Three types of funds are flooding in! In the first quarter, the scale of quantitative private equity saw a "leapfrog" growth, and reaching hundreds of billions is no longer far away.

In Q1 2026, the quantitative hedge fund industry is staging a hard-core leap: Fanhfang, Jiukun, Mingyuan, and Yanfu all entered the 80 billion to 90 billion yuan range, and it seems the 100 billion-yuan “giant” firms are no longer far away; meanwhile, a number of institutions such as Jingshi, Qianxiang, and Longqi even jumped across two or even three size tiers, with an intense lineup shake-up. With external capital flooding in疯狂, and the combined forces of existing-client reorders, channel support, and institutional allocations stacking together, the scale of quantitative hedge funds is rapidly pushed higher. At the same time, the logic of competition has changed: it’s no longer enough to rely solely on excess returns—service capability is becoming the new winning point.

Tier-by-tier accelerates, and 100 billion-yuan giants are no longer far away

How fast are quantitative hedge fund managers expanding?

Judging from the AUM mapping released by “Quantitative Investment and Machine Learning,” in Q1 2026, domestic quantitative hedge fund managers saw significantly enhanced liquidity among tiers, with the head-interval camp continuing to rise.

In the top tier, the 80 billion to 90 billion yuan range already has four firms—Fanhfang Quantitative, Jiukun Investment, Mingyuan Investment, and Yanfu Investment—tied in place, and the threshold to reach 100 billion yuan seems no longer far away. However, at the end of 2025, these four were still in the 70 billion to 80 billion yuan range. New members entered the 60 billion to 70 billion yuan range: Chengqi Fund; the 50 billion to 60 billion yuan range added Blackwing Assets and WanYan Assets; the 40 billion to 50 billion yuan range welcomed two new firms—Maoyuan Quant and Tanyan Capital; and the 30 billion to 40 billion yuan range added Yinhualun Asset.

The mid-size tier also moved up across the board: the 20 billion to 30 billion yuan range added Mengxi Investment, Nian Kong Nian Jue, Turing Fund, Zhengding Private Fund, and Zhuoshi Fund; and the 15 billion to 20 billion yuan range added Beiyang Quantitative, Jin Ge Rong Rui, Niuda Investment, and Micro Boiyi.

Image source: Quantitative Investment and Machine Learning

Meanwhile, eight managers—including Banqing Private Fund, Hongxi Fund, Kui Private Fund, Luoshu Investment, Mingxi Capital, Shenyi Investment, Tott Investment, and Umeili Investment—surpassed 10 billion yuan, entering the 10 billion to 15 billion yuan bracket. Hanrong Investment, Huishi Assets, Qianying Investment, and Shengfeng Fund entered the 5 billion to 10 billion yuan bracket as well.

Most eye-catching is the chain-level jump phenomenon of some managers: they are not rising step by step in an orderly fashion, but instead cross two or even three size intervals within a single quarter. At the end of 2025, Jingshi Fund, whose management scale was still in the 20 billion to 30 billion yuan range, jumped three levels in a row, directly moving into the 50 billion to 60 billion yuan bracket, becoming the widest-span case in the current quarter. Qianxiang Investment and Zhengying Assets jumped two levels into the 20 billion to 30 billion yuan range; Fanghe Investment jumped two levels into the 30 billion to 40 billion yuan range; and Longqi Technology jumped two levels into the 50 billion to 60 billion yuan range.

There is no doubt that these managers’ rapid advancement indicates that the speed at which capital concentrates toward quantitative head firms is accelerating, and internal tier reshuffling is becoming increasingly fierce.

Three types of funds flow into quantitative funds

Quantitative hedge funds’ Q1 scale surged rapidly, and it’s not solely due to NAV growth. Multiple interviewed quantitative hedge fund practitioners and heads of brokerage custody businesses all said that the sustained net inflow of external funds is the core driving force behind this expansion, and the fund structure also shows clear seasonal characteristics and an institutional trend.

Previously, according to statistics from Privately-placed Fund Ranking, as of February 28, 2026, across the entire market there were 722 private fund institutions with a total of 1,366 privately-placed securities products filed, up 151.57% year-over-year from the 543 products in February 2025, and up 100.88% month-over-month from the 680 products in January 2026—achieving a doubling in both year-over-year and month-over-month terms.

“Every year in Q1, especially after the Spring Festival, is a good time for quantitative hedge fund scale expansion.” A person in charge of the quantitative hedge fund market told the reporter, “In Q2 and Q3, the funding environment is relatively flat, and in Q4 clients often redeem. In Q1, after clients receive their year-end bonuses, their willingness to make additional subscriptions is strongest. Plus, our overall performance was good last year, so clients’ trust is relatively high, and they tend to reorder quickly.”

An insider related to a hundred-billion-yuan quantitative hedge fund said: “We mainly do direct sales, and we see a lot of subscription from existing clients. Also, it’s institutional money—especially partnerships with brokerages’ asset management side, where there are also quite a few FOFs.”

A broker-custody professional told the reporter: “We’ve observed that the external funds driving the rapid expansion of quantitative hedge fund scale mainly come from three directions: money from high-net-worth individuals as well as funds transferred from discretionary equity by family offices; wealth funds batch-imported from the channel side; and institutional allocation pools such as FOF and MOM funds. In addition, with NAV expansion brought by existing performance, quantitative hedge funds within the industry are concentrating toward the head, which has become the main reason for the collective expansion in the scale of quantitative hedge fund managers in this Q1.”

According to this custodian, in recent years many clients have gradually moved money from discretionary private funds, public equity-oriented mutual funds, and even their own stock-trading accounts to the quantitative hedge fund space. The reasons are realistic: drawdown feelings are relatively more controllable; strategies are more “explainable” in a disciplined and systematic way; and for some clients, it’s more easily accepted than the “style drift” of a discretionary fund manager.

A mid-sized brokerage custodian also analyzed: originally, money in bank wealth management, trusts, and fixed-income+ had only a small portion taken out to allocate to quantitative strategies—not a full portfolio move of everything. More often, this looks like: a client’s account originally consisted of 100% conservative assets, and now they use 5%-20% to seek enhanced returns. These contributions are not large per order, but the base is big, and when accumulated they become quite substantial.

In addition, as multiple quantitative hedge fund practitioners pointed out, the help of distribution channels in recent years should not be ignored either.

A senior wealth management professional at a Shanghai-based brokerage said: In recent years, the scale of quantitative hedge funds has grown significantly, and one key reason is that channels have started to be willing to sell and find it easier to sell. This channel is not only brokerages, but also includes private banking, high-net-worth client systems at banks, and third-party distribution channels. Besides standout performance support, factors like models, factors, risk control, and diversification all serve as add-on points when customers choose. In terms of capacity, they can also absorb capital better than some small-but-beautiful discretionary strategies.

Also, some quantitative hedge fund practitioners remind that not only absolute growth scale but also the growth pace deserves attention. If a manager’s scale increase is not large—for example, only around 10%—the impact on strategy is relatively limited, and companies can usually handle it calmly. But if the scale grows too fast in a short period, it must closely track the trend of its subsequent excess returns. Even if these companies have a smaller base and the absolute incremental amount is not large, funds flowing in too quickly will test their technical reserves, talent reserves, strategy management capabilities, and the capacity of their overall investment research system. Once management capability cannot keep up with the pace of scale expansion, excess returns may show a clear deceleration.

Overperforming is not enough—you must also deliver service

In past years, the competitive focus of quantitative hedge funds almost entirely centered on the comparison of excess returns: whose excess return is higher, whose drawdown is smaller—whoever gets that advantage wins capital favor. However, with the industry’s scale expanding rapidly and strategy homogeneity improving to some extent, quantitative hedge funds are placing more and more emphasis on “service attributes” such as product liquidity and investment education and communication.

Taking Pansong Asset as an example: on March 30, 2026, this hundred-billion-yuan quantitative hedge fund firm issued an announcement that it adjusted the redemption reservation time for its long-short hedging and leveraged quantitative strategy index amplification series products—from the original T-5 trading days to T-2 trading days. The reservation window was shortened by three trading days significantly, and liquidity was notably improved. Among its index-enhanced products, small-sum capital can complete redemption subscription agreement by 14:30 on the same day, with NAV confirmation.

A related person at Pansong Asset told Jijing News reporters: “This adjustment is not sudden—we have been continuously optimizing our investment process. At present, our optimizer can plan redemption issues more precisely, so that within the T-2 reservation window, we can still achieve no impact on the product’s leverage management and overall operations, keeping consistent with the original operation logic. This can provide customers with a better liquidity experience.”

Beyond liquidity optimization, investment education and transparent communication have also become important directions for quantitative hedge funds to strengthen their service. As quantitative products become increasingly complex, investment education and transparent communication have become a key link for maintaining customer trust. Some managers, when markets are volatile, proactively help clients understand the operating mechanisms and risk characteristics of quantitative strategies through methods such as strategy communication meetings and regular report interpretation, instead of relying only on performance.

A quantitative hedge fund practitioner in Beijing believed that the competitive dimensions of quantitative hedge funds are widening. Excess returns are certainly the foundation, but in the context of customer capital size continuing to grow, the difficulty of generating excess returns increases. Whoever can provide better liquidity, more transparent communication, and a smoother holding experience will win more trust from long-term capital in the next stage.

（责任编辑：李悦 ）

     【免责声明】本文仅代表作者本人观点，与和讯网无关。和讯网站对文中陈述、观点判断保持中立，不对所包含内容的准确性、可靠性或完整性提供任何明示或暗示的保证。请读者仅作参考，并请自行承担全部责任。邮箱：news_center@staff.hexun.com

举报