A mid-sized Chinese asset manager is under scrutiny after one of its flagship products posted persistent losses while promotional materials appeared to attribute other funds' historic gains to its then-manager. The fund, launched in December 2023, has become a rare underperformer amid a broadly recovering A‑share market and has prompted questions about marketing practices and regulatory compliance in China's fast‑growing retail fund sector.
The product, Puyin Ansheng Strategy Select (浦银安盛策略优选), recorded a cumulative loss of 12.52% and was reported to have lagged the CSI 300 index and its stated benchmark by a wide margin. Its inaugural lead manager, Yang Fulin, who specialised in consumer sector research, resigned and relinquished management of all his funds in October 2025 after a string of disappointing returns across multiple mandates.
Public records show Yang’s track record was uneven. One long‑running consumer fund he managed returned a modest 10.8% over nearly five years but only outpaced its benchmark on a relative basis; other funds under his stewardship experienced sharp drawdowns and poor peer rankings. The Strategy Select fund itself lost 3.84% during Yang’s 18 months at the helm, a weak result in a period when major indexes rallied.
The more contentious issue is promotional. Marketing materials used to sell Strategy Select in late 2023 highlighted striking three‑year, five‑year and since‑inception returns from a separate product, Puyin Ansheng Dividend Select, presenting them as evidence of Yang’s skill. Those figures — shown as a 3‑year gain of 16.91%, a 5‑year gain of 114.55% and a nearly 197% cumulative return since inception as of 30 September 2023 — mostly predated Yang’s stewardship, which began in July 2021. In fact, the fund reportedly lost 28.96% during Yang’s actual management window used in the promotion, creating a clear mismatch between the manager credited and the period from which returns were drawn.
Chinese rules for publicly offered fund marketing require that materials disclose managers’ tenure and avoid selective or misleading use of performance history. The practice, described in the original Chinese coverage as "移花接木" — grafting one performance record onto another manager — raises questions about whether the firm complied with those rules. If regulators find the disclosures incomplete or misleading, the firm could face administrative measures, fines, or orders to correct marketing language.
Beyond any regulatory consequences, the episode underscores larger tensions in China’s retail investment landscape. Asset managers compete aggressively for flows in a crowded market and have an incentive to amplify successful narratives around star managers. But as the regulatory authorities push for greater transparency and as Chinese retail investors grow more sophisticated, misattributed performance claims risk damaging trust, reducing future fundraising capacity and accelerating reputational harm for the firm and its affiliates.