, it seems that only Wang Yawei can always rank in the top ten.
Secondly, we should consider the risk adjustment of the fund manager and the expected annualized expected return. Expected annualized expected return and risk are always in direct proportion. Therefore, when analyzing fund managers, we should consider the risks undertaken by funds in order to obtain the expected annualized expected returns. The best comparison method is to consider the information ratio of funds. The higher the ratio, the higher the expected annualized income of fund managers' risk adjustment, and the more trustworthy they are.
Third, we should consider the investment philosophy of fund managers and the consistency of investment and research teams. Only an investment manager who has a stable investment team and a consistent investment philosophy and has achieved sustained and excellent performance is worthy of entrustment.
Finally, the fees charged by the fund are also very important. The more efficient the market is, the more difficult it is to obtain the expected annualized return, and the various expenses of the fund have a direct effect on reducing the expected annualized expected return of the fund, which can never be ignored.
In short, "men are afraid of going into the wrong business, and women are afraid of marrying the wrong person." Choosing a fund manager is also directly related to the financial interests of investors. You must know the hero with your eyes, and you can't be deceived by an accidental outstanding performance.