Author | Liu Yinping

Editor | Fu Ying

Source | Dujiao Finance

After experiencing previous market fluctuations and adjustments, public fund institutions finally ushered in a “triple surge” of scale, revenue, and net profit in 2025, delivering a highly substantial report card.

Total scale exceeded 37 trillion yuan, a year-on-year increase of nearly 15%; among the 42 public fund institutions that disclosed performance, more than 70% achieved year-over-year growth in net profit or turned losses into profits. Even more exciting, the annual profit of public funds reached 2.61 trillion yuan, hitting a record high, with equity funds contributing over 70% of the profit.

However, behind this seemingly broad-based growth report card, there lies a “song of ice and fire” among leading public funds. Top players like E Fund and Huaxia Fund saw revenue hit new highs, ICBC Credit Suisse soared to over 3 billion yuan in net profit to rank second in the industry; meanwhile, China Merchants Fund experienced a double-digit decline in net profit.

Why does the same bull market bring wild celebration for some and disappointment for others? The answer may lie in the industry’s differentiated landscape.

1

Over 70% of public fund institutions see improved profitability

The industry’s recovery first manifests in a comprehensive rise in total volume. According to data released by the Asset Management Association of China, by the end of 2025, the total size of the public fund market reached 37.71 trillion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 14.89%. Among various fund types, index funds performed the best. According to Wind data, the scale of non-Hong Kong ETF increased by over 60% throughout the year to 5.8 trillion yuan.

Many leading fund companies not only returned to growth but also set new records in absolute scale. E Fund and Huaxia Fund broke through the 2 trillion yuan mark first, with total management scales reaching 2.42 trillion yuan and 2.16 trillion yuan respectively (excluding ETF connect funds), with growth rates exceeding 20%; GF Fund and Southern Fund also achieved double-digit growth, while Huitianfu Fund and Penghua Fund entered the trillion-yuan club.

Along with the scale, operational efficiency has also significantly improved, benefiting from steady management fee income and the synergy of diversified business lines in some companies. Overall, industry revenue and net profit have both increased.

Looking at the 45 public fund institutions that have disclosed their 2025 performance, 35 of them also disclosed revenue for the past two years, with overall revenue increasing by about 14%, of which 28 saw year-over-year growth, accounting for 80%. E Fund maintained the top position with revenue of 8B yuan, while Huaxia, Southern, GF, and Wanguo Funds, though slightly behind in revenue, grew faster.

From the performance of several securities firm asset management subsidiaries, since 2025, revenue and net profit have performed well overall. This is thanks to the unique business attributes of securities firm asset management—besides public funds, private equity management, ABS, corporate asset securitization, and other non-public fund sectors contributed considerable income, helping them remain resilient amid industry-wide profit pressures.

Seven public fund institutions—Ping An Ansheng, Guohai Franklin, Shenwan Lingxin, etc.—saw their revenue decline year-over-year.

This image may be AI-generated

Image source: CanTote Stock Photo

In terms of profit, out of 42 public fund institutions that disclosed net profit for the past two years, 30 saw improved profitability, accounting for 71.43%, with 29 experiencing year-over-year growth and 1 turning profitable from loss; 12 institutions saw worse results, accounting for 28.57%, with 11 declining year-over-year and 1’s losses widening.

Wang Zhaojiang, Executive Director of the Changcheng Fund Research Institute, said, 2025’s growth in public fund performance mainly relies on scale expansion, with fee reduction effects still present but diminishing marginally and offset by scale. With 70% of funds seeing profit growth, the main reason is scale growth, with relatively stable fee rates, and revenue driven by scale. This is driven by the market’s recovery in equities, boosting both new issuance and existing holdings, creating a resonance between scale and performance.

E Fund still leads, with a net profit of 370k yuan in 2025, but amid rapid scale and revenue growth, net profit decreased by 2.42%. ICBC Credit Suisse Fund ranked second with a net profit of 26.1k yuan, and is one of only two public fund institutions with net profits exceeding 3 billion yuan.

The comprehensive recovery of public fund performance in 2025 is driven by multiple forces.

The rebound in the equity market is the core engine, as the A-share market experienced a structural rally after prior adjustments, led by technology growth styles, with sectors like AI, robotics, and communication equipment performing especially well. Supported by strong equity assets, public funds’ investment returns for the year reached 2.6 trillion yuan, doubling from previous levels, with stock and hybrid funds contributing a total of 2 trillion yuan, accounting for over 75%, making them the “profit bearers.”

ETFs have become the most explosive growth driver in this recovery, as index investing shifts from a mere asset allocation tool to the “main channel” for hundreds of billions of yuan entering the market, with over 2 trillion yuan flowing into ETFs throughout the year.

Fixed income products continue to play the “ballast” role, but amid falling interest rates and bond market volatility, the growth of bond fund scales slowed, and profits of fixed income funds also declined year-over-year.

2

Some break through, others fall behind

Against the backdrop of overall industry recovery, a “fire and ice” situation within public funds is intensifying. While most institutions are riding the wave upward, some are facing challenges of stagnant or declining income and profits.

In the 2025 industry performance report, ICBC Credit Suisse performed remarkably: net profit exceeded 3 billion yuan, soaring 42.51% year-over-year, becoming the second most profitable after E Fund.

In terms of management scale, ICBC Credit Suisse’s 377.1k yuan, with only a 6.23% increase YoY, is not particularly outstanding compared to top-tier players in the trillion-yuan club. However, it has surpassed many larger competitors in net profit.

As one of the few “full-qualification” fund companies, ICBC Credit Suisse’s business covers public funds, pensions, separate accounts, special projects, and cross-border asset management. By the end of 2025, it managed 272 public funds, 653 pension, separate account, and special project portfolios, with total assets under management reaching 2.37 trillion yuan. Amid fee reductions and profit pressures in the industry, these assets underpin its strong profitability.

GF Fund and Wanguo Fund’s 2025 net profits reached 58k yuan and 20k yuan, respectively, with growth rates of 37.7% and 25.92%. In a more polarized industry, these two firms, with well above-average growth, further solidified their leading positions in the “top tier.”

Among small and medium-sized institutions, firms like Dacheng Fund, Industrial Fund, Wanjia Fund, CICC Fund, and Everbright Prudence Fund also achieved “double-digit” growth in revenue and net profit.

This image may be AI-generated

Image source: CanTote Stock Photo

However, industry polarization is intensifying. Under the pressure of fee reductions and fierce market competition, some companies face revenue and profit pressures.

In 2025, China Merchants Fund’s public fund management scale grew by 8.82% YoY to 24.2k yuan, just shy of the trillion-yuan mark. Operating income increased by 3.07% to 5.47 billion yuan, but net profit declined by 12.84% to 21.6k yuan, earning 212 million yuan less than the previous year. Since peaking in 2022, the company’s revenue has stagnated, and net profit has shrunk for three consecutive years—an authentic reflection of the divergence between scale expansion and profit decline amid industry fee cuts.

Wang Zhaojiang believes that the profit decline despite scale growth in some public funds mainly stems from product structure, costs, and fee rate pressures. First, regarding product structure, the proportion of low-fee products has increased, such as ETFs, money market, and bonds (with fee rates of 0.15%-0.3%), while high-fee active equity funds (with fee rates of 1.2%) have shrunk, leading to “revenue growth without profit growth.” Second, rigid cost increases—research, channels, IT, compliance, and sales expenses—continue to rise, with high fixed costs and weakened scale effects.

China Universal Shenlong’s performance is also not optimistic. Although revenue data has not been disclosed, net profit declined 12.97% YoY to 765 million yuan, and scale shrank 6.53% to 13B yuan, with all fund types—from equity to fixed income—shrinking in scale. Additionally, Ping An Ansheng, Guohai Franklin, Shenwan Lingxin, and others also saw declines in revenue and net profit.

3

Challenges Remain Under Public Fund Fee Reductions

2025 public fund annual reports show that license dividends are rapidly diminishing, and the era of “easy profits” is over. In the past, holding a public fund license meant considerable scale and profit; now, industry differentiation extends from scale to operational results, with research depth, product innovation, and refined operations becoming core variables in ranking.

In the future, three key variables may reshape the industry landscape.

This image may be AI-generated

Image source: CanTote Stock Photo

The wave of fee reductions is far from over. In 2025, public fund fee cuts and commission reductions were fully implemented. Fee reduction is not just a short-term pain but a fundamental shift in industry pricing power—shifting from channel-driven to performance-driven, from scale-oriented to profit-oriented.

Can index investing continue to “attract money”? In 2025, ETF scale surpassed 5.8 trillion yuan, but behind the enthusiasm, concerns are emerging: intensified homogeneity competition, with most funds flowing into leading broad-based and popular sector ETFs, leading to a “80/20 split” becoming the norm. For small and medium-sized institutions, blindly following ETF trends is like fighting a losing battle; differentiation, boutique strategies, and tool-based approaches may be key to breaking through.

Incremental opportunities lie “outside public funds”. ICBC Credit Suisse, with a total management scale of 2.37 trillion yuan, ranks second in profitability. The real moat may be hidden in non-public fund businesses such as pensions, separate accounts, and investment advisory. As the personal pension system is fully rolled out and fund advisory becomes routine, those with early multi-asset management capabilities are likely to seize opportunities in the next cycle.

From “broad-based growth” to “differentiation,” from “license competition” to “internal strength”—the public fund industry is undergoing a profound value restructuring. The competition in 2026 has already begun. In this race for survival and ranking, who will win, and who will fall behind? Time will tell.