It seems to protect the interests of fund share holders by committing profits or taking losses in violation of regulations, but it is not. Because if you promise to gain or bear the loss, it will definitely not be borne by the individual, but by the company. The company promises that the management scale of a medium-sized fund company is about100-300 billion, and the general registered capital is only about 200 million. If the promised income is calculated at 654.38+000 billion, the company that bears 2% of the losses will have to close down. If a company with a scale of 30 billion loses 654.38+0 billion, and the company is going to close down, is it unfair to other 20 billion managers? This is on the one hand, on the other hand, from the perspective of historical evolution, there is a risk that the illegal promised income will become the company's disguised financing for the holders. How to understand it? I issued 654.38+000 billion products, giving you 4% income. I used the money for other purposes. Does this mean that I borrow money from you for my own use?

At present, the CSRC allows flexible ways to protect the interests of holders and enhance the confidence of investors, such as allowing fund companies to use their own funds as safety mats for products (or inferior products). That is, if the product loses money, the fund company will first lose that part of its own funds until it loses money.