A method and system for ranking mutual fund performance indicators

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of gold bull fund company performance index ranking method and system, comprising: receiving selection calculation task request, analysis request to build selection task five tuple CounselorAwardTask=(AwardName, the date of examination EvalEndDate, the number of years of examination EvalYears, Qualifications, score model ScoreModel);Based on the public fund public information disclosure data in basic database, build the sample pool of participating fund company;For each participating fund under each participating fund company in sample pool, extract the basic data of each trading day in the examination period to pre-calculate basic index, generate participating fund basic index dataset;According to score model ScoreModel, the basic index dataset is called, and the quantitative evaluation index of each company in the sample pool of participating fund company is calculated respectively;The quantitative evaluation index obtained by calculation is converted into standard score, and is weighted and summarized according to preset weight, to obtain the comprehensive score of each participating fund company, and the quantitative scoring ranking result is output according to the comprehensive score.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of financial data processing technology, and in particular to a method and system for ranking the performance indicators of top-performing fund companies. Background Technology

[0002] Fund industry rankings help investors quickly filter out historically high-performing funds from a vast pool of options, improving decision-making efficiency. A consistently high ranking usually reflects strong stock selection, market timing, and risk control capabilities from fund managers and their research teams. Meanwhile, ranking changes can reflect shifts in market style, competitive distribution channels, and the success or failure of company strategies.

[0003] The ranking of my country's fund industry is an important indicator reflecting the competitive landscape of the industry. Its current situation is characterized by concentration among the top players and intensified competition. It has important reference value for investors' decision-making, but there are also problems such as data transparency, evaluation standards, and short-term behavior.

[0004] When faced with massive amounts of data such as net asset value, size, and government bond yield of thousands of funds over a long period (5 or 7 years), using traditional serial calculations or real-time join queries can lead to problems such as database I / O bottlenecks, memory overflows, or extremely long calculation times (high system response latency).

[0005] How to effectively process the aforementioned financial data and obtain a fair and effective ranking is a technical problem that needs to be solved. Summary of the Invention

[0006] In view of the problems existing in the prior art, the purpose of this invention is to provide a method for ranking the performance indicators of top-performing fund companies. This method can accurately and quickly obtain relevant rankings by effectively processing financial data. Another purpose of the invention is to provide a ranking system for the performance indicators of top-performing fund companies that implements the above method.

[0007] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides a method for ranking the performance indicators of top-performing fund companies, the method comprising: Receive the evaluation calculation task request, parse the request to construct the evaluation task quintuple CounselorAwardTask=(AwardName, EvalEndDate, EvalYears, Qualifications, ScoreModel); Based on publicly disclosed information data of public funds in the basic database, data is filtered according to the qualification criteria for participation, and data of eligible fund companies are extracted from all fund companies in the market to construct a sample pool of participating fund companies. For each participating fund under each participating fund company in the sample pool, basic data for each trading day during the observation period is extracted to pre-calculate basic indicators and generate a basic indicator dataset for the participating funds, so as to reduce the repeated reading and calculation of data in the subsequent evaluation indicator calculation stage; the basic indicator dataset consists of a seven-tuple including fund return, rolling 1-year fund return, rolling 1-year benchmark return and size weight. Based on the ScoreModel scoring model, the basic indicator dataset is retrieved, and quantitative evaluation indicators are calculated for each company in the sample pool of participating fund companies. The quantitative evaluation indicators include: ranking of assets under management, growth of equity investment assets under management, overall performance of actively managed equity funds, overall performance of actively managed fixed-income funds, passive investment management capabilities, investor satisfaction evaluation, and comprehensive expense ratio of equity funds. The calculated quantitative evaluation indicators are converted into standard scores and weighted according to preset weights to obtain the comprehensive scores of each participating fund company. The quantitative ranking results are then output based on the comprehensive scores.

[0008] Furthermore, data is filtered based on the eligibility criteria (Qualifications) to construct a sample pool of participating fund companies, including: Determine whether the number of standard equity funds, actively managed flexible funds, or actively allocated funds under a fund company that meet the preset threshold for operating time, as well as the number of pure bond funds, quasi-bond funds, or bond-biased funds, meet the product line requirements. For fund companies that meet the product line requirements, their average comparable net asset value during the evaluation period is calculated, and they are sorted from largest to smallest and accumulated sequentially. The fund companies with the highest cumulative comparable net asset value accounting for the top 90% of the total size are selected as the sample of participating fund companies.

[0009] Furthermore, the methods for calculating comparable net asset value include: Confirm the fund category and query the preset conversion table of comparable net asset value of each type of fund to obtain the corresponding conversion factor; The comparable net asset value of a fund is obtained by multiplying its net asset value by the corresponding conversion factor. For mixed funds, the net asset value of the fund's investments in stocks, bonds, and convertible bonds at the end of each quarter during the review period is converted and summarized at ratios of 1, 0.2, and 0.5, respectively.

[0010] Furthermore, the seven-tuple is specifically defined as:

[0011] in, Indicates participation in the evaluation of the fund. This indicates one trading day during the observation period. This represents the rate of return of fund F on day t. This represents the rolling 1-year fund return. This represents the rolling 1-year benchmark yield. This represents the rolling one-year risk-free rate of return. This indicates the size weight of the participating fund on that trading day.

[0012] Furthermore, when calculating the overall performance of actively managed equity funds and actively managed fixed-income funds, both dimensions of absolute return performance and relative return performance are included. The calculation logic is as follows: the overall performance score is equal to the average of the sum of the absolute return performance score and the absolute return ranking stability score multiplied by 70%, plus the average of the sum of the sum of the relative return performance score and the relative return ranking stability score multiplied by 30%.

[0013] Furthermore, when calculating the stability score of absolute return ranking and the stability score of relative return ranking, a performance drawdown adjustment ranking calculation model is introduced. Specifically, this includes: calculating the quantile of the participating fund's return rate on the set of returns of similar funds, and performing an inverse normal transformation on the quantile to obtain a sample sequence; Calculate the mean and maximum drawdown of the sample sequence, and adjust the mean by the maximum drawdown based on the empirical adjustment coefficient, which is used as the ranking stability score.

[0014] Furthermore, the calculation methods for investor satisfaction evaluation indicators include: Using each half-year of the observation period as the calculation cycle, the publicly disclosed data of the funds are extracted to calculate three basic indicators of the participating funds in each cycle: simple investor return rate, weighted average net asset value return rate, and investor profit / loss ratio based on the target return rate. Convert the above three basic indicators into standard scores relative to similar participating funds; Based on the net asset value of the fund in each semi-annual period, the weighted average score of the three basic indicators for each participating fund during the entire evaluation period is calculated, and the arithmetic mean of the three weighted average scores is taken as the score of a single participating fund. The investor satisfaction evaluation index is obtained by weighting the scores of all participating funds under a fund company by using the comparable net asset value of each individual participating fund as the weight.

[0015] Furthermore, the calculation method for the comprehensive fee rate of equity funds includes: Extract all expenses accrued by fund companies at the equity-type public fund product level. These expenses must include at least the manager's remuneration, custody fees, sales service fees, investment advisory fees, transaction fees, and other expenses. The average net asset value for the first half of the year is calculated by combining the fund product’s custody fee amount, daily custody fee rate and number of calendar days. The comprehensive fee rate is obtained by dividing the total amount of all fees of all equity funds in all sub-periods within the observation period by the sum of the products of the average net asset value and the number of calendar days in the corresponding period.

[0016] Furthermore, the calculation of passive investment management capability indicators adopts different underlying scoring rules depending on the type of passive product; If the participating fund is a standard index fund, its underlying scoring indicators include tracking error and contract compliance; If the participating fund is an enhanced index fund, its underlying scoring indicators include relative return ranking stability and the proposed Sortino information ratio; If the participating fund is an ETF, its underlying scoring indicators include tracking error, market capitalization, and average daily turnover.

[0017] A performance indicator ranking system for top-performing fund companies, the system being used to implement the aforementioned performance indicator ranking method for top-performing fund companies, the system comprising: The task parsing and construction module is used to receive evaluation calculation task requests, parse and construct the evaluation task quintuple CounselorAwardTask=(AwardName, EvalEndDate, EvalYears, Qualifications, ScoreModel); The sample screening module is used to filter data based on the publicly disclosed information of public funds in the basic database and the qualification conditions (Qualifications) to extract data of eligible participating fund companies and build a sample pool of participating fund companies. The data preprocessing module is used to extract basic data for each trading day for each participating fund under each participating fund company in the sample pool, perform pre-calculation, and generate a seven-tuple dataset of basic indicators of participating funds, which includes data features such as fund return rate and rolling 1-year fund return rate. The evaluation index calculation module is used to retrieve the basic index dataset based on the scoring model ScoreModel and calculate the quantitative evaluation indexes for each company in the sample pool of participating fund companies. The quantitative evaluation indexes include: management scale ranking, equity investment management scale growth, overall performance of actively managed equity funds, overall performance of actively managed fixed income funds, passive investment management capability, investor satisfaction evaluation, and comprehensive expense ratio of equity funds. The sorting output module is used to convert the calculated quantitative evaluation indicators into standard scores, perform weighted summaries according to preset weights to obtain a comprehensive score, and output the quantitative score ranking results.

[0018] This invention has the following technical features: 1. Efficient preprocessing and feature encapsulation technologies for massive financial data This invention addresses the massive and complex daily trading data in fund evaluation by designing a "fund basic indicator pre-calculation" architecture. By pre-calculating and uniformly encapsulating the data of each participating fund for each trading day into a standardized seven-tuple basic indicator dataset, this data structure optimization effectively avoids the repetitive reading and cumbersome calculations of basic data during subsequent multi-dimensional indicator (such as active equity and fixed income) calculations, significantly improving the overall system's computational performance and batch processing efficiency.

[0019] 2. Mathematical Modeling of the Evaluation Task This invention abstracts and defines the complex evaluation calculation task into a highly reusable quintuple data structure. This enables the system's underlying layer to automatically delineate the set of participating fund companies and call the corresponding calculation engine for processing by parsing this structured data, thus enhancing the system's scalability and flexibility.

[0020] 3. Standardized "comparable conversion" mechanism for the scale of heterogeneous assets This invention designs an underlying data conversion mechanism based on a "comparable net asset value conversion table." It assigns specific conversion coefficients to funds with different risk characteristics (e.g., 0.2 for pure bond funds and 0.433 for standard index funds), and maps heterogeneous data to a unified comparison dimension through mathematical weighting, thus solving the technical problem that different types of funds cannot be directly benchmarked.

[0021] 4. Innovative "Drawdown Adjusted Ranking (DAR)" statistical algorithm This invention proposes a mathematical statistical algorithm to eliminate extreme values ​​and volatility interference when calculating the performance stability of actively managed funds. Instead of simply calculating the rate of return, the algorithm first calculates the quantile of the fund's return among similar samples, and then uses the inverse function of the standard normal distribution (inverse normal transformation) to map the data into a standard sample sequence. Subsequently, the mean and maximum drawdown features of the sequence are extracted, and an adjusted DAR score is output by combining empirical adjustment coefficients. This algorithm effectively filters data noise and more accurately quantifies the true stability of performance.

[0022] 5. Data fusion model for multi-dimensional innovation evaluation indicators In constructing the scoring model, this invention breaks away from the limitations of traditional methods that solely rely on "rate of return" as the benchmark. It introduces two innovative data nodes that closely align with real-world investment experiences from a data fusion perspective: Investor satisfaction (15% weight): The discrete data points disclosed by the fund are aggregated to comprehensively calculate the simple return rate and weighted average net asset value return rate of investors. The investor profit / loss ratio (Omega ratio) based on a given target return rate is introduced for data standardization and fusion.

[0023] Comprehensive Fee Rate Calculation (5% Weight): This method penetrates the individual fee rates of fund products, extracts and calculates implicit and explicit cost data from multiple dimensions such as manager compensation, custody fees, and transaction fees, and truly restores the overall data loss model for maintaining product operation. Attached Figure Description

[0024] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating the overall ranking of performance indicators for Golden Bull Fund Management Companies; Figure 2 This is a flowchart for calculating the performance indicators and overall scores of Golden Bull Fund Management Company. Detailed Implementation

[0025] The technical solution of the present invention will now be clearly and completely described with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some, not all, of the embodiments of the present invention. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0026] In the description of this invention, it should be noted that the terms "center," "upper," "lower," "left," "right," "vertical," "horizontal," "inner," and "outer," etc., indicate the orientation or positional relationship based on the orientation or positional relationship shown in the accompanying drawings. They are used only for the convenience of describing the invention and for simplifying the description, and do not indicate or imply that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation, or be constructed and operated in a specific orientation. Therefore, they should not be construed as limitations on the invention. Furthermore, the terms "first," "second," and "third" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance.

[0027] In the description of this invention, it should be noted that, unless otherwise explicitly specified and limited, the terms "installation," "connection," and "linking" should be interpreted broadly. For example, they can refer to a fixed connection, a detachable connection, or an integral connection; they can refer to a mechanical connection or an electrical connection; they can refer to a direct connection or an indirect connection through an intermediate medium; and they can refer to the internal connection of two components. Those skilled in the art can understand the specific meaning of the above terms in this invention according to the specific circumstances.

[0028] The following combination Figure 1 , Figure 2Specific embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are for illustrative and explanatory purposes only and are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0029] This invention discloses a method for ranking the performance indicators of top-performing fund companies, comprising the following steps: Receive the evaluation calculation task request, parse the request to construct the evaluation task quintuple CounselorAwardTask=(AwardName, EvalEndDate, EvalYears, Qualifications, ScoreModel); Based on publicly disclosed information data of public funds in the basic database, data is filtered according to the qualification criteria for participation, and data of eligible fund companies are extracted from all fund companies in the market to construct a sample pool of participating fund companies. For each participating fund under each participating fund company in the sample pool, basic data for each trading day during the observation period is extracted to pre-calculate basic indicators and generate a basic indicator dataset for the participating funds, so as to reduce the repeated reading and calculation of data in the subsequent evaluation indicator calculation stage; the basic indicator dataset consists of a seven-tuple including fund return, rolling 1-year fund return, rolling 1-year benchmark return and size weight. Based on the ScoreModel scoring model, the basic indicator dataset is retrieved, and quantitative evaluation indicators are calculated for each company in the sample pool of participating fund companies. The quantitative evaluation indicators include: ranking of assets under management, growth of equity investment assets under management, overall performance of actively managed equity funds, overall performance of actively managed fixed-income funds, passive investment management capabilities, investor satisfaction evaluation, and comprehensive expense ratio of equity funds. The calculated quantitative evaluation indicators are converted into standard scores and weighted according to preset weights to obtain the comprehensive scores of each participating fund company. The quantitative ranking results are then output based on the comprehensive scores.

[0030] This invention discloses a method for ranking the performance indicators of top-performing fund companies, specifically including the following: I. Evaluation System 1.1 Evaluation of Calculation Tasks This invention uses the Golden Bull Award selection process in the fund industry as a background and example to illustrate the detailed technical solution of this invention. The Golden Bull Fund Management Company Award selection task can be defined by the following quintuple: CounselorAwardTask = (AwardName, EvalEndDate, EvalYears, Qualifications, ScoreModel). Wherein: AwardName: Award Name (e.g., "Golden Bull Fund Management Company Award") EvalEndDate: The deadline for evaluation (e.g., the deadline for the 22nd Golden Bull Award is December 31, 2024). EvalYears: The evaluation period (the evaluation period for the Golden Bull Company Award is five years). Qualifications: Eligibility criteria for participation, expressed as a Boolean expression. ScoreModel: The scoring model for this award The evaluation task can be described as follows: Based on the set of participating fund companies defined by the task (determined by the Qualifications) and the relevant evaluation indicators involved in the task, calculate the score of each fund company in the set during the corresponding observation period (determined by EvalYears and EvalEndDate) according to the ScoreModel of the task, and rank the fund companies in the set from largest to smallest score, which is the quantitative score ranking result of the evaluation task.

[0031] 1.2 Evaluation Index System The quantitative evaluation indicators and their weighting ratios for Golden Bull Fund Management Companies are briefly listed below: Table 1. Quantitative Evaluation Index System for Top-Performing Fund Management Companies

[0032]

[0033]

[0034] 1.2.1 A certain type of fund (denoted as...) Overall performance score over time First remember ,and Similarly, for the fund market, this is the set of all such trading days during the observation period. The fund is purchased on the trading day preceding each date and redeemed on trading day h, provided that the redemption date is still within the observation period, and the elements in this set are arranged in chronological order.

[0035] Then calculate the fund according to the following calculation steps. In the fund category The score is calculated first at each point in time. The standardized scores compared to similar categories are as follows: 1. Benefit: For any given time... For any fund Calculate the fund subscription amount on the trading day prior to t. and holding The daily return is denoted as and above-benchmark return .

[0036] 2. Standardization: Calculation at a specific point in time. For fund-related matters Standardize all funds, i.e., calculate the return vector. )and ( The mean and standard deviation of ) are then standardized, i.e.

[0037] On trading day t, each fund The standard scores of the daily return and the return exceeding the benchmark are denoted as the absolute return standard score vector of trading day t. and the standard vector of excess returns .

[0038] 3. Estimate the fund size at each point in time: Calculate the fund size using the method described in 1.2.10. Scale at various points in time and the corresponding weights .

[0039] 4. Calculate the fund Overall score: Fund F in fund category The above-average return and above-benchmark return scores are as follows: .

[0040] 1.2.2 Ranking Adjusted by Fund Performance Drawdown Calculate the fund using the following steps. In the fund category The ranking was adjusted based on the performance pullback.

[0041] (1) First calculate the fund Set of returns and excess return set ,in and Similarly, this is the set of all such trading days in the fund market during the observation period, arranged in chronological order: If a fund is purchased on the trading day preceding each of the specified dates and redeemed on trading day h, the redemption date must still be within the observation period. (2) For any ,calculate In the set quantiles on and In the set quantiles on ; (3) Record Let be the inverse function of the standard normal distribution function, calculate and ; (4) Calculate the samples separately. and samples average , and maximum drawdown , ; (5) Calculate the samples separately. and samples average , For maximum drawdown , Experience adjustment coefficient , : ;

[0042] It is a fund In the fund category The ranking of the maximum drawdown adjustment of absolute returns and the ranking of the maximum drawdown adjustment of relative returns.

[0043] 1.2.3 Calculation Method for Individual Scoring Indicators at the Fund Company Level One of the principles of the Golden Bull Award is categorized comparison. Therefore, the performance of an evaluation object on a certain scoring indicator can only be compared with its own category. For example, the share growth rate of a fund can only be known by comparing it with all equity funds in the category, and cannot be compared with mixed funds. However, a fund company often has multiple funds in the equity sub-category, and funds in multiple sub-categories of equity. Aggregating the scores of the share growth rate indicator of these equity funds into the fund company's equity fund score involves two steps: 1. The scores of individual indicator funds are aggregated into a category of funds under the fund company ( Total score for this single indicator: Remember a certain fund company exist The fund portfolio managed by the type of fund is , China Fund F in a certain indicator The score is recorded as , and remember To calculate the fund according to the method described in 1.2.10 The total size during the observation period is calculated according to the following steps: (1) Calculation ; (2) then It is a fund company In terms of indicators The score.

[0044] 2. The scores of a fund company across multiple subcategories for a single indicator are aggregated to form the fund company's total score for that indicator: Suppose a certain fund company There are funds in multiple types; let these types be... In class Listing on fund companies Regarding indicators The score is If we denote the collection of all fund companies as ,and Follow the steps below to summarize the scores of each sub-category of fund companies. exist The above is about indicators The score.

[0045] (1) Calculate the weighted weight of the subclass scores. First, calculate the fund company. In the fund category The total scale on the above: recorded by fund companies There are classes The fund collection is Calculate the total size of fund F during the observation period according to method 1.2.10. That fund company In the fund category The total scale on ; Then consider fund companies In the fund category Weighted average of scores: ,

[0046] (2) Summary score: Fund company exist The above is about indicators Score: .

[0047] 1.2.4 Table of Comparable Net Asset Value Scale for Various Types of Funds When calculating award results, if the net asset value of multiple types of funds needs to be aggregated, Table 2 below will be used. The specific method is to first identify the fund category, find the corresponding conversion factor in the table, and multiply its net asset value by the corresponding conversion factor (for mixed funds, calculate the conversion factor using the algorithm given in the table) to calculate the fund's comparable net asset value.

[0048] Table 2. Conversion Table of Comparable Net Asset Value of Various Fund Types

[0049] Comparable net asset value (NAV) of fund companies: As of the end of the observation period, this includes equity funds (excluding stock index funds), all mixed funds, and bond funds and stock index funds with an operating period of at least 37 months. Following rule 1.2.4, the NAV of each quarter during the observation period is converted and averaged across all quarters to obtain the comparable NAV of each product. Subsequently, the comparable NAVs of all products under the same fund company are aggregated to obtain the company's overall comparable NAV.

[0050] 1.2.5 Scoring Indicators for Passive Products The scoring indicators for passive index funds, enhanced index funds, and ETFs are shown in the table below: Table 3 Scoring Indicators for Standard Index Funds

[0051] Table 4 Scoring Indicators for Enhanced Index Funds

[0052] Table 5 ETF Scoring Indicators

[0053] 1.2.6 Investor satisfaction evaluation indicators The assessment of investor satisfaction is primarily based on a comprehensive consideration of three indicators: simple rate of return, weighted average net asset value return, and investor profit / loss ratio. The specific calculation methods for each indicator are as follows: (a) For the participating fund product F in the (semi-annual) reporting period, calculate the following three indicators respectively: 1. Simple rate of return for investors

[0054] in, Indicates the reporting period, for Net asset value of Fund F at the end of the reporting period. The net asset value of fund product F at the beginning of the reporting period is u. for Total subscription amount of Fund F during the reporting period for Net subscription and redemption amount of Fund F during the reporting period This refers to the dividends distributed by Fund Product F during the reporting period.

[0055] 2. Weighted average net asset value return rate: disclosed in the fund's semi-annual report, denoted as... . 3. Investor Profit / Loss Ratio: Given a target rate of return (This value is 0). The method for calculating investor profit and loss (Omega ratio) is as follows (see 1.2.11): Where vector It is the method described in 1.2.10 ( Change to ) calculation , It represents the number of trading days for Fund F during the reporting period.

[0056] (II) Calculation of Standard Scores for the Three Indicators in the (Semi-annual) Reporting Period: For all funds in the category (according to the finest classification in Table 2) that participated in the evaluation, and which disclosed reports during the reporting period, the three indicators mentioned above were standardized according to the method in 1.2.13, and standard scores were obtained. The standard scores for these three indicators for fund F are as follows: , and .

[0057] (III) Summarize the scores of the participating fund F on the three indicators during the evaluation period: (Record) This represents the average net asset value of Fund F over the three quarters of the reporting period (six months). , Given the total number of reporting periods for Fund F during the observation period, the three indicators for Fund F during the observation period are as follows: (1) Simple rate of return for investors:

[0058] (2) Weighted average net profit margin:

[0059] (3) Investor profit / loss ratio:

[0060] (iv) The investor satisfaction score for Fund F during the evaluation period was:

[0061] (v) Summarize the fund company's investor satisfaction score: The net asset value of the participating fund F will be used as the basis for the score. Converted to comparable net asset value, denoted as Let's say the set of funds participating in the evaluation for fund company q is... Then the investor satisfaction score for fund company q is:

[0062] in .

[0063] 1.2.7 Calculation Method for Comprehensive Fee Rate of Equity Fund Products This calculation uses all expenses incurred in maintaining equity-type public funds to determine the overall expense ratio for fund companies' equity products. This indicator aims to reflect the level of fees investors incur when holding these fund companies' equity products.

[0064] (a) Items involving expenses Management fees, custody fees, sales service fees, investment advisory fees, transaction fees (such as transaction commissions, stamp duty, handling fees, securities regulatory fees, transfer fees, etc.), and other fees (such as registration fees, annual listing fees, information disclosure fees, account service fees, shareholder meeting fees, audit fees, legal fees, etc.).

[0065] (ii) Average size of the first half of the year If remember Let i be the average net asset value of fund product i in period t. Let t be the number of calendar days in period t. The formula for calculating the average net asset value of fund product i in period t is:

[0066] in, Let be the custody fee amount for fund product i in period t. Let i be the daily custody fee rate for fund product i in period t. Let t be the number of calendar days in period t. If the custody fee rate changes during period t, the average net asset value of fund product i in period t is calculated using the following formula:

[0067] in, The daily rate prior to the change in the custody fee rate for period t. The daily rate after the change in the custody fee rate for period t. The number of calendar days prior to the change in the custody fee rate for period t. This represents the number of calendar days following the change in the custody fee rate for period t. .

[0068] (III) The specific calculation formula for the comprehensive fee rate is as follows:

[0069] Where T represents the number of sub-periods within the observation period, divided by six months. Let J be the set of all equity funds offered by a certain fund company in period t, and let J be the set of all fee items of the fund. This refers to the cost of the j-th project of fund product i in period t.

[0070] 1.2.8 Calculation Method for Score Summary of Multiple Scoring Indicators under the Same Category Individual awards for fund products and awards for fund companies often have multiple scoring indicators. This invention uses a weighted summation method to aggregate these indicators into a single indicator, where the weights are predetermined. Because individual awards or company awards are selected within a category, and categories are comparable, but the dimensions of each scoring indicator may not be the same, standardization is necessary before weighted summation. The specific method is as follows: 1. Establish an individual award or company award in the category of Selection from the middle, and have Each scoring indicator is set in category Members , The scores on these indicators are respectively , .

[0071] 2. For all members in the class, the first... A vector composed of indicators After standardization according to method 1.2.13, it is denoted as .

[0072] 3. Remember The weighted summation weight of each scoring indicator is: ;

[0073] 4. Then the members of the class Overall score for:

[0074] Then according to The size of the award determines which members are eligible to be nominated.

[0075] 1.2.9 Calculation Scope of Indicators In fund evaluation, to ensure consistent calculation methods, funds with multiple share classes will be handled according to the following principles: 1) Except for the unit net value, all other indicators (such as fund size, weighted average net value return rate, etc.) use the consolidated data disclosed in the fund's periodic reports.

[0076] 2) The net asset value per unit uses data from the fund's main share.

[0077] The above principles are mainly based on the following considerations: 1) Consolidated data reflects the overall operation of the fund and is more representative and comparable.

[0078] 2) The information required to weight or combine the net asset value per unit of different shares is incomplete, and there are technical difficulties; the difference in net asset value per unit of different shares of the same fund is small, and the net asset value of the main share is representative, so the net asset value per unit of the main share is used for calculation.

[0079] 1.2.10 Risk-Adjusted Performance Indicators (1) The total size and trading day weighting of Fund F during the observation period: On any trading day during the observation period , record fund On the trading day The net asset value disclosed at the end of the most recent quarter, converted using the conversion factor in table 1.2.4, yields comparable net asset values ​​(hereinafter referred to as "size"), which are denoted as follows: , ,time The number of trading days between the most recent disclosed trading volume and the last disclosed trading volume were respectively , If time It is precisely because of this large-scale announcement that... = , = like definition:

[0080] This can be referred to as the total size of Fund F during the observation period. (Record again)

[0081] For the return vector and The common weighted weights, where For set The number of elements.

[0082] (2) The pseudo-sorcinol ratio and pseudo-sorcinol information ratio are respectively: ; .

[0083] 1.2.11 Performance: Absolute Return and Excess Return remember Let F be the set of all such trading days for fund F during the observation period, arranged in chronological order: For funds purchased on the trading day preceding each specified date and redeemed after being held for h trading days, the redemption date must still be within the observation period. This is especially true when h is d, w, m, or y. These represent a set consisting of a trading day, a trading week, a trading month, and a trading year, respectively.

[0084] Sample of Fund F's return: for any given time period ,investor The return on fund F purchased on the previous trading day and held for h trading days is denoted as . A set arranged in chronological order is abbreviated as . ,Right now .

[0085] 1.2.12 Investor Profit / Loss Ratio Given a target rate of return The method for calculating investor profit and loss (Omega ratio) is as follows: Where vector It is calculated by the method described in (1) of this section. .

[0086] 1.2.13 Calculation Methods for Some Basic Indicators of Publicly Offered Funds (a) Relevant notation for one-dimensional samples Record the sample and For the sample The number of elements, It is a sample Observe the frequency vector, that is These are sample observations. Frequency of occurrence (In this evaluation scheme, in some cases, take...) Define the sample median, sample mean, sample standard deviation, sample lower standard deviation, and root square of the second-order raw moment of sample S. The standard scores for each sample observation are as follows: 1. Median: (Note: The original text contains some formatting errors and inconsistencies. A more accurate translation would require the full context.) Let S be the set of elements arranged in ascending order, and denote it as S. , and remember ;

[0087] The following are some possible scenarios: (1) If Then the sample median , (2) If No value, meaning ,but

[0088] (3) If No value, meaning ,but

[0089] (4) Other cases are (only) or )

[0090] 2. Sample mean:

[0091] 3. Sample standard deviation:

[0092] 4. Standard deviation below the sample size:

[0093] 5. Root square of the second-order moment at the origin of the sample:

[0094] 6.No. Standard score of each sample observation:

[0095] in, And record It is a sample The standard component vector.

[0096] 7. The sample mean used in indicators 3 and 4 above. Using the sample median respectively By substitution, we can obtain the corresponding indicators, and denot the sample standard deviation at this time as follows: The standard deviation below the sample is and the The standard for individual sample observations is divided into .

[0097] 8. Sample The maximum drawdown is defined as: .

[0098] 1.3 Overall Calculation Process The overall calculation process for the comprehensive ranking of Golden Bull Fund Management Company performance indicators is as follows: Figure 1 As shown.

[0099] The overall data processing and calculation process consists of five steps: The first step is to prepare the basic data. Based on publicly disclosed information from public funds, a basic database for the Golden Bull Awards selection will be constructed. This database will store and record the basic data related to the entire Golden Bull Awards selection calculation process. In addition, based on the Golden Bull Awards fund classification system, all funds in the market will be classified, tagged with category labels, and any historical changes in fund classifications will be recorded.

[0100] The second step is the selection of participating fund companies. Based on the eligibility criteria for the Golden Bull Fund Management Company Award, fund companies meeting the eligibility requirements are selected from the Golden Bull Award database to form a sample pool of participating fund companies. Each subsequent calculation step is performed within this sample pool.

[0101] The third step is to pre-calculate the fund's basic indicators. To facilitate the verification of the calculation process, improve the overall calculation performance, and avoid repeatedly calculating some basic indicators (such as "the return rate of buying this fund on the previous trading day and holding it for one year") when calculating various evaluation indicators later, the basic indicators of relevant fund products can be pre-calculated and saved to the Golden Bull Award selection database.

[0102] The fourth step is to calculate the performance evaluation indicators for fund companies. For each participating fund company, calculate its various scoring indicators during the evaluation period (e.g., the evaluation period for the 22nd Golden Bull Award is from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2024) as shown in Table 2.

[0103] The fifth step is to calculate and rank the fund companies' overall scores. For each participating fund company, the relevant scoring indicators are weighted and summed according to the scoring model to obtain an overall score. The companies are then ranked from highest to lowest based on their overall scores.

[0104] The data processing flow, indicator calculation methods, or related algorithms involved in each of the above steps are described below.

[0105] II. Basic Data Preparation Based on publicly disclosed information from public funds, a foundational database for the Golden Bull Awards selection was constructed (technology selection: MySQL relational database). This database stores and records historical basic data related to the entire Golden Bull Awards selection calculation process, mainly including: basic information and changes in fund products, basic information of fund companies, information on fund manager appointments and changes, daily net asset value data of funds, fund dividend or split data, 10-year Treasury bond yield data, daily benchmark index data, ETF fund circulating shares and trading volume data, data disclosed in fund quarterly reports (net asset value, asset allocation, etc.), and data disclosed in fund semi-annual or annual reports (including ending net asset value, beginning net asset value, fund subscription proceeds, fund redemption proceeds, income distribution to holders, weighted average net asset value return rate, and profit for the period).

[0106] In practice, the basic database for the Golden Bull Award selection can be built and maintained based on the Hengsheng Juyuan database, Wind database, or similar databases in the industry through ETL, data fusion, cross-validation, and incremental updates.

[0107] Based on the fund contracts' provisions regarding the fund's asset investment scope and proportions, and the equity and bond composition ratio of the performance benchmark, all funds in the market are classified (including liquidated funds). The classification information for each fund (including historical changes) is recorded in the Golden Bull Awards' basic database. If a fund's classification has changed historically due to changes in its investment scope or performance benchmark, the database must record the classification information before and after the change (including the fund's category label, effective date, and expiration date at each stage before and after the change).

[0108] III. Selection of Participating Fund Companies Based on the Golden Bull Award selection database, fund companies that meet the eligibility criteria for the Golden Bull Fund Management Company Award are selected to form a sample pool of participating fund companies (each calculation step is performed in this sample pool).

[0109] Fund companies participating in the Golden Bull Fund Management Company Award selection must meet the following eligibility criteria: (1) Product line requirements: The participating fund management company shall have at least one standard equity fund / active flexible fund / active allocation fund and one pure bond fund / quasi-bond fund / bond-biased fund, which have been in operation for more than 60 months; at the same time, the company shall have no less than three standard equity funds / active flexible funds / active allocation funds with an operation period of more than 39 months.

[0110] (2) Asset size requirement: For fund companies that meet condition (1), their average comparable net asset value during the observation period are sorted from largest to smallest and accumulated sequentially. The fund companies whose cumulative comparable net asset value accounts for the top 90% of the average comparable net asset value of fund companies that meet condition (1) during the observation period are selected.

[0111] The following outlines the selection process for participating fund companies:

[0112] In practice, the average comparable net asset value of each fund company's various types of fund products during the observation period is usually calculated in advance and recorded in the Golden Bull Award selection database. This makes it easy to read the data according to the sample conditions when selecting samples for each company's awards, and also facilitates manual review and inspection.

[0113] IV. Pre-calculation of Fund Basic Indicators For each participating fund under the participating fund company, the relevant basic indicators for each trading day during the observation period are calculated and saved to the Golden Bull Award selection database. This avoids duplicate calculations during the subsequent indicator calculation stage and effectively improves overall computational performance. These basic indicators for each participating fund on each trading day together form a seven-tuple, forming the overall basic indicator dataset for the participating funds.

[0114] Where: F represents the participating fund (usually identified by the fund code). This indicates one trading day during the observation period. This represents the rate of return of fund F on day t. This represents the return on an investor who bought F on the previous trading day of t and held it for one year (referred to as the "rolling 1-year fund return"). This represents the return on an investor's purchase of the benchmark F on the previous trading day of t and holding it for one year (referred to as the "rolling 1-year benchmark return"). This represents the risk-free rate of return for an investor who buys a 10-year Treasury bond on the previous trading day of t and holds it for one year (referred to as the "rolling 1-year risk-free rate"). This indicates the size weight of the participating fund F on that trading day.

[0115] In addition to the basic indicators mentioned above, other relevant basic data disclosed by the funds are also required when selecting fund companies for awards to calculate the relevant evaluation indicators, which are listed below: The net asset value disclosed in the fund's quarterly report; The number of shares outstanding in ETFs and their daily trading volume; Data related to investor satisfaction: Net asset value at the end of the period, net asset value at the beginning of the period, fund subscription proceeds for the period, fund redemption proceeds for the period, profit distribution to holders for the period, weighted average net asset value return rate for the period, and profit for the period, as disclosed in the fund's semi-annual or annual report; Comprehensive fee data includes: manager's remuneration, custody fee, custody fee rate, sales service fee, investment advisory fee, transaction fees, and other fees.

[0116] V. Calculation of Fund Company Performance Evaluation Indicators Based on the basic indicator dataset D of the participating funds obtained in the previous steps (and other relevant basic data of the fund products, which will be explained in detail when calculating each evaluation indicator later), the specific algorithms and calculation processes of each performance evaluation indicator in "Table 2 Quantitative Evaluation Indicator System of Golden Bull Fund Management Company" are described below. Figure 2 The overall calculation process from calculating each evaluation index to obtaining the final comprehensive score is given (since the various indicators are independent of each other, they can be calculated in parallel to speed up the overall performance).

[0117] The specific algorithms and calculation processes for each performance evaluation indicator are described below: 5.1 Calculation of Ranking Indicators for Management Scale This indicator measures the ranking of fund companies based on their average comparable net asset value during the evaluation period. The funds included in the statistics are equity, mixed, and bond funds managed by the fund companies that have been operating for at least three years as of the end of the evaluation period and are currently in operation, as detailed below: The scope of participating fund types included in the calculation (all funds must have been operating for at least three years and still be in existence). Equity funds: Standard equity funds, Standard index funds, Enhanced index funds, ETFs; Hybrid types: Active allocation, Active flexibility, Conservative flexibility, Conservative allocation, Absolute return; Bond funds: pure bond funds, quasi-bond funds, bond-heavy funds, convertible bond funds, standard bond index funds, enhanced bond index funds, bond ETFs; The calculation process for the ranking indicators of the participating fund companies' assets under management is as follows:

[0118] 5.2 Calculation of Growth Indicators for Equity Investment Management Scale This indicator measures the growth of a fund company's comparable net asset value related to equity investments at the end of the assessment period relative to the beginning of the assessment period. The participating funds included in the statistics are equity and mixed-asset funds managed by the fund company that have been operating for at least three years as of the end of the assessment period and are currently in existence, as detailed below: The scope of participating fund types included in the calculation (all funds must have been operating for at least three years and still be in existence). Equity funds: Standard equity funds, Standard index funds, Enhanced index funds, ETFs; Hybrid types: Active allocation, Active flexibility, Conservative flexibility, Conservative allocation, Absolute return; The calculation process for the equity investment management scale growth indicator of participating fund companies is as follows:

[0119] 5.3 Calculation of Overall Performance Indicators for Actively Managed Equity Funds This indicator measures the overall performance of a fund company's actively managed equity funds during the evaluation period. It considers both absolute return performance (70%) and relative return performance (30%). When measuring absolute (or relative) return performance, it comprehensively considers the rolling one-year absolute (or relative) returns of the evaluated funds and their ranking stability compared to similar funds during the same period, thus comprehensively assessing the fund company's sound investment management capabilities in actively managed equity funds.

[0120] The funds included in the calculation are actively managed equity funds (including funds that have been liquidated at the end of the assessment period) managed by the fund company that have been operating for at least three years during the assessment period. The scope of participating fund types included in the calculation (all funds must have been operating for at least three years during the observation period). Equity Fund: Standard Equity Fund; Hybrid types: Active allocation, Active flexibility, Conservative flexibility, Conservative allocation, Absolute return; This indicator is calculated by combining four sub-indicators: Overall performance score of actively managed equity funds (Absolute return performance score of actively managed equity funds + Stability score of absolute return ranking of actively managed equity funds) / 2 + 30% (Relative return performance score of actively managed equity funds + Relative return ranking stability score of actively managed equity funds) / 2.

[0121] Given a range of fund types for evaluation, the calculation process for the overall performance indicators of participating fund companies within that range is as follows. When the input parameter FundTypes=[Standard Equity Fund, Actively Allocated Fund, Actively Flexible Fund, Conservative Flexible Fund, Conservatively Allocated Fund, Absolute Return Fund], the result obtained by calling this algorithm is the overall performance indicator of actively managed equity funds.

[0122]

[0123]

[0124]

[0125]

[0126]

[0127] 5.4 Calculation of Overall Performance Indicators for Actively Managed Fixed Income Funds This indicator measures the overall performance of a fund company's actively managed fixed-income funds during the evaluation period. It considers both absolute return performance (70%) and relative return performance (30%). When measuring absolute (or relative) return performance, it comprehensively considers the rolling one-year absolute (or relative) returns of the evaluated funds and their ranking stability compared to similar funds during the same period, thus comprehensively assessing the fund company's sound investment management capabilities in actively managed fixed-income funds.

[0128] The funds included in the calculation are actively managed fixed-income funds (including funds that have been liquidated at the end of the assessment period) managed by the fund company that have been operating for at least three years during the assessment period. The scope of participating fund types included in the calculation (all funds must have been operating for at least three years during the observation period). Bond-type bonds: pure bond type, quasi-bond type, bond-heavy type, convertible bond type; This indicator is calculated by combining four sub-indicators: Overall performance score of actively managed fixed income funds (Absolute return performance score of actively managed fixed-income funds + Stability score of absolute return ranking of actively managed fixed-income funds) / 2 + 30% (Relative return performance score of actively managed fixed income funds + Relative return ranking stability score of actively managed fixed income funds) / 2.

[0129] Given a range of fund types for evaluation, the calculation process for the overall performance index of the participating fund company on funds within that range is the same as the compute_total_perf_score algorithm in Section 5.3. When the input parameter FundTypes=[pure bond, quasi-bond, bond-biased, convertible bond], the result obtained by calling this algorithm is the overall performance index score of actively managed fixed-income funds.

[0130] 5.5 Calculation of Passive Investment Management Capability Indicators This indicator measures the overall performance of a fund company's index funds during the evaluation period. It is evaluated comprehensively according to its respective criteria across three types and six categories: standard, enhanced, and ETF funds (each type includes both equity and bond funds).

[0131] The funds included in the calculation are actively managed fixed-income funds (including funds that have been liquidated at the end of the assessment period) managed by the fund company that have been operating for at least three years during the assessment period. The scope of participating fund types included in the calculation (all funds must have been operating for at least three years during the observation period). Stock index funds: Standard index funds, Enhanced index funds, ETFs; Bond index funds: Standard bond index funds, Enhanced bond index funds, Bond ETFs; The calculation process for the passive investment management capability indicators of participating fund companies is as follows:

[0132] 5.6 Calculation of Investor Satisfaction Indicators This indicator measures the overall performance of a fund company's funds in terms of investor satisfaction during the evaluation period. When calculating this indicator, each six-month period is considered a calculation cycle (e.g., for an award with a five-year evaluation period, this includes 10 six-month periods). Based on publicly disclosed semi-annual or annual reports from the funds, three basic indicators related to investor satisfaction can be calculated for each participating fund in each six-month period: simple investor return rate, weighted average net asset value return rate, investor profit / loss ratio, and the average net asset value and its conversion factor for each six-month period.

[0133] Based on these three fundamental indicators, the standard score of each participating fund relative to similar funds in each semi-annual period can be calculated. For each fundamental indicator, based on its standard score and the fund's net asset value in each semi-annual period, the weighted average score of that fundamental indicator for each participating fund over the entire observation period can be further calculated. The investor satisfaction score of the participating fund is then the average of the scores of the three fundamental indicators. Finally, the overall scores of each participating fund over the observation period are weighted and summed to obtain the investor satisfaction score for each fund company.

[0134] The funds included in the statistics are equity, mixed, and bond funds managed by fund companies that have been operating for at least three years (including those that have been liquidated by the end of the assessment period), as detailed below: The scope of participating fund types included in the calculation (all must have been operating for at least three years). Equity funds: Standard equity funds, Standard index funds, Enhanced index funds, ETFs; Hybrid types: Active allocation, Active flexibility, Conservative flexibility, Conservative allocation, Absolute return; Bond funds: pure bond funds, quasi-bond funds, bond-heavy funds, convertible bond funds, standard bond index funds, enhanced bond index funds, bond ETFs; The calculation process for the investor satisfaction index of participating fund companies is as follows:

[0135] 5.7 Calculation of Comprehensive Fee Rate for Equity Funds This indicator calculates the comprehensive expense ratio of a fund company's equity-type public funds based on all expenses incurred in maintaining the operation of these funds. It reflects the overall expense level that investors bear when holding these equity-type products. The expense items included in the statistics are: management fees, custody fees, sales service fees, investment advisory fees, transaction fees (such as transaction commissions, stamp duty, handling fees, regulatory fees, transfer fees, etc.), and other expenses (such as registration fees, annual listing fees, information disclosure fees, account service fees, shareholder meeting expenses, audit fees, legal fees, etc.).

[0136] The funds included in the statistics are equity funds managed by fund companies that have been operating for at least three years during the review period (including funds that have been liquidated at the end of the review period). The types of funds included in the statistics (all of which must have been operating for at least three years during the observation period) Equity funds: Standard equity funds, Standard index funds, Enhanced index funds, ETFs; Hybrid types: Active allocation, Active flexibility, Conservative flexibility, Conservative allocation, Absolute return; The calculation process for the equity fund composite expense ratio index of participating fund companies is as follows:

[0137] VI. Calculation and Ranking of Fund Companies' Overall Scores After all the evaluation indicators for all participating fund companies were calculated, each indicator was converted into a standard score (based on zscore). Then, the scores were weighted and summed according to the weights of each indicator in "Table 2. Quantitative Evaluation Indicator System for Golden Bull Fund Management Companies" to obtain the comprehensive score for each fund company. Overall Score = Ranking Score Based on Management Scale +Equity Investment Management Scale Growth Score +Overall performance score of actively managed equity funds +Overall performance score of actively managed fixed income funds +Passive investment management capability score +Investor satisfaction rating score +Equity Fund Overall Expense Score .

[0138] The participating fund companies are ranked from highest to lowest based on their overall scores, which gives the final ranking of the evaluated fund companies.

[0139] This invention also provides a performance indicator ranking system for top-performing fund companies, the system being used to implement the aforementioned performance indicator ranking method for top-performing fund companies, the system comprising: The task parsing and construction module is used to receive evaluation calculation task requests, parse and construct the evaluation task quintuple CounselorAwardTask=(AwardName, EvalEndDate, EvalYears, Qualifications, ScoreModel); The sample screening module is used to filter data based on the publicly disclosed information of public funds in the basic database and the qualification conditions (Qualifications) to extract data of eligible participating fund companies and build a sample pool of participating fund companies. The data preprocessing module is used to extract basic data for each trading day for each participating fund under each participating fund company in the sample pool, perform pre-calculation, and generate a seven-tuple dataset of basic indicators of participating funds, which includes data features such as fund return rate and rolling 1-year fund return rate. The evaluation index calculation module is used to retrieve the basic index dataset based on the scoring model ScoreModel and calculate the quantitative evaluation indexes for each company in the sample pool of participating fund companies. The quantitative evaluation indexes include: management scale ranking, equity investment management scale growth, overall performance of actively managed equity funds, overall performance of actively managed fixed income funds, passive investment management capability, investor satisfaction evaluation, and comprehensive expense ratio of equity funds. The sorting output module is used to convert the calculated quantitative evaluation indicators into standard scores, perform weighted summaries according to preset weights to obtain a comprehensive score, and output the quantitative score ranking results.

[0140] Any process or method described in the flowcharts of this invention or otherwise herein can be understood as representing a module, segment, or portion of code comprising one or more executable instructions for implementing a particular logical function or process, which can be implemented in any computer-readable medium for use by an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. The computer-readable medium can be any medium containing a program for storage, communication, propagation, or transmission for use by an execution system, apparatus, or device, including read-only memory, magnetic disks, or optical disks.

[0141] In the description of this specification, references to terms such as "embodiment," "example," etc., indicate that a specific feature, structure, material, or characteristic described in connection with that embodiment or example is included in at least one embodiment or example of the present invention. In this specification, the illustrative expressions of the above terms do not necessarily refer to the same embodiment or example. Furthermore, those skilled in the art can combine or combine the different embodiments or examples described in this specification and the features therein without causing contradiction.

[0142] The above description is merely a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the invention in any way. Although the present invention has been disclosed above with reference to preferred embodiments, it is not intended to limit the invention. Therefore, any simple modifications, equivalent changes, and alterations made to the above embodiments based on the technical essence of the present invention without departing from the scope of the present invention should fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for ranking performance indicators of top-performing fund companies, characterized in that, The method includes: Receive the evaluation calculation task request, parse the request to construct the evaluation task quintuple CounselorAwardTask=(AwardName, EvalEndDate, EvalYears, Qualifications, ScoreModel); Based on publicly disclosed information data of public funds in the basic database, data is filtered according to the qualification criteria for participation, and data of eligible fund companies are extracted from all fund companies in the market to construct a sample pool of participating fund companies. For each participating fund under each participating fund company in the sample pool, basic data for each trading day during the observation period is extracted to pre-calculate basic indicators and generate a basic indicator dataset for the participating funds, so as to reduce the repeated reading and calculation of data in the subsequent evaluation indicator calculation stage; the basic indicator dataset consists of a seven-tuple including fund return, rolling 1-year fund return, rolling 1-year benchmark return and size weight. Based on the ScoreModel scoring model, the basic indicator dataset is retrieved, and quantitative evaluation indicators are calculated for each company in the sample pool of participating fund companies. The quantitative evaluation indicators include: ranking of assets under management, growth of equity investment assets under management, overall performance of actively managed equity funds, overall performance of actively managed fixed-income funds, passive investment management capabilities, investor satisfaction evaluation, and comprehensive expense ratio of equity funds. The calculated quantitative evaluation indicators are converted into standard scores and weighted according to preset weights to obtain the comprehensive scores of each participating fund company. The quantitative ranking results are then output based on the comprehensive scores.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Data was filtered based on the eligibility criteria (Qualifications) to construct a sample pool of participating fund companies, including: Determine whether the number of standard equity funds, actively managed flexible funds, or actively allocated funds under a fund company that meet the preset threshold for operating time, as well as the number of pure bond funds, quasi-bond funds, or bond-biased funds, meet the product line requirements. For fund companies that meet the product line requirements, their average comparable net asset value during the evaluation period is calculated, and they are sorted from largest to smallest and accumulated sequentially. The fund companies with the highest cumulative comparable net asset value accounting for the top 90% of the total size are selected as the sample of participating fund companies.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, Methods for calculating comparable net asset value include: Confirm the fund category and query the preset conversion table of comparable net asset value of each type of fund to obtain the corresponding conversion factor; The comparable net asset value of a fund is obtained by multiplying its net asset value by the corresponding conversion factor. For mixed funds, the net asset value of the fund's investments in stocks, bonds, and convertible bonds at the end of each quarter during the review period is converted and summarized at ratios of 1, 0.2, and 0.5, respectively.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The specific definition of a 7-tuple is: in, Indicates participation in the evaluation of the fund. This indicates one trading day during the observation period. This represents the rate of return of fund F on day t. This represents the rolling 1-year fund return. This represents the rolling 1-year benchmark yield. This represents the rolling one-year risk-free rate of return. This indicates the size weight of the participating fund on that trading day.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, When calculating the overall performance of actively managed equity funds and actively managed fixed-income funds, both dimensions of absolute return performance and relative return performance are included. The calculation logic is as follows: the overall performance score is equal to the average of the sum of the absolute return performance score and the absolute return ranking stability score multiplied by 70%, plus the average of the sum of the sum of the relative return performance score and the relative return ranking stability score multiplied by 30%.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, When calculating the stability score of absolute return ranking and the stability score of relative return ranking, a performance drawdown adjustment ranking calculation model is introduced. Specifically, this includes: calculating the quantile of the participating fund's return rate on the set of returns of similar funds, and performing an inverse normal transformation on the quantile to obtain a sample sequence; Calculate the mean and maximum drawdown of the sample sequence, and adjust the mean by the maximum drawdown based on the empirical adjustment coefficient, which is used as the ranking stability score.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation methods for investor satisfaction evaluation indicators include: Using each half-year of the observation period as the calculation cycle, the publicly disclosed data of the funds are extracted to calculate three basic indicators of the participating funds in each cycle: simple investor return rate, weighted average net asset value return rate, and investor profit / loss ratio based on the target return rate. Convert the above three basic indicators into standard scores relative to similar participating funds; Based on the net asset value of the fund in each semi-annual period, the weighted average score of the three basic indicators for each participating fund during the entire evaluation period is calculated, and the arithmetic mean of the three weighted average scores is taken as the score of a single participating fund. The investor satisfaction evaluation index is obtained by weighting the scores of all participating funds under a fund company by using the comparable net asset value of each individual participating fund as the weight.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation methods for the comprehensive fee rate of equity funds include: Extract all expenses accrued by fund companies at the equity-type public fund product level. These expenses must include at least the manager's remuneration, custody fees, sales service fees, investment advisory fees, transaction fees, and other expenses. The average net asset value for the first half of the year is calculated by combining the fund product’s custody fee amount, daily custody fee rate and number of calendar days. The comprehensive fee rate is obtained by dividing the total amount of all fees of all equity funds in all sub-periods within the observation period by the sum of the products of the average net asset value of the corresponding period and the number of calendar days.

9. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calculation of passive investment management capability indicators adopts different underlying scoring rules depending on the type of passive product; If the participating fund is a standard index fund, its underlying scoring indicators include tracking error and contract compliance; If the participating fund is an enhanced index fund, its underlying scoring indicators include relative return ranking stability and the proposed Sortino information ratio; If the participating fund is an ETF, its underlying scoring indicators include tracking error, market capitalization, and average daily turnover.

10. A performance indicator ranking system for top-performing fund companies, characterized in that, The system is used to implement the method as described in any one of claims 1-9, the system comprising: The task parsing and construction module is used to receive evaluation calculation task requests, parse and construct the evaluation task quintuple CounselorAwardTask=(AwardName, EvalEndDate, EvalYears, Qualifications, ScoreModel); The sample screening module is used to filter data based on the publicly disclosed information of public funds in the basic database and the qualification conditions (Qualifications) to extract data of eligible participating fund companies and build a sample pool of participating fund companies. The data preprocessing module is used to extract basic data for each trading day for each participating fund under each participating fund company in the sample pool, perform pre-calculation, and generate a seven-tuple dataset of basic indicators of participating funds, which includes data features such as fund return rate and rolling 1-year fund return rate. The evaluation index calculation module is used to retrieve the basic index dataset based on the scoring model ScoreModel and calculate the quantitative evaluation indexes for each company in the sample pool of participating fund companies. The quantitative evaluation indexes include: management scale ranking, equity investment management scale growth, overall performance of actively managed equity funds, overall performance of actively managed fixed income funds, passive investment management capability, investor satisfaction evaluation, and comprehensive expense ratio of equity funds. The sorting output module is used to convert the calculated quantitative evaluation indicators into standard scores, perform weighted summaries according to preset weights to obtain a comprehensive score, and output the quantitative score ranking results.

Images