Fund marketing warfare is in full swing, institutions suggest: ETF splits themselves are neutral operations.

Against the backdrop of the recent active A-share market, some industry-themed ETFs have frequently split their shares, cutting the unit net value in half through a 1:2 split of fund shares. Many popular thematic products such as innovative pharmaceuticals, general aviation, non-ferrous metals, artificial intelligence, financial technology, banks, securities firms, military industry, and dividends have all undergone similar operations. Some fund companies have also carried out a series of marketing promotions, with slogans like "lowering the trading threshold," "increasing on-exchange trading activity," "continuing to provide excess returns through splits," and "splits are the patent of superior performance funds" becoming focal points of marketing. According to a survey by reporters, in general, the unit net value of ETFs is high, leading to ETF "baskets" tying up more funds, reducing the efficiency of fund use, and affecting investment and redemption. It is indeed necessary for fund managers to split ETF shares. However, while some ETFs have lowered unit net value through share splitting, they have simultaneously increased the minimum subscription and redemption units, meaning that the net value of the ETF "basket" has not changed significantly. Furthermore, in conjunction with corresponding marketing actions, some fund companies have labeled the split ETFs as "superior performance," which may be a means of competing in the homogeneous ETF market. Industry insiders advise that ETF splitting itself is a neutral operation, and investors still need to consider market valuation, industry prosperity, and other factors comprehensively to avoid blindly following the trend.