Which is the reason for the loss?

2022-06-12 0 By

Many investors believe that fund managers must act like gods and make money every day, which is impossible.In my opinion, some money fund managers must lose, and some money has to lose.Fund industry has been a strange like, that is, fund managers make money, and base people do not make money.The root of the problem is that Jimin did not earn what fund managers should, but lost what fund managers had to lose and what they had to lose.Clearly fund products just retreat, but for a lot of people it is a loss, who is this problem?This is something to reflect on.The first, systemic risk and black swans, is the main reason why markets are worried about systemic risk and black swans.Black Swan risk: The main reason for this decline is the tension between Russia and Ukraine. This risk is very sudden. Like a natural disaster, the big risks cannot be avoided, the small risks can not be avoided, but the risks are irresistible.Systemic risk: This is the risk of a system-wide blowup, such as this fall because the Fed will tighten monetary policy and markets fear the European Central Bank will follow suit.In 2021, the major stock indexes in Europe and the US strengthened, largely on the back of ample liquidity from ultra-loose monetary policy.For example, in 2015, the sharp drop of A shares was due to excessive market rise, but the main driving force of the rise was financing disk drive, coupled with the pledge of major shareholders, the whole ecology of A shares is very fragile, A slight drop will trigger A domino effect, the sharp drop will lead to financing disk burst, financing disk burst and then cause A slump.For fund managers, black swans and systemic risk are unavoidable, especially as many equity products have position limits.Here, or to emphasize the importance of asset allocation, allocation of part of the debt base and commodity base although not high returns, but can ensure that in the worst market also have harvest.In addition, when doing asset allocation, do not have fluke psychology or speculative psychology, such as using part of a higher proportion of fixed income + allocation of equity assets to replace the debt base.As we all know, I highly praise fixed income + zhang Qinghua, the first person, but his representative product Efonda Ann Ying return actually did not resist this round of decline, loss of 6% this year.However, it is worth noting that zhang Qinghua’s other products are actually stable due to the large allocation of debt capital. Considering the income hedging of debt assets, even if the market falls further this year, these products are also likely to achieve positive returns.Second, volatility risk, such as the K-chart of Kweichow Moutai, does not rise in a straight line, but in a spiral like the waves.In the face of such an excellent company, if we want to seize every round of volatility, high cast low suction, it is likely to lose the watermelon pick sesame, so the maximum probability of making a lot of money is firmly hold.Since firmly hold, it is natural to face the decline of the stock, the decline of nature will also be a loss of money.Third, valuation risk Valuation is like gravity, it can’t go up forever, it can’t go down forever.When the stock price of an enterprise rises to a certain extent and the price is much higher than the fair value, a bubble will occur, and the enterprise will become an asset with very low cost performance. It is natural for profit-seeking capital to sell it and then look for an enterprise with more cost performance.There are generally two ways for the market to digest valuation. One is that enterprises have the growth ability and absorb valuation pressure by rising earnings; the other is that enterprises belong to cyclical industries and absorb valuation pressure by falling stock prices.For fund managers, there are only two strategies to deal with the risk of high valuations.For deep value fund managers, they tend to sell when the valuation is high, but for growth fund managers, as long as the growth logic of the enterprise is still in place and the valuation is not too exaggerated (for example, the valuation increases to hundreds of times, completely overdrawing the growth space in the next ten years), many will choose to hold.So growth managers tend to suffer performance pressure from valuation pullbacks, which is why deep value managers are more defensible than growth managers.However, for the valuation risk of individual stocks, fund managers are still relatively professional, but for the market valuation risk and industry valuation risk, in fact, there is no good way.For example, since 2021, fund managers who adhere to value investing generally have not changed well. The main reason is that their favorite stocks have risen too much, resulting in overvaluation. The valuation chart of csi 300 index has been well illustrated.In August 2020, the valuation of the CSI 300 index has broken through the danger value, and it happens that many people are also at this time of admission.Many investors made some money in the following months, thinking that they were “gifted” at investing when they were really just making money from the market bubble.This is all about making money on luck and then selling it back to the market when the bubble bursts.But it should be noted that after a long cycle, most fund managers actually make money, even if they suffer from the bursting of the valuation bubble.If you carefully review the operation of excellent fund managers, you will find that they generally intervene in the A interval below the opportunity value, looking for the opportunity to repair the valuation, and then choose the opportunity to sell above the median, the most perfect place to leave the B interval, and repeat.And the reason why jimin lost money is that he did not make money from A to B, but lost money when the valuation bubble burst.For example, Zhang Kun, who manages Efunda Premium Selection Mix, has achieved nearly six times the return during his tenure, but has been criticized by others for withdrawing 20% recently.In recent months, her products have undergone a considerable correction. Many people think that she is a bad fund manager, and in fact, she has not realized the essence. Her loss is nothing more than the money of the valuation bubble burst, which is a systemic risk.The author has looked at her representative product, CEIb Healthcare, which has achieved a return of 197% and an annual income of 22% up to now. It still belongs to the first-class data level!In short, the reason for many of the people’s losses lies in that they did not earn the money the fund manager should earn, but lost the money the fund manager should lose.It is clear that the fund managers’ products are only withdrawn, but for many people it is a loss. Whose problem is this?This is something to reflect on.Fourth, style risk A-shares are not mature in all aspects, including market mechanism, listed companies and investors, so the volatility is significantly higher than the mature market, style rotation is also obvious.It is the value managers who will have a tough time in 2020 and 2021, such as Cao Mingchang, Qiu Dongrong, He Shuai and Chen Yifeng.One of the main reasons is that the market’s money is focused on the white horse stocks with large market capitalization, and the white horse stocks are constantly rising resulting in high valuations, and value managers do not have good access to the opportunities.But as we can see, Messrs. Cho and Cho had their own recovery during this period as the market style shifted.I have said on more than one occasion that Despite his poor performance, Cho was one of the fund managers who made the biggest gains for me in the past two years. The main reason is that I continued to invest in the downturn, which led to a large number of low-priced chips, which will be rewarded when the fund’s net value rises.In addition, the author looked at the following, despite the poor performance of cho in the past few years, but the several products under his management have doubled, and the annualized returns are as high as 30%.As Zhang Kun said, good investors in his investment career, at least should have two or three times against the whole market experience.If a good fund manager goes with the flow, that is the beginning of mediocrity.For fund investors, only by understanding the investment style of the fund manager, can we know why he lost money during this period of time, why he made money, holding his products will feel at ease.Fifth, the wrong money fund managers make mistakes is very normal things, excellent fund managers can control the loss to the lowest degree.For example, if a company has fundamental problems, Feng Liu calls it the risk of value destruction. If the company’s promising logic does not appear, the company has major strategic mistakes, and accidents occur in the company or industry, thus resulting in value destruction.For example, letV, Xinwei Group, Erkang Pharmaceutical, China Fortune, etc., these stocks have serious flaws. In fact, there are many excellent fund managers who “step on thunder”, which naturally has the problem that their research is not in place and has not been cleaned, but fortunately, the risk is controlled at the lowest level through asset allocation.For example, changchun High-tech suffered a sharp drop in its stock price due to policy reasons, and ZTE suffered a continuous drop in sanctions in 2018. These are mini black swans, and fund managers are also victims. There is really not much to be done.Of course, the premise of “stepping on thunder” is that the company itself is “thunder”, there is indeed a problem of one kind or another, but at present many people just because a fund manager’s position in a stock has fallen too much, accuse it of stepping on thunder, this is a little unreasonable.Last but not least: I’ve been impressed by the number of prominent fund managers who have left the public sector in recent months.Being a fund manager is a tough job, and the better the manager, the harder it is.Because good fund managers, they don’t make a name for themselves by chasing good rankings and risking investors’ money, they just try to make the safe money they can.For example, some big guy has multiplied his cumulative returns several times to an annualized return of nearly 20% (warren Buffett is just over 20%, too).But he was miserable, often greeted by investors.Investors look at his performance in previous years, scold him, “I rely, you earned 300% in previous years, this year only more than 20%, old eyes dim, bad comment!”Investors look at his ranking this year, and scold him again, “I rely on, not even in the top 30%, garbage!”Think about it. Kind of vindicates him.If you really want to rely on funds to make money, you have to understand the fund managers, why they make money and why they lose money.In this way, we can earn what we should earn and lose what we should lose.