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 private fund industry staged a hard-core leap: four firms—AIFang, Jiukun, Mingrun, and Yanfu—entered the 80 billion yuan to 90 billion yuan range, making the “8B yuan” leaders seem no longer out of reach; meanwhile, a number of institutions including Mingshi, Qianxiang, and Longqi jumped across two to three size tiers in one go, with a fierce shake-up of the ranks. With external capital surging in crazily and three forces—existing client re-orders, channel support, and institutional allocations—stacking together, the overall scale of quantitative private funds was 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.

The tiers are accelerating their leap; the 100-billion-yuan leaders are no longer far off

How fast is the expansion pace of quantitative private fund managers?

From the AUM map released by “Quantitative Investing and Machine Learning,” in Q1 2026, among domestic quantitative private fund managers, liquidity between tiers increased markedly, and the head cohort continued to rise.

In the top tier, AIFang Quantitative, Jiukun Investment, Mingrun Investment, and Yanfu Investment are already tied at four firms within the 80 billion yuan to 90 billion yuan range, seemingly not far from the 8B yuan threshold. And these four were still in the 70 billion yuan–80 billion yuan range at the end of 2025. The 60 billion yuan–70 billion yuan range welcomed a new member, Chengqi Fund; the 50 billion yuan–60 billion yuan range added Blackwing Asset and Wan’yan Asset; the 40 billion yuan–50 billion yuan range saw two new entrants, Maoyuan Quant and Tianyan Capital; and the 30 billion yuan–40 billion yuan range joined Evolutionary On-Asset.

The mid-size tier also moved up comprehensively: the 20 billion yuan–30 billion yuan range added Mengxi Investment, Nian Kong Nian Jue, Turing Fund, Zhengding Private Fund, and Zhuoshi Fund; the 15 billion yuan–20 billion yuan range added Beiyang Quantitative, Jinge Yarui, Nuoda Investment, and Microview Boyi.

Image source: Quantitative Investing and Machine Learning

Meanwhile, eight managers including Banqiu Private Fund, Hongxi Fund, Liang Kui Private Fund, Luoshu Investment, Mingsi Capital, Shanyi Investment, Totte Investment, and Youmeili Investment all exceeded 10 billion yuan, entering the 10 billion yuan–15 billion yuan queue. Hanrong Investment, Huishi Asset, Liangying Investment, and Shengfeng Fund also entered the 5 billion yuan–10 billion yuan queue.

What’s most striking is the phenomenon of some managers making multi-level jumps. They are not rising step by step in an orderly fashion; instead, they cross two or even three size ranges within a single quarter. At the end of 2025, when their management scale was still in the 20 billion yuan–30 billion yuan range, Mingshi Fund jumped three tiers in a row, moving directly into the 50 billion yuan–60 billion yuan queue, becoming the largest quarter-spanning case of this period. Qianxiang Investment and Zhengying Asset both jumped two tiers into the 20 billion yuan–30 billion yuan range; Pinfang Investment jumped two tiers into the 30 billion yuan–40 billion yuan range; and Longqi Technology jumped two tiers into the 50 billion yuan–60 billion yuan range.

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

Three types of capital flooding into quant

The rapid jump in scale of quantitative private funds in Q1 is not driven solely by net value increases. Multiple quantitative private fund practitioners interviewed and heads of broker-dealer custody business all said that the sustained net inflow of external capital is the core driving force behind this expansion, and the capital structure also shows clear seasonality and an institutionalization trend.

Previously, according to statistics from Privately Placed Funds Ranking and Ranking (私募排排网), as of February 28, 2026, across the entire market there were 722 private fund institutions with a total of 1,366 registered private securities products, up 151.57% year over year from 543 in February 2025, up 100.88% month over month from 680 in January 2026—achieving a doubling both year over year and month over month.

“Every year in Q1, especially after the Spring Festival, is a good window for expansion in the scale of quantitative private funds.” A head of the quantitative private fund market told reporters, “In Q2 and Q3, the funding situation is relatively flat, and in Q4 clients often redeem. In Q1, after clients get their year-end bonuses, their willingness to add subscriptions is strongest. Plus, last year our overall performance was good, so clients’ trust is relatively high, and re-orders happen quickly.”

A person related to a 10-billion-yuan quantitative private fund said: “We mainly do direct sales; we see more subscriptions from existing clients. Also, it’s institutional money—especially the FOFs under cooperation with broker-dealer asset management are also relatively common.”

A broker-dealer custody person told reporters: “We observe that the external capital driving the rapid expansion in quantitative private fund scale mainly comes from three directions: money from high-net-worth individuals and from family offices migrating from discretionary (subjective) equity; wealth funds batch-imported from the channel side; and institutional allocation books and FOF and MOM capital. In addition, there is net value expansion brought by existing performance. As capital concentrates internally toward the head, it has become the main reason for the collective expansion of quantitative private fund managers’ scale in this quarter of 2026.”

Based on this custody person’s observations, in recent years many clients have gradually migrated money from discretionary private funds, public funds’ discretionary active equity, and their own stock-trading accounts to the quantitative private fund space. The reasons are quite realistic: the drawdown experience is relatively more controllable; the strategies are more “explainable” in the sense of being disciplined and systematized; and for some clients, it’s easier to accept than the “style drift” of discretionary fund managers.

A custody person at a mid-sized broker-dealer also analyzed and pointed out that previously, money in bank wealth management products, trusts, and in the “fixed income plus” bucket—if you take out only a small portion to allocate to quantitative strategies, it’s not a full transfer relocation. More often, this is the situation: a client’s account was originally 100% steady assets, but now they take 5% to 20% to use for enhanced returns. This type of money per single transaction is not huge, but with a large base, the accumulation becomes considerable.

In addition, as multiple quantitative private fund practitioners have noted, the help from distribution channels in recent years should not be ignored either.

A senior wealth-management person at a broker-dealer in Shanghai said: “In the past few years, when quantitative private funds’ scale grew, one key reason is that channels have started to be willing to sell—and to sell more easily. This channel is not only broker-dealers; it also includes private banking, the bank’s high-net-worth customer system, and third-party distribution channels. Besides the support of standout performance, model, factors, risk control, and diversification are all value-add points for clients when they choose. In terms of capacity, it can also absorb capital better than some ‘small but excellent’ discretionary strategies.”

Also, some quantitative private fund practitioners remind that it’s not only absolute growth scale that matters—growth magnitude is worth paying attention to as well. If a manager’s scale increase is not substantial—for example, only around 10%—the impact on the strategy is relatively limited, and the company usually can handle it calmly. But if the scale increases too fast in a short period of time, then it’s necessary to closely track how the subsequent excess returns trend changes. Even if the company’s base is small and the absolute incremental amount is not large, excessively fast inflows will test its technical reserves, talent reserves, strategy management capabilities, and the overall capacity of its investment research system. Once management capability can’t keep pace with scale expansion, excess returns may show a clear decline.

Over-achieving on excess returns, but also delivering service

In past years, competition in quantitative private funds focused almost entirely on the contest of excess returns: whoever has higher excess returns and smaller drawdowns wins favor for capital. However, as the industry’s scale expands quickly and strategy homogenization increases, quantitative private fund products are paying more and more attention to “service attributes” such as product liquidity and investor education and communication.

Taking Panstar Asset (磐松资产) as an example: on March 30, 2026, this 10-billion-yuan quantitative private fund firm issued an announcement that it adjusted the redemption appointment time for its long/short hedging and leveraged enhancement (“杠杆指增”) series products from the previous T-5 trading days to T-2 trading days. The appointment period was shortened by three trading days significantly, and liquidity improved substantially. For its index-enhanced products, small amounts of money can complete the redemption agreement by 14:30 on the same day, enabling net value confirmation.

A person related to Panstar Asset told the Economic Daily (每日经济新闻) reporter: “This adjustment wasn’t sudden. We’ve been continuously optimizing the investment process. Currently, our optimizer can plan redemption issues more precisely, so within the T-2 appointment period, we can still avoid impacting leverage management of the product and overall operations, keeping consistent with the original operational logic. This can provide customers with a better liquidity experience.”

Beyond liquidity optimization, investor education and transparent communication have also become important directions for quantitative private funds to strengthen their service. As quantitative products become increasingly complex, investor education and transparent communication have become key steps in maintaining client trust. Some managers, when markets are volatile, actively help clients understand the operating mechanics and risk characteristics of quantitative strategies through strategy communication meetings, regular report interpretations, and similar methods—rather than relying only on performance to speak for itself.

A quantitative private fund practitioner in Beijing believes that competition dimensions for quantitative private funds are expanding. Excess returns are undoubtedly the foundation, but against the backdrop of client capital bases growing continuously, 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 phase.

*(Source: Economic Daily (每日经济新闻))*