In less than five months this year, the issuance scale of new Fund of Funds (FOFs) has reached 994 billion yuan, surpassing the total for the entire previous year and nearing the historical annual peak. The FOF market in 2026 is surging with momentum unseen in nearly a decade. Behind these record-breaking figures, a crucial question arises: how far can this FOF issuance wave, predominantly driven by banks with active participation from public fund managers, ultimately go?
The FOF surge is evident. Data shows that as of May 25th, 77 new FOFs have been established in 2026, with a combined scale of 994.36 billion yuan. This represents a staggering increase of 2.67 times in number and 3.32 times in scale compared to the same period last year. More remarkably, the new issuance scale in under five months has already exceeded the full-year total for 2025 and is close to the historical peak set in 2021.
This year has also seen a concentration of blockbuster FOF products. Twelve FOFs have been sold out on their first day of issuance, while 36 "mini-blockbusters" with initial fundraising exceeding 10 billion yuan account for nearly half of all new FOFs. Leaders include Bosera Yingtai臻选 6-month holding, raising 58.44 billion yuan, and Zhongou Yingxin稳健 6-month holding, which followed with 51.25 billion yuan. Guangfa Wentai多元机遇 three-month holding also secured 50.41 billion yuan. Beyond the 77 newly established FOFs, 10 are currently being issued, 25 have been approved for future issuance, and 60 are awaiting regulatory review.
The history of FOFs traces back nine years. The first batch of six public offering FOFs was approved in September 2017, with a total issuance scale of 130 billion yuan. Over the next five years, FOFs grew steadily, reaching 2.22 trillion yuan by 2021. However, market volatility from 2022 to 2024 disrupted this trend. By the end of 2024, the FOF scale had receded to 1.33 trillion yuan, a 40% contraction from the 2021 peak. 2025 marked a turning point, ushering in a wave of expansion that saw the year-end scale surge to 2.44 trillion yuan, an increase of approximately 83% year-on-year. The momentum continued into 2026, with the FOF scale reaching 3.55 trillion yuan by May 25th, a year-to-date increase of about 45%.
A notable shift is the dominance of bond-biased hybrid FOFs. Industry insiders indicate that稳健型的偏债混合型FOFs have become the main theme of this issuance wave, whereas high-equity FOFs have largely faded from the market. Data reveals that of the 77 new FOFs this year, 70 are bond-biased hybrid types, constituting 90% of the total.
A fund manager explained that following the decline in risk-free interest rates, a large number of low-risk-preference investors within the banking system seek tools offering stable returns with controlled drawdowns. FOFs, by diversifying across low-correlation assets like stocks, bonds, commodities, and REITs, precisely meet this demand. Another expert added that post-"打破刚兑", investor demand has risen for稳健 products that can genuinely achieve asset allocation. The combined forces of bank wealth management product净值化, increased market volatility, and the rise of pension investments have propelled FOFs to the forefront.
Analysis points to the strategic transformation needs of bank channels as the core driver behind the火爆的FOF发行. Banks are no longer content with merely "selling single products." Instead, based on customer profiles, they specify requirements for fund companies to定制策略, shifting towards "selling配置方案." Concurrently, low interest rates have ignited strong demand for wealth management alternatives. FOFs, with their unique advantage of "多元分散、较低波动增值," precisely cater to bank clients' thirst for稳健 tools, becoming a new favorite in asset allocation.
These FOF products often feature short holding periods of 3 or 6 months, with equity allocations controlled between 5% and 30%, employing a "固收+" strategy. This design恰好精准承接了 the massive funds maturing from bank wealth management products and fixed deposits. Fundamentally, FOFs represent a one-stop asset配置解决方案, aligning with the long-term trend of居民财富 migrating from real estate and deposits to capital markets.
An industry participant outlined a direct动力链: "银行渠道的主动助推" serves as the immediate catalyst, "居民资产配置需求转移" forms the underlying基本面, and "市场赚钱效应" acts as the indispensable lubricant. Over the past year, public offering FOFs have delivered an average return of about 11.7%, a performance curve that has become the most powerful endorsement for sales.
The banking sector's role has evolved into a systematic "造星"运动. Banks are no longer focused on single product发行 but are implementing体系化、品牌化、定制化布局 through exclusive FOF plans. Examples include招商银行's "TREE长盈计划," 建设银行's "龙盈FOF," and 中国银行's "慧投计划." Banks have elevated FOFs to strategic-level products, directly controlling the flow of capital.
In this深度合作, banks, as the principal party, prioritize customer retention and brand reputation. Their考核权重 typically follows this order: alignment of product strategy with customer profile (primary) > comprehensive strength of the fund company (foundational) > historical performance of the fund manager (flexible). The investment team and the overall投研实力 of the fund company are key considerations for banks because FOFs'多元化配置 demands极高的"体系化作战能力" – from专业价值判断 across various assets to跟踪研究 of细分资产投资机会 and深度挖掘 of underlying funds, all relying on高效协同 within the投研团队.
Banks evaluate potential FOF合作产品 based on several要素: product positioning, alignment of业绩基准 with customer needs, stability of risk-return characteristics achieved through asset配置, proof of strategy effectiveness via past performance, and consistency of style across different market environments. This time, banks are not seeking high-volatility "stars" but rather an absolute收益体验 with "收益有上限，回撤有硬性底线." For instance,招商银行 imposes strict requirements on FOF drawdown control. "Whether the strategy can precisely match the risk-aversion characteristics of bank wealth management clientele determines whether the合作 can成立."
Furthermore, while individual manager performance is a bonus, it is less critical. Banks tend to define FOFs as B2B资产管理方案 rather than marketing vehicles for单一明星基金经理. Customizing FOFs is not a simple task; it tests a fund company's ability to manage多种资产配置, discern大类资产走势, and integrate seamlessly with银行系统. Such high barriers make it difficult for smaller fund companies to compete, leading to an accelerated concentration of FOF resources among头部基金公司.
This深度合作 brings additional pressure for fund managers. Regarding定制FOFs, banks exhibit a strong意愿 for窗口指导 on compliance, risk control, and performance drawdowns. If the net asset value falls below a warning line or underperforms the定制基准, the consequence is not merely redemption pressure but a potential trust crisis for the entire channel brand. This压力 directly传导至投研端, forcing fund managers to adopt more defensive and conservative操作.
A fund industry insider summarized the current mindset of fund companies in eight words:战略必争，战术焦虑. "With an incremental market exceeding one trillion yuan摆在这里, and traditional active equity fundraising being difficult, FOFs represent one of the few remedies to rapidly scale up and increase total assets under management. No leading company wants to fall behind," the source stated.
However, under the银行定制模式, the话语权 of public fund managers is severely compressed. Fee structures are被迫向渠道倾斜, featuring arrangements like管理费分成 and极低综合费率. Consequently, this business exhibits characteristics of "高规模、低利润、强服务." Moreover, "后续持营是个大问题; upon opening, most定制FOFs face大规模流失. The存量 is finite, and banks引导客户 to redeem old products to purchase new ones, continuing to做大首发规模," the insider added.
Data raises concerns. As of May 25th, the份额 of newly established FOFs this year is 994亿份, while the total FOF份额 across the market increased by 1091亿份 during the same period—a difference of only about 100亿份. In other words, approximately 90% of the year-to-date growth in FOF份额 comes from new fund issuance, primarily driven by bank channel sales, with only 10% attributable to net subscriptions.
Regarding the banking sector's shift from "代销" to "定制," a public fund professional私下坦言: with定制FOFs, banks wield absolute话语权 in the channel端, essentially making public fund managers work for the banks—a sentiment tinged with无奈.
What is the future prospect for public offering FOFs? The trend appears positive. The rationale includes持续利率下行, which increases investor demand for稳健工具. Furthermore, the rapid development of markets like ETFs, commodities, and REITs provides FOFs with a rich工具箱.
Looking ahead, FOFs need to better leverage their跨资产、多策略的优势, improve their risk-return ratio, help holders achieve a better investment experience, and strive for a positive cycle between scale growth and investor profitability. An industry calculation notes that while public FOF scale has创历史新高 exceeding 3.5 trillion yuan, compared to the近30万亿元体量 of bank wealth management products, the penetration rate remains below 1.5%. "If FOFs are positioned as高品质、多资产的银行理财替代/增强工具, capturing just 5% of the bank wealth management market would point to a potential market space of 1.5 trillion yuan. Over the next 3–5 years, with the development of the personal pension金字塔 and the真正的落地 of买方投顾, FOFs still have room for growth," the source said.
The future likely belongs to "固收+" FOFs and多资产多策略FOFs that can truly扛起 the "理财替代" banner—this赛道 is considered the most certain. The reasoning is that in a low-interest-rate environment, the收益率 of单一债基 is continuously diluted, paving the way for the爆发 of多资产配置型FOFs that span stocks, bonds, gold, REITs, and overseas assets.
However, after nine years since their launch in China, why is FOF development still有限? An interviewee pointed out three core issues: First, the lack of下跌保护. Unlike私募 or some多资产银行理财 that can use strategies like CTA or long-short to adapt to various markets, public funds primarily focus on stocks and bonds and are基本只能做多. Although FOFs can invest in跨境资产 and商品期货ETFs, they are still restricted to long-only positions. "This is an institutional硬伤 in investment scope; many private banking high-net-worth clients will not purchase this阉割版多资产产品," the insider stated. Second, poor清算效率. Due to the complexity of underlying assets,净值的公布 is often on a T+2 basis, leading to low赎回效率 and a suboptimal customer experience. Third, transparency and liquidity disadvantages. Compared to基金投顾, FOFs have lower transparency regarding底层资产 and lack the emotional "按摩" service provided by投顾. Furthermore, most products impose holding periods of three months or more, restricting liquidity.
Can a product that has regained popularity due to银行渠道定制 firmly establish itself within the wealth management landscape? Only time will provide the answer.