A souring asset-management story in China has exposed the widening gap between marketing and reality in the country’s mutual fund industry. Puyin Ansheng Fund Management (浦银安盛基金) has come under fire after one of its new products, Strategy Select (浦银安盛策略优选), posted persistent losses while promotional materials appear to have credited the manager with earlier gains he did not produce.
Launched on December 19, 2023, Strategy Select has accumulated a loss of 12.52% and, the reporting shows, materially lagged both the CSI 300 benchmark and its peer group. The fund’s first manager, Yang Fulin (杨富麟), resigned and left the firm on October 24, 2025 after a string of disappointing results across multiple products he managed. Regulators and investors now face a straightforward question: did the firm’s marketing mislead buyers about who produced the track record it highlighted?
Puyin Ansheng’s marketing material for the 2023 launch emphasised the historical performance of two other funds—Dividend Select (浦银安盛红利精选) and Consumption Upgrade (浦银安盛消费升级)—to bolster Yang’s credentials. The promotional brochure froze performance figures at September 30, 2023, showing three‑ and five‑year returns that looked impressive on paper. But Yang only took over Dividend Select on July 26, 2021; under his stewardship the fund lost 28.96% through the cut‑off date, meaning most of the cited gains were achieved before he was in charge.
Industry rules are blunt on this point. The interim rules governing public fund promotional materials in China require advertising to be truthful, complete and to disclose a manager’s tenure, so that investors can judge whether historical returns reflect the current decision‑maker. Presenting a fund manager as a “top performer” by leaning on prior gains that occurred under different stewardship risks confusing investors about who actually delivered those returns and could run afoul of regulatory standards.
Yang’s track record was mixed elsewhere. Over roughly five years managing Consumption Upgrade, the fund delivered a cumulative return of 10.81%, which outpaced its internal benchmark by 14.45 percentage points but was middling in absolute terms given market cycles. Other products he ran posted deeper losses and weak peer rankings; one dividend‑focused fund declined 33.83% while trailing its performance target by nearly 47 percentage points during his tenure.
The episode matters beyond one firm and one manager. China’s mutual fund industry has grown rapidly in recent years, with retail investors accounting for an increasing share of flows. Trust in product disclosure and fund manager accountability underpins that growth. Allegations that a fund house used “misattributed” historical returns to package a new product risk undermining investor confidence, inviting closer scrutiny from regulators and encouraging more conservative distributor behaviour.
For Puyin Ansheng the immediate fallout is reputational and commercial. Investors who bought Strategy Select on the strength of the advertised track record may now question product governance and internal compliance. For peers, the case is a reminder that bright marketing can trigger regulatory headaches if it glosses over who was actually at the helm when returns were achieved. Watch for stronger enforcement of disclosure rules and clearer labeling of manager tenures in promotional copy as regulators seek to protect retail clients and shore up market credibility.