Fund Manager: Cheng,

Performance benchmark: GEM index yield * 95%+ deposit interest rate (after tax) * 5%.

Fund type: passive index fund

Fund establishment date: 2011September 20th.

Latest scale: 474 1 100 million yuan

ETF linked fund under simple promotion.

The so-called ETF-linked fund is the fund whose main investment field corresponds to ETF.

It is generally required that the investment target ETF of ETF-linked funds should not be less than 90% of the fund's net asset value, which is mainly used to track the index. From this perspective, ETF-linked funds are basically equivalent to investment funds (FOF);

In addition, 10% of the fund assets can be actively managed (by investing in the constituent stocks and alternative constituent stocks of the underlying index) to enhance its income. From this perspective, ETF-linked funds have the flavor of some enhanced index funds.

I have to say that ETF linked fund is really a very good innovative product. Through this way of linking OTC funds, more investors can participate in investing in ETFs and activate the ETF market.

Back to E Fund's GEM ETF Connection A, which is an off-site connection fund of the famous E Fund's GEM ETF in the main investment field. A stands for Class A share, and there is a Class C share called E Fund Growth Enterprise Market ETF Connection C. The difference between them is only the subscription and redemption rates.

Established on September 20, 20001,this fund is the oldest index fund of growth enterprise market, and its latest off-site scale of Class A and Class C totals 6.037 billion yuan, of which Class A is 474,654.38 billion yuan, and Class C129.7 million yuan;

This is not too much. The ETF on the market is a big one. E Fund's Growth Enterprise Market ETF is almost the spokesperson of the Growth Enterprise Market ETF in the market, with the latest scale reaching 20.942 billion yuan, which is unparalleled in its kind.

Second: Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market A(00 1592)

Fund Manager: Zhang Zifa, Sabrina.

Performance benchmark: GEM index yield * 95%+ bank deposit interest rate (after tax) * 5%.

Fund type: passive index fund

Fund establishment date: 2065438+July 8, 2005.

Scale: 654.38+34 million yuan

Tian Hong GEM index fund is the most common passive index fund. Different from the above ETF-linked funds, Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market Index Fund tracks the Growth Enterprise Market Index by directly allocating the GEM index stocks, which is also the most common way to construct OTC index funds.

Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market Index Fund was established on July 8, 20 15. At the same time, Tian Hong GEM C has Class A shares and Class C shares. The latest off-site total scale reached 3,276,543.8 million yuan, of which Class A share was1034 million yuan and Class C share was 2,237 million yuan.

What's interesting here is that the share of Class C in Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market is more than twice that of Class A, which indirectly shows that friends buy funds and have a tendency to do short-term bands, which is not a good phenomenon but reflects the actual situation.

Third: GEM A financing

Fund Manager: Cai Zhiwei.

Performance benchmark: GEM index yield * 95%+ bank deposit interest rate * 5%.

Fund Type: Enhanced Index Fund

Date of fund establishment: April 6, 20 12.

Fund size: 984 million yuan

Unlike the above two index funds, which are purely passive funds, Rongtong GEM Index Fund is the only index fund in the GEM index series launched today that belongs to the enhanced book category.

The reason why the word "book" is specially marked is mainly because this enhanced index fund is different from the funds in the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 and CSI 500 categories and does not show a special index enhancement effect. I'll talk about this later. There's no room for the table here.

Rongtong GEM Index Fund was established on April 6, 20 12, which can be regarded as a GEM index fund with a long history. At the earliest, the fund only had a Class A share. In July of 20 103 10, the latest off-site total scale was 654.38 million yuan, of which the Class A share was 984 million yuan.

Fourth: Grading of Growth Enterprise Market Index of Rich Countries

Fund Manager: Wang Baohe/Fang Min.

Performance benchmark: GEM index yield * 95%+ bank RMB deposit interest rate (after tax) * 5%.

Fund type: passive index fund

Establishment time: 20 13 September 12.

Fund size: 6.605 billion

As can be seen from the name, Guo Fu GEM Index Grading is a graded parent fund. This kind of graded parent fund was mentioned in the last interim certificate 500, and can generally be used as a passive index fund.

Guo Fu Growth Enterprise Market Index was established at 20 13 and 12, with the latest off-site scale of 6.605 billion yuan.

In addition, Guo Fu's Growth Enterprise Market may be more famous than Guo Fu's Growth Enterprise Market B( 150 153). Adding leverage to an already exciting gem may make Archimedes rise.

In addition, I said in the last issue that the graded parent fund may be slightly inferior to the conventional passive index fund in tracking the index because of the existence of grading A and grading B in the market, so it is still not the first choice to invest in a sector index fund, although the index grading of GEM in rich countries has done a good job in tracking the index.

Fifth: Huatai Bairui quantifies excellence.

Fund Manager: Tian Hanqing

Performance benchmark: GEM index yield * 90%+ bank deposit interest rate (after tax) * 10%.

Fund type: flexible allocation of funds

Established: 2065438+May 2007 12.

Fund size: 358 million yuan

Huatai Bairui Fund is a flexible allocation fund. On the surface, it seems to have nothing to do with the GEM index, but its name is engraved with the word "Chuang", and its benchmark has a return rate of 90% on the GEM index, which is obviously unusual.

According to its investment target, this is a flexible allocation fund that tracks the GEM index. On the one hand, the Fund strives to achieve a return on investment that exceeds the return rate of the Growth Enterprise Market Index. On the other hand, under extreme market conditions, the Fund's stock assets can be reduced to 0%.

The first point is a bit like index enhancement, and the second point is the biggest difference between this fund and all the above index funds.

The above zero zero general ledger lists several typical GEM funds, but I don't know if you have found that the previous periods beyond the benchmark series will involve the comparison of fund returns and indexes in the ledger, but there is no comparison in this period.

Actually, it's better than that When I drew the income retracement chart, I directly put the GEM index in: except Huatai Bairui, a product with a relatively short cycle, which outperformed the GEM index, the others, whether graded or purely passive or enhanced, all underperformed the GEM index itself.

In short, it is really not an easy task to beat the Growth Enterprise Market, an index with tough ups and downs.

I put all the funds together and made a comparison:

The above figure is mainly based on the time period of Tianhong GEM, and other funds and GEM indices themselves are normalized according to this time period. Huatai Bairui Quantitative Excellence was established later than Tianhong GEM, so it took the average value including GEM index.

If it is difficult to see the difference between the two directly by looking at the chart, it is better to look at the final normalized net value comparison first:

Pure from the final normalized net value: Huatai Bairui has the strongest quantitative Excellence, and its annualized performance can outperform the GEM index by 2.84%. Of course, it must be pointed out here that its time period is less than two years; Secondly, Rongtong GEM can outperform GEM index 1.76% every year. E Fund's Growth Enterprise Market is the most satisfied, almost equal to the Growth Enterprise Market; Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market underperformed Growth Enterprise Market1.31%during the year; Guo Fu Growth Enterprise Market underperforms the Growth Enterprise Market by 3.20% every year.

More specifically, look at it in sections (compared with the annual rate of return):

The period from 20 16 to 20 18 in the above picture is a complete three years. July 8, 20 15 to the end of 20 19 only covers the period from the beginning of the year to May 19.

This picture seems to reflect something more clearly:

For example, the GEM index can indeed outperform index funds most of the time, especially when it skyrockets (20 15 and 2019);

Rongtong Growth Enterprise Market ranks first with a net ending value of 0.68 (initial value is 1), but most of its excess returns come from 20 15, and there is no special bright spot in other years.

E Fund Growth Enterprise Market is one of the relatively well-regulated funds, and there is a small gap between the final net value and the normalized index net value of 0.6358, which shows the closeness of the fund tracking index.

In fact, Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market and E Fund Growth Enterprise Market are very similar. The gap between Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market and Growth Enterprise Market refers to the period from July 20 15 to the end of the year when Tian Hong Growth Enterprise Market was just established. After the normal operation of 20 16, it is as satisfactory as the growth enterprise market of E Fund.

The lowest normalized net value of Guo Fu Growth Enterprise Market is 0.56, and the distance index is quite different from many funds. In fact, this may be the common problem of the graded parent fund mentioned above. In the long run, its tracking error will be larger than that of conventional passive index funds. What's more, during the same period, the growth enterprise market of rich countries rose the least when it rose, and fell the most when it fell, which was a bit embarrassing.

Although Huatai Bairui Quantitative Excellence has been established for a short time, it is still very eye-catching: the decline was the smallest in 20 18, and the increase was the largest since 20 19. Everything looks beautiful except that it was established for a short time.

In view of the above analysis, unlike the issuance of CSI 300 and CSI 500, although the original intention of this issue is to find funds that outperform the GEM, the GEM itself is too strong to keep up with, let alone surpass, index funds in the long run, so the goal of this paper has quietly changed to find the most suitable GEM funds.

Whether the words are appropriate or not is actually a bit subtle.

For index funds (including enhanced index funds), it is not appropriate if the long-term rate of return can obviously outperform the index. Unfortunately, this is not true on the GEM: at present, almost no GEM index fund can obviously outperform the GEM index for a long time.

Then look at some second-best standards:

First of all, the size of the fund should not be too small. It seems that the five funds mentioned today basically meet the requirements. Except for Huatai Bairui, the scale is slightly smaller by 358 million, and the smallest is above 654.38+0 billion.

Secondly, we usually look at the tracking error. Judging from the self-requirement of the fund's own prospectus for tracking error and actual performance, the growth enterprise market of E Fund and the growth enterprise market of Tianhong closely track the growth enterprise market index.

By the way, look at a correlation coefficient chart to deepen your impression:

In fact, when the above items are similar, one factor may play a decisive role, that is, the rate cost of the fund.

Please look at the table:

The above table lists the explicit costs (subscription and redemption fees) and implicit costs (management fees, custody fees, sales and service fees) required for buying and selling a fund. I only listed the subscription rate below one million, and the last two columns are the comprehensive rate cost of buying and holding for one year and half a year. Among them, the subscription rate is calculated according to the most common discount now.

This is even more obvious. No matter whether you make money or not, what you save is what you earn. The criterion is simple: which one is cheaper to buy.

Of course, if I were to choose, I might look at the rate cost together with the previous situation that the major GEM index funds outperformed the index every year:

As can be seen from the above table, Huatai Bairui Quantitative Excellence with the highest comprehensive rate cost has become the one with the best comprehensive rate and the largest excess rate of return. Simply put, the excess rate of return covers the comprehensive rate cost at the same time.

E Fund's Growth Enterprise Market (GEM) is in the forefront with its low rate cost and slightly outperforming the index's excess rate of return, and it is almost the index fund with the best comprehensive situation.

It must be emphasized here that the rate cost is fixed, but the excess rate of return of the annual outperforming index can only be said to be an expected value based on historical data (replaced by geometric average), and it is uncertain whether it can continue to reach such excess rate of return in the future.

It is on this premise that if I decide to invest in the GEM, I will generally choose the E Fund GEM or Tian Hong GEM with the lowest tracking error (since I don't know if I can earn it, I will choose to save it first); If you want to pursue excess returns, I think you can seriously consider Huatai Bairui's quantitative Excellence.