Since the start of the year, a total of 1,350 new funds have been established across the market, with combined issuance reaching 738.5 billion units and an average of 636 million units per fund. Looking at the monthly trends, issuance has followed a pattern of being strong early, weak in the middle, and then stabilising. In January, boosted by the traditional "new year rally" and a phased recovery in the equity market, issuance hit 167.443 billion units, marking the year's peak. February saw a sharp drop to 66.342 billion units due to the holiday period. From March to June, issuance remained stable at around 80 to 90 billion units per month. It slipped again to 79.287 billion units in July before falling further to 39.204 billion units in August, setting a new annual low.

Data source: WIND, as of 2026-09-03

It is worth noting that the number of funds issued and the total shares raised have not moved in tandem. In August, 181 new funds were established, the second-highest monthly count of the year, yet issuance totalled just 39.2 billion units, the second-lowest of the year. The average issuance per fund dropped to 356 million units, well below January's 1.003 billion units. While fund companies have been actively expanding their product lines, distribution channels are finding it significantly harder to raise capital, and blockbuster funds have become noticeably scarcer. Although June and August saw similar numbers of newly established funds, August's issuance was only 43.8% of June's, reflecting a sharp decline in fundraising efficiency.

Mixed Funds Lead the Pack While FOF and Bond Funds Deliver Quality Over Quantity

Looking at the product structure, mixed funds have overtaken equity funds to become the largest category this year, with issuance reaching 252.783 billion units, accounting for 34.23% of the total. Their average issuance per fund stood at 790 million units, far exceeding the 352 million units seen in equity funds. Although equity funds numbered as many as 593, representing 43.9% of all funds, they raised only 174.5 billion units, or 23.6% of the total.

Data source: WIND, as of 2026-09-03

Meanwhile, FOF funds have emerged as a standout. A total of 158 products raised 138.5 billion units, with an average of 1.026 billion units per fund, leading the entire market. Among them, Bosera Yingtai Zhenxuan 6-Month Holding A, Zhongou Yingxin Steady 6-Month Holding A, and Guangfa Wentai Multi-Opportunity 3-Month Holding A saw combined issuance of 5.844 billion, 5.125 billion, and 5.041 billion units, respectively. Bond funds, on the other hand, displayed a "fewer but better" profile, with just 203 products representing 15% of the total. However, their average issuance per fund reached 865 million units, second only to FOF funds. In the current cycle of falling interest rates, fixed-income products remain a key allocation target for institutional capital.

Guangfa Leads with 47.3 Billion Raised While Zhongou Secures 31 Billion from 23 Funds

From the perspective of fund companies, leading institutions are showing a differentiated competitive landscape. Guangfa Fund ranked third by number of products with 51 offerings, but led the market with 47.374 billion yuan in issuance. Its Guangfa Research Select A raised a combined 7.221 billion yuan, while Guangfa CSI 500 Index Quantitative Enhanced A brought in 5.605 billion yuan.

Data source: WIND, as of 2026-09-03

E Fund ranked first in the market with 63 products, but its issuance of 44.2 billion yuan was slightly below Guangfa's. Its average product size stood at 702 million units, lower than Guangfa's 929 million. Zhongou Fund's "boutique strategy" has proven highly effective, as just 23 products raised 31.056 billion yuan, with an average issuance per fund of 1.35 billion units, the highest among leading firms. Its brand strength in active equity and FOF is evident. Franklin Templeton Sealand Fund also displayed a "fewer but finer" approach, with 32 products raising 33 billion yuan and an average size exceeding 1 billion units, supported by blockbuster offerings in both active equity and ETF segments. ChinaAMC Fund, however, exhibited a "volume-price divergence," with 49 products raising just 23.8 billion units, averaging a mere 486 million per fund. Despite its comprehensive ETF lineup, initial issuance sizes remain generally small, with numerous "seed-type" ETFs dragging down the overall average.

Looking at blockbuster funds, a total of 12 new funds have seen issuance exceed 5 billion units this year. By type, balanced hybrid funds, short-term pure bond funds, passive index bond funds, and hybrid FOF products have performed particularly well. Among them, Southern Balanced Return A led the entire market with 7.533 billion units and was officially established on June 16. In the tilt-equity hybrid category, Guangfa Research Select A ranked second with 7.221 billion units in issuance. Following closely were Yongying Ruijian Growth A, Fortune Huabao Advantage Industry A, and Silver Fund Zhixiang A, which recorded issuance of 5.867 billion, 5.777 billion, and 5.099 billion units, respectively.

Asset Allocation Accelerates and ETFs Move Toward Quality Competition

In the near term, September data is likely to remain at low levels. Should the equity market stage a phase of recovery, mixed funds and "fixed-income plus" products are expected to be the first to rebound. Looking at longer-term trends, FOF and pension target funds are set to enter an accelerated growth phase. With the deepening rollout of the personal pension system, "asset allocation-type" products represented by FOF will continue to receive sustained incremental capital. The strategic position of bond funds and "fixed-income plus" products will be further elevated. As interest rates continue to decline, institutional allocation demand will shift from "credit downgrading" to "duration management plus moderate equity enhancement." Second-tier bond funds and balanced hybrid products that offer steady returns will continue to be the mainstay of new issuance. ETFs will transition from "quantity expansion" to "quality competition," with the survival space for homogenous ETFs set to shrink further. Products with distinct tool attributes, low fee advantages, and strong liquidity will stand out, intensifying the Matthew effect among leading fund companies in the ETF space.