What kind of ** can be popular, to the product department of ** company, is actually a very metaphysical thing.
GF's Nasdaq ETF (159941) has now reached 16.3 billion, and there is no doubt that it is a very successful product design.
From 2015 to 2019, the Nasdaq ETF had a five-year scale swinging around 30 million, and its liquidation line was 50 million yuan.
So in each reporting period, we can see such a net worth warning.
But for some reason, this ** was not liquidated, and finally survived until 2020, and the ** scale at that time was 1 billion yuan.
Then the market volatility is more and more exaggerated, everyone is more and more recognized for the importance of cross-border investment, to last year's U.S. stock market plummeted, a large number of funds have chosen, the scale of this ** stood at 10 billion last year, and then exceeded 15 billion this year.
In 2015, when wealth management has just been redeemed and trusts are full of high returns, ** is not a particularly rare wealth management variety, let alone the US Nasdaq **.
Since the listing of the Nasdaq ETF, the net value has risen by 282%, and the company has indeed made a fairly forward-looking product layout, but it has experienced several years of no interest.
I think that only after the full interpretation, the wide coverage, and the acceptance of this point of view by more and more people, and the fact that they can make money and get positive feedback, will everyone implant an "ideological steel seal" in their heads, and the scale of the product can have a benign response.
These variables are undoubtedly difficult for those who design the best products in the first place.
For ** companies, these tens of billions of ** are of course the "treasures" in the company, and they are the "cash cows" that create management fees, but a few years ago, they were still about 50 million mini ** that could be liquidated if they were not careful.
At that time, you said that the scale of these products could increase by more than 100 times, and I don't think many people could believe it.
After all, in 2012, new energy vehicles were still in the stage of speculating on the concept and cheating subsidies, Zhuang Tao of the Chinese businessman had just left, Zhou Haidong had not been born, and the Nasdaq had not yet had the status in the minds of investors today.
In addition to Huaan's **ETF, other **ETFs, including Huabao Oil and Gas, which has been very popular in the past two years, almost fell on the eve of dawn before the arrival of the bull market in 2014, allowing us to get a glimpse of the tragedy of the bear market that year.
Ten years, for the A** field, it may be like a lifetime, and we will definitely not have much understanding of the "ancient" market.
But taking a step back, I think you must still have a feeling about the quantitative multi-factor of Guojin, which is red and purple this year.
The scale of Guojin quantitative multi-factor at the end of 2021 is only 3 million, and Ma Fang has changed a round of strategy after independently managing Guojin multi-factor, and the impact on the product can be described as reborn, but if it were not for the ** resonance of micro-cap stocks + quantification, we may miss such a product forever.
Last Friday, I went to Huabao** to learn from Uncle Mang, and talked about a product he was very sad about - China Merchants S&P Index (000391), which tracks the S&P High Yield Dividend Aristocratic Total Return Index (SPHYDA.).SPI), which was liquidated on July 29, 2016, and the index has risen by about 49% since the liquidation date, while the CSI dividend has risen by 30% over the same period.
This U.S. stock dividend QDII** did not last to the day when the cross-border and the dividend was widely accepted, which has to be said to be the regret of our investors.
"The fate of an individual must be considered not only by personal struggle, but also by the historical process." This is true.
Due to the recent impact, it is becoming more and more difficult to happen, and the number of liquidations is also increasing.
But in fact, many of the scale of less than 500 million or even liquidated may be a lack of opportunities, or the company's ability to maintain products needs to be improved, not that the product creation is not good enough.
Strictly speaking, these mini**, which are among the top in terms of earnings this year, are at risk of liquidation, but do you dare to guarantee that the future tens of billions of ** will not be born in these products?Not necessarily.
I don't know if you have found it, but the tens of billions of bases shared earlier, the time when their scale fell near the liquidation line was mainly concentrated in 2012-2014, which is similar to today's long bear road.
If the market rises in the future, there is no doubt that it will be a **pit now, but it is just in it, and it is not perceptible.
Trapped by the current customer's account losses, many first-line financial planners are questioning their own "existence value".
At the end of the day, isn't it just selling **?A similar confusion is plaguing the minds of every practitioner.
I used to be obsessed with a sentence," I was obsessed withGood ** is managed, not sold
I think that the "conscience" of the company should always be "clean and self-conscious", maintain restraint and low profile in publicity, and spend more attention on making good products.
But now I don't think so, Marx's philosophy of dialectics has long told us to understand the world dialectically.
The chef is good, and of course someone has to spread the word of mouth and cheer for you.
Like today's 30-year Treasury bond ETF, the only unique product in the whole market, the increase in the past year is 96%, fully enjoying this year's bond bull market, and now the scale is only 26.4 billion, I have to say that it is a pity.
There are two ** in front of you, one 10 billion and one 10 million, is the former really much stronger than the latter?
Not necessarily. It is not false to be good, but someone must sell it.
The matter of "selling **" itself is a neutral behavior, and the key is just a degree.
Please imagine, if no one sells, many very good products may not be able to wait for the arrival of their home field, if the Nasdaq ** was liquidated in the past few years, what do we investors take to invest in the Nasdaq today?If the ETF was liquidated at that time, what asset allocation do we take now?What do we take to share the alpha of Huashang, Bank of Communications, and IFC?
When an industry has passed the stage of savage development, the final competition is the level of alpha.
What is Alpha?
* The manager's stock selection is alpha, the index compilation of the index company is alpha, the company's product creation is alpha, and the friendly cooperation between the company and channels, brokerages and e-commerce is also an alpha.
Financial planners, ** sales within the restricted range of product recommendations to customers, of course, is a kind of alpha.
A successful product is inseparable from the efforts of the industry up and down, which is also the unique significance of the industry as a unique ecosystem.