The "Open Secret" of Top Quantitative Firms' Dividends

```

As the A-share market trends upwards, a leading quantitative firm has made a surprising move: dividend "net value reset to one".

Months ago, a similar maneuver once pushed a new quantitative star to the center of controversy.

On the surface, this seems like a "generous" gesture to clients—distributing all the book profits to investors.

For investors, is this a reassuring “payout in hand,” or a passive “account reset”?

For private fund managers, is this a clever mechanism, or an underlying “little calculation” behind the dividends?

When net value and dividends are rearranged, what is truly put on the table may not be cash flow, but the power game over profit distribution.

As for “who wins and who loses,” it is for readers to ponder deeply.

“Net Value Reset to One” Dividend Arrives

In mid-September, just as the A-share market had finished an upward phase for the year, a leading quantitative private fund managing over 60 billion yuan—let’s call it Quant Fund J—suddenly made a “special move”: one of its funds announced a dividend.

According to the announcement, the record date for the dividend was September 17, and the expected distribution date was September 22.

The so-called “special move” was that the dividend was done via a “net value reset to one”.

What does this mean?

It means that no matter how much the fund’s net value had risen during the boom, after the dividend, its per-unit net value would be “reset” to 1.0000 yuan.

Let’s “translate” this for investors:

First, when the fund’s net value rises above a certain level, at the time of dividend, the manager “takes out” the part exceeding 1 yuan and distributes it to investors.

Second, investors can either receive cash directly or choose to reinvest the dividends to enjoy compound returns in the future.

Third, the net value shown in the fund account returns to the 1 yuan starting line.

The fund manager also specifically stated in the announcement that this is just a choice of distribution method and will not alter the fund’s inherent risk and return characteristics, nor does it mean reduced risk or increased returns.

This dividend method is like putting 120 yuan into a piggy bank, then your family takes 20 yuan out and puts it in your pocket, and the balance in the piggy bank returns to 100 yuan.

In essence, no money is lost, just placed differently; the 20 yuan taken out can be freely “used”.

Net Value "Below Par"

Zishitang further learned: the fund mentioned earlier is an all-market stock selection product from private fund J.

“All-market stock selection” means the quantitative model isn’t limited to a single broad index—like the common CSI 500 or CSI 1000 indices—but selects from thousands of A-share stocks, capturing short- and mid-term trading opportunities according to factor models.

Holders of the product found that as of September 25, its latest net value had dropped below the 1 yuan face value, temporarily in a "below par" state.

(As shown above) This product completed its dividend on September 17—net value reset to 1.0 yuan—so this situation arose.

Channel information shows: this quant product was launched in mid-July 2021, and when the “924 rally” began in 2024, its net value was still around 0.87, indicating that its first three years had been a rather long “trough”.

“Disagreements” Among Giants

Zishitang also noted: “Net value reset to one” is not a first in the quantitative industry; for example, in June 2025, emerging quantitative star K also did this.

Since 2023, quant star K has been a “rocket” in the private fund world: rising from below 10 billion yuan in assets to the “first echelon” of quant funds.

The moves of these two quant giants are highly representative, but their dividends differ significantly.

Take quant rising star K as an example: if fund holders do not specify a dividend method (cash/dividend reinvestment), according to the information provided by the distribution channel at the time, “cash dividend” is the default. (As shown above)

As shown below: quant private fund J states in its announcement: “For holders who do not choose a specific dividend method, the default is dividend reinvestment.”

This obvious wording difference is actually about whether investors "pocket it" or "keep working".

Let’s illustrate:

Quant rising star K's approach: If investors do not select, the money is returned directly to your pocket by default.

This is like a year-end bonus going straight to your payroll card—you can spend it as you like.

Quant private fund J’s logic: If you don’t choose, the system automatically reinvests the dividend in the fund, as if the money stays in the “warehouse” working for you.

This is like the company automatically buying you a long-term investment, locking the money back in the pool; your account amount doesn’t decrease, but you don’t actually get "cash in hand".

The difference in operation between the two giants might look like a few words, but it determines whether investors feel immediate cash flow or not—“immediate realization” or “delayed realization”.

Controversy Over Dividend Operations

Let’s return to the dividend move by quant private fund J.

If we zoom in to the past year, a completely different picture appears: the net value of the product mentioned has risen more than 90%. Against this significant gain, combined with the long previous lull, the “net value reset to one” dividend looks especially intriguing.

Even the most glamorous products in a quant bull market have experienced long periods of drawdown and trials.

From a manager’s perspective, this kind of maneuver isn’t just a "gift", but more of a “clever arrangement” in mechanism.

The product’s net value once reached as high as 1.68, and at the moment of the dividend reset, previous gains were “locked in”, allowing the manager to extract the corresponding performance fee.

Let’s do a simple (theoretical) math: starting from a net value of 1 yuan, reaching 1.68 yuan in four years is a 68% return.

According to the usual 20% performance fee in private funds, about 13% of the gain would be taken out as the manager’s share at the dividend moment. In other words, if you invest 1 million yuan and earn 680,000 yuan on paper, about 130,000 yuan will “belong” to the quant private fund at the dividend date, and the remainder will stay with the investor as cash or reinvestment.

For investors, this brings mixed feelings.

For example: it’s a staged realization—you finally get some real cash in your hand;

Or: after the reset, your account net value is back to the start, seemingly as if you “worked for nothing.” You didn’t plan to cash out, but were made to "witness" a performance fee extraction because of the manager’s dividend arrangement.

This dividend method actually involves a subtle balance: managers, old investors, and new money—all three interests converge here.

This phenomenon can be packaged as a beautiful report card when the market booms, but upon careful inspection, it can also suggest a different implication.

Risk Warning and DisclaimerThe market involves risk, investments require caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, and does not take into account the special investment goals, financial status, or needs of any individual user. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article fit their specific situation. Investing accordingly is at your own risk. ```