Recent controversy surrounding SDIC UBS Silver Futures LOF (Code: 161226) has intensified due to ongoing net value volatility and high premium risks, drawing widespread market scrutiny and placing SDIC UBS Fund under the public spotlight. The fund's fluctuations have sparked significant debate across financial circles.
Numerous investors have voiced their dissatisfaction through social media platforms and complaint channels, with维权 demands growing increasingly vocal. Reports even suggest that regulatory hotlines were overwhelmed by investor calls. This single fund product controversy has thrust the established asset manager into unprecedented public attention.
By the end of 2025, SDIC UBS Fund's management scale had exceeded 250 billion yuan, ranking 34th in the industry. According to incomplete statistics from Tian Tian Fund's Q2 2025 data, the company's products (counting only initial funds) collectively achieved approximately 3.019 billion yuan in net profit while charging 479 million yuan in management fees during the same period. Particularly noteworthy is that the 20 worst-performing funds incurred over 160 million yuan in losses for investors, yet these products still collected more than 70 million yuan in management fees.
The fee structure reveals prominent high-rate products within SDIC UBS's portfolio: over 40 funds implement a 1.2% management fee rate, with nearly half of all products charging fees above 1%. The single largest fee contributor was SDIC UBS Tian Li Bao Money Market Fund A, which collected 102 million yuan in management fees during the 2025 interim period alone, while generating 393 million yuan in net profit.
The SDIC Silver LOF at the center of the controversy also carries a 1% management fee, with manager compensation reaching 12 million yuan according to 2025 interim reports, alongside 327 million yuan in net profit. Despite the fund's profitability during the reporting period, recent chain reactions triggered by sharp net value declines and persistently high premium rates reveal significant shortcomings in product design, liquidity risk warnings, and investor suitability management.
Established on June 13, 2002, with 100 million yuan in registered capital, SDIC UBS Fund features experienced leadership under legal representative Fu Qiang and General Manager Wang Yanjie. The firm's 32 fund managers boast an average tenure of 6.22 years, exceeding industry standards.
Fund manager Zhao Jian, involved in the current controversy, has over 12 years of experience managing approximately 21.1 billion yuan in assets. However, even with seasoned team credentials, traditional risk control and research frameworks appear inadequate when handling complex cross-border commodity futures LOF products with unique structures and risk transmission mechanisms.
From a broader business perspective, the controversial product represents only a minor portion of the company's management portfolio. Data shows the firm's total fund scale reaches 255.01 billion yuan, with money market funds (102.379 billion yuan) and bond funds (97.479 billion yuan) comprising nearly 80% of its core business. The alternative investment fund category containing the silver LOF totals 18.944 billion yuan, with the controversial product representing a relatively limited proportion even within this segment.
Overall, SDIC UBS has demonstrated concerning weaknesses in product information transparency, timely risk disclosures, and prudent liquidity management. For specialized products like the silver LOF featuring unique underlying assets, high volatility, and speculative tendencies, managers should thoroughly identify and disclose specific risks including liquidity constraints, premium trading, and cross-border fluctuations during rapid expansion phases, while establishing effective response mechanisms.
The fundamental purpose of management fees is to fulfill fiduciary responsibilities inherent in "managing wealth on behalf of clients." This responsibility should extend beyond research capability development to encompass comprehensive risk identification, full disclosure, and cautious management throughout a product's lifecycle. The silver LOF controversy demonstrates that relevant risks weren't adequately controlled, ultimately leaving losses with investors. Market consensus indicates SDIC UBS Fund has insufficiently fulfilled its duty to protect investor interests across multiple dimensions.
Comments