For the executives of fund companies, the correct evaluation of funds is an important prerequisite for their correct evaluation and assessment of their investment talents. For the market system of fund companies, the correct evaluation of funds is an important prerequisite for them to choose resource allocation and sales focus. For the fund manager himself, the correct evaluation of the fund is an important prerequisite for him to reflect on the investment process and find that the investment ability is insufficient and constantly improve.
But generally speaking, in the fund industry, the previous evaluation of funds was not so open, and the evaluation objects were relatively narrow, mostly focusing on the funds around them. Now, for the fund team that publicly sells FOF products, due to the formal establishment of the products, its evaluation ability on the fund will be objectively demonstrated, and the performance effect will also be placed in front of the public.
Given that this field is so small and subjective, it can almost be concluded that the performance of the first batch of FOF products will be relatively differentiated, and the performance of some FOF products is lower than expected, which is a high probability event.
Judging the performance potential of the fund is a very challenging job. To some extent, it is as difficult as predicting the trend of the stock market. Considering the complexity of human nature and the uncertainty of organisms themselves, it is sometimes more difficult than analyzing listed companies.
Therefore, compared with the problem of evaluating all-market funds, the following methods can systematically reduce the difficulty of evaluation, save manpower, and may further increase the management performance of FOF products.
First, focus on passive products. Compared with the importance of fund managers in the performance of active funds, the daily importance of fund managers is greatly reduced in passive products. Therefore, many FOF products will limit their evaluation to passive products. This process can indeed avoid the ability evaluation of fund managers, but it also means that the value of such FOF products is reflected in the asset allocation level, which is not difficult. Therefore, this method is only suitable for management teams with specific endowments.
Second, pay attention to products with small net value fluctuations. Low volatility products, especially capital preservation and fixed income products, are completely different from the evaluation logic of high volatility products. Relatively speaking, the evaluation of the former will be more lasting and transparent, and the team weight of the former products will be higher, and the uncertainty of the evaluation results will be lower. However, such products are usually less competitive, more suitable for institutional holders, and have higher requirements for follow-up services.
Third, focus on our products. This is a flattering method. In view of the large space for information exchange within the company, it helps to eliminate some uncertainties. However, the disadvantage of this kind of FOF products is also obvious, that is, the configuration of this kind of products is easily affected by "off-site factors", which may bring greater challenges to the management of FOF products.