With the improvement of people's financial awareness, funds, as an important investment tool, have attracted more and more attention from investors. So the bigger the assets managed by the fund, the better? How to choose the right one? Bian Xiao also prepared the related content that the bigger the assets under fund management, the better, for your reference.

The bigger the assets managed by the fund, the better?

The larger the assets under management, it does not necessarily mean that the investment performance of fund products will be better. In fact, the large scale of assets managed by the fund may have a negative impact on the investment performance of the fund. First of all, the management of large-scale funds may limit the investment decisions of fund managers. When the scale of fund management is too large, the energy of fund managers may be dispersed. In order to maintain a large asset scale and asset security, fund managers may need to choose large-scale and liquid underlying assets, while ignoring some potential investment opportunities. Moreover, the large scale of fund management may increase the transaction cost and operational risk of the fund. When the scale of fund management is too large, the fund manager may need to carry out a lot of trading operations when adjusting the investment portfolio, resulting in an increase in transaction costs.

How to choose the right one?

When investors choose fund products, they need to consider the strength and management team of the fund company, the investment strategy and cost of the fund, the historical performance of the fund and so on. Excellent fund management team and rich investment experience can provide strong support for the performance of fund products. Different fund products have different investment strategies, including stock type, bond type, money market type and index type. Investors should choose fund products that meet their risk preferences and understand their investment strategies and investment scope. At the same time, investors should pay attention to the historical income and withdrawal of the fund and understand its past performance. Investors can understand the performance of the fund in different market environments by consulting the historical net value and performance report of the fund.

Is the fund bigger, the better?

In the choice of fund size, I believe most investors will think that the bigger the fund, the better. This concept has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. In fact, for funds with active interests, it is not good for the fund to be too large or too small. Because the larger the scale of the fund, the higher the cost of its unit share, and at the same time it faces the risk of being liquidated at any time. If the fund size is too large, asset allocation also needs to invest more in stocks. If the fund scale is too large, the fund manager can manage the fund better and reduce the flexibility of fund operation.

Huaan Securities once had such a set of data research reports. Take the scale of 2 billion funds as an example, holding 5% positions in heavy positions, about 1 100 million. According to the turnover rate of 0.5 for 30 billion stocks, the single-day turnover accounts for 10% of the turnover of individual stocks. It takes 6.7 working days for the fund to transfer positions.

When the fund scale reaches 50 billion, it takes 166.7 days for the fund manager to change positions. However, if the time for changing positions is reduced, it will have a greater impact on the market and increase transaction costs. Therefore, from the perspective of trading direction, the turnover rate of large-scale fund transactions is low, and the idea of stock selection is biased towards medium and long-term allocation.

First, for actively managed funds, the larger the scale, the better.

There is a saying in the fund industry that scale is the enemy of performance.

Due to Public Offering of Fund's "Double Ten Rule", considering the liquidity of stocks, larger funds need to be dispersed in more stocks. However, high-quality stocks in the A-share market are still scarce, and the number of stocks that fund managers can track is limited.

If the fund scale is too large, it is usually a big challenge for the fund manager. Generally speaking, large-scale funds take longer to adjust their positions and have a greater impact on the stocks they hold, so the flexibility of the funds will also decline. Just like riding a bike well, it doesn't mean driving steadily.

Of course, if the fund manager's style is long-term holding and the turnover rate is low, then the influence of fund size on it will not be reflected. After all, when the transaction volume is small, the demand for flexibility is relatively small.

Generally speaking, the bigger the fund, the greater the challenge to the fund manager's own ability and level. If the fund is large in scale and can maintain good performance at the same time, it shows that the fund manager's own professionalism and firm operational ability are very good. Daniel, please accept my knees.

Second, for passively managed funds, the larger the scale, the better.

Because passively managed index funds only fit the index and do not actively operate, fund managers should first consider the impact of subscription and redemption on net worth. Naturally, the larger the scale, the smaller the impact on the net worth.

Of course, if it is an index-enhanced fund, if the scale of the fund is too large, it may lead to the slow response or even failure of some enhancement factors. So the bigger the enhancement fund, the better.

Although we know that the bigger the fund, the better, but there is no doubt that any fund size can not be too small. If the scale is too small, fixed costs such as information disclosure fee, audit fee and lawyer's fee. The higher the cost allocated to the unit share.

For actively managed funds, because fund managers must keep some cash for daily redemption, if the scale is too small, it will also have a serious impact on normal operation.