Recently, C Fund received a regulatory fine, once again bringing the issue of fund style drift back into the eyes of investors. Since this year, regulatory restrictions on the investment side of public funds have continued to increase, and rules such as performance comparison benchmarks and themed investment styles have been introduced one after another, yet the shift in fund style continues to be prohibited. In particular, due to the siphoning effect of the technology market in the second quarter, some consumption, dividend-themed funds, and even balance and value style funds switched to popular tracks such as semiconductors and optical communications, and there was a clear deviation between actual holdings and product positioning. In an interview with the Securities Times reporter, several institutions said that the combination of multiple factors, such as scale requirements, relative ranking assessment guidelines, and broad contract boundaries for some products, is an important reason why the shift in fund style is difficult to root out. Regarding the phenomenon of some funds gaining phased returns through drift, the institutions interviewed generally believe that short-term earnings cannot be a reason to deviate from product positioning, and that reducing style drift still requires the formation of full-process constraints in terms of assessment mechanisms, product design, sales evaluation, and continuous supervision.

Recently, C Fund received a regulatory fine, once again bringing the issue of fund style drift back into the eyes of investors. Since this year, regulatory restrictions on the investment side of public funds have continued to increase, and rules such as performance comparison benchmarks and themed investment styles have been introduced one after another, yet the shift in fund style continues to be prohibited. In particular, due to the siphoning effect of the technology market in the second quarter, some consumption, dividend-themed funds, and even balance and value style funds switched to popular tracks such as semiconductors and optical communications, and there was a clear deviation between actual holdings and product positioning. In an interview with the Securities Times reporter, several institutions said that the combination of multiple factors, such as scale requirements, relative ranking assessment guidelines, and broad contract boundaries for some products, is an important reason why the shift in fund style is difficult to root out. Regarding the phenomenon of some funds gaining phased returns through drift, the institutions interviewed generally believe that short-term earnings cannot be a reason to deviate from product positioning, and that reducing style drift still requires the formation of full-process constraints in terms of assessment mechanisms, product design, sales evaluation, and continuous supervision.