Many small leeks are heartbroken by the ups and downs of the industry every day and can't sleep well. I also want to take advantage of the current ups and downs of A-shares to make a short-term profit.
But not surprisingly, they always chase up and kill down.
I dare say that this bad daily life of jumping between greed and fear must not be your original intention of buying a base!
Who doesn't want to "throw" a handful of spare money in and lie down and make a steady profit?
Here comes the method-> Balanced configuration. The advantages are:
Worry-free and painless response to market fluctuations
When the market is bad, you can bear the loss.
When the market is good, the income can catch up with the big troops.
Let me show you the power of balanced configuration first, above!
The yellow line and the red line are two balanced combinations, and the income is at least three times that of the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300! Don't worry, the money is still in your pocket!
I want to sell it here. I won't tell you how the two balanced combinations are matched (the hand of copying homework stops first), and I will clarify a few misunderstandings about the balanced configuration with you first.
Misunderstanding of balanced allocation: buying too much is not called equilibrium.
Buy more funds and try to achieve the effect of diversification. This practice is commonly known as not putting eggs in one basket. But if there are too many baskets to manage, it will not be worth the loss.
Before, a citizen of Quanzhou, Fujian spent a few days buying the 13 14 fund to remind himself to hold it for a long time.
Decentralization is indeed decentralized, but it is hard to say that this "combination" is unbalanced. Pull an excel to see the computer card.
The dispersion of risks cannot be achieved simply by quantity. Generally, it is enough to buy a dozen funds.
Ok, then buy less, but some people will manipulate "deformation" and come to a company to disperse the combination: "E Fund will come to a few, invest in a few, and distribute a few, so it will be balanced."
Finally, I bought a dozen. The biggest difference may be that the names of funds are different, but the industry concentration is very high. This will not only fail to achieve the effect of balanced allocation, but will take up too much energy, which is not conducive to management.
Buying a bunch of industries is not equilibrium.
There is also a kind of basic people who choose industry funds to buy, such as liquor, new energy, military industry, semiconductors, internet and medicine. If they don't lose money in these industries, they are embarrassed to speak in groups.
At this time, you may ask: "This imbalance, several industries that A shares can see in the past are all in it."
Please allow me to say: "Yes, yes, plus some bank real estate, we can form the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 debut."
If the industry buys too much, it will eventually perform worse like the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 Index (red line 7.5%).
The misunderstanding here is that the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 is not balanced, it only covers the large-cap stocks in A shares, and those small and beautiful companies have become a legacy.
Ok, I've fished you out of the above two pits, and now I'll tell you what a real equilibrium is.
What is a true equilibrium? In my opinion, there are three kinds of real equilibrium:
Balance the market value.
CSI 300, CSI 500 and CSI 1000 respectively represent the large, medium and small market value of A shares, with great returns and little dexterity. If you buy all these brothers and sisters, you can play all kinds of roles.
Here, I suggest you only buy index-enhanced funds. Index-enhanced funds can always outperform the corresponding index, because what such fund managers need to do is actually very simple-just screen out the "junk" companies in A shares.
* Does not constitute investment advice.
As can be seen from the above figure, the return of the market value balance portfolio (one third of each of the three index-enhanced funds) is 1 13%, which is tied for the second place with little fluctuation.
Seeing this, you may ask: since a single index can improve the performance of the fund more than a portfolio, can't I just buy the best? Worry-free, I also had this idea before, and later I was severely educated by A shares.
In the trade war of 20 18, A shares fell miserably. In the following years, 20 19 and 2020, the three major indexes collectively rebounded, all of which were "closing their eyes" to make money.
* Does not constitute investment advice.
(In the two years of 20 19 and 2020, the performance of Xilide CSI 300 is dominant.)
No.65438 +0 West Profit Shanghai and Shenzhen 300: 126%, the income doubled!
NO.2 market value balance combination: 102%, the second child of the Millennium.
But 202 1 is different. 202 1 is the world of small-cap stocks. Both CSI 500 and CSI 1000 have left CSI 300 behind, and Sheng Yanfeng's ability is no better than the general trend.
* Does not constitute investment advice.
(202 1, Shengyanfeng CSI 300 is no longer strong)
No.65438 +0 Bodao 500: 32%
Second place Guo Fu CSI 1000: 27%
NO.3 market value balance portfolio: 19%, fortunately not at the bottom.
Under different market conditions, individual index enhancement funds take the lead, but the market value balance portfolio is as stable as an old dog, so there is no need to worry at all, and they will not win the first place, but they will not be at the bottom.
Therefore, using index-enhanced funds to balance the market value can not only get alpha (screening out junk stocks) by virtue of the fund manager's ability, but also won't miss the beta (grasping the structural market) in the small-cap market, which can be described as killing two birds with one stone. * It is for reference only and does not constitute investment advice.
Strategic balance
The market value is divided into large, medium and small, and the strategy is divided into upper, middle and lower. The upper, middle and lower here refers to the perspective of fund managers when deciding to buy stocks.
In fact, it is a macro perspective. This kind of fund manager is always staring at major events at home and abroad, and will immediately change positions once there is any trouble in the international situation.
From the perspective of industry, this kind of fund managers are concerned about the trends of various industries, such as how houses are sold, how many people are there at the airport, whether pork prices have gone up, and so on. If they think that an industry can go up, they will not hesitate to hold heavy positions.
Next, it is the company's perspective. This kind of fund manager focuses on a specific company, paying attention to whether the profit rate of a company is rising, whether it is possible to monopolize the whole industry, whether new business is profitable, and so on. As long as they are sure that a company will rise in the future, they will hold a heavy position, and I will stay put despite the market turmoil.
All three strategies can make money, but people who use this strategy always make mistakes. At this time, the necessity of balanced allocation is highlighted. If you can select the best people who use these strategies and allocate them reasonably, the probability of making money in the long run is very high.
Okay, okay, let's get to the point and get to the answer.
I made a balanced strategy combination to show the results:
* Does not constitute investment advice.
This picture is already obvious, and several fund managers have greatly outperformed the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 Index. Because there is no extreme deviation from a certain strategy, it will not fall into disloyalty when the market suddenly changes, and certainly it will not run out of the new energy fund market when it is in Big bounce.
Seeing this, you may have to ask again, since these managers are so capable, why can't they find a stallion? Lie down after buying.
Well, I also predicted this question:
* Does not constitute investment advice.
There are six lines in the above figure, the most striking black line is the performance trend of the strategic balance portfolio, and the other fancy lines are the five funds that make up the portfolio.
It can be seen that the initial performance of the strategic balance portfolio is not as good as Zhang Kun's E Fund Blue Chip Selection (Green Line), and the final performance is not as good as Mo Haibo's Wanjia Emerging Blue Chip (Blue Line). But you can see the final result, the performance of the portfolio is not only very good, but also very small fluctuations.
In the early days, E Fund's strong blue chip finally became the last one, and 10,000 emerging blue chips rode the dust, but ask ourselves, can we grasp it?
Therefore, to make a balanced allocation, what is needed is not extreme ups and downs, but a stable and sustainable long-term victory.
Many people worry that if they buy some funds with various strategies, won't the income be easily washed away? I tell you: no! Look at these six funds, some of them are rising and some are falling, but the final performance, the balanced combination of the six funds, ranks in the top three, still making money, with little fluctuation!
Of course, distinguishing the strategies of fund managers and figuring out their thinking requires particularly long-term follow-up. If you are too busy making money to care about these "little things", I have a follow-up skill.
Buy a balanced fund directly
There is also a fund. The fund manager's goal is the balanced allocation of the whole A-share market. They are impartial in all walks of life. With the experience of crossing bulls and bears many times, they carefully maintained the balance of their portfolio.
* Does not constitute investment advice.
Let me give you a taste of this kind of fund first. It is only a strategic example and does not constitute investment advice.
3 balanced funds, 3~4 times ahead of the Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 Index!
Zhu Shaoxing and Xie Zhiyu are old acquaintances, and their performance trends are very similar, and they are all large-scale, so it is difficult for both aircraft carriers to turn around.
If you don't pursue the titles of Zhu Shaoxing and Xie Zhiyu, then Cao Wenjun is also a good choice. Compared with the two predecessors, Cao Wenjun's qualifications are slightly inferior, but the scale is moderate (not large under the strategy of market-wide equilibrium), and the range of optional stocks is wider. After all, the boat is easy to turn around. Of course, if the size of the fund continues to expand, Cao Wenjun may also face the same problems as his two predecessors.
If you have always wanted to operate after establishing the first two portfolios to enhance the sense of participation in investment, then I recommend you to pay attention to such funds, because there is nothing to operate such funds, and you basically don't have to worry about it.
Finally, the key to balanced allocation is to build a suitable combination, and then you have to hold it. Repeat, hold, hold, that's all that matters.
Everyone knows this truth, but we all know in our hearts that when we go fishing at work every day, when we brush our mobile phones on the subway, and when we play with our mobile phones before going to bed, we always want to follow the "professional" advice of the fund group countless times.
But according to my years of experience, these operations basically ended in failure, and I never have a long memory.
Balanced allocation, in order to avoid the recurrence of this scene, as long as everyone really understands the concept of balanced allocation and chooses simple strategies, they can have leisure to invest and increase their income after sleep!