Investment Rating - The industry rating is "Buy" as of April 1, 2026, consistent with the previous rating [5] Core Insights - The report highlights a divergence in performance among banks, with state-owned banks showing renewed vitality despite pressure on net interest margins. The overall revenue and profit growth for 22 listed banks has shown signs of recovery compared to the previous quarters, driven by improvements in effective tax rates, accelerated scale expansion, and a slowdown in the decline of net interest margins [5][20] - The report indicates that the net profit growth for the 22 listed banks is primarily driven by six factors, including the expansion of interest-earning assets and recovery in net fees, while the decline in net interest margins has been the main negative contributor [15][20] Summary by Sections Overall Performance - As of March 30, 2026, 22 A-share listed banks reported a revenue growth of 1.24%, PPOP growth of 0.60%, and net profit growth of 1.30% for 2025, with a quarter-on-quarter recovery observed [14] - The net profit growth drivers include a 7.97% contribution from interest-earning asset expansion and a 0.97% contribution from the recovery of net fees [15] Scale - The report notes that public and bill financing are the main growth drivers, with financial investments continuing to show high growth [9] Net Interest Margin - The net interest margin has stabilized for two consecutive quarters, with expectations for a rebound in 2026 [9] Non-Interest Income - There is a performance divergence in non-interest income, with state-owned banks performing better due to lower exposure to the capital market [9][20] Asset Quality - The report indicates that the asset quality is improving for corporate loans, while retail loans are under pressure [9] Investment Recommendations - The report suggests a favorable outlook for the banking sector in the second quarter, emphasizing its defensive nature amid economic fluctuations [9][20]

1. Report Industry Investment Rating - Not provided in the document 2. Core Views of the Report - In Q4 2025, the bond market valuation recovered, and the net asset value of the bond funds in the whole market stopped falling and rebounded. However, the "asset shortage" pattern continued, the yield of credit bonds declined again, and the supply of desirable medium - to - high - yield assets shrank. Against this background, bond funds actively explored returns in terms of variety and duration in Q4, while remaining relatively cautious about credit downgrading [5]. - From the overall situation of bond fund heavy - holdings, the return range was further compressed, and institutions tended to adopt conservative strategies. The yields of the heavy - holding bond issuers were highly concentrated in the low - return range below 1.8%, and the scale of high - yield assets above 2.5% continued to shrink [5]. - For heavy - holding of urban investment bonds, the regional level showed a downward trend, with a preference for short - term durations. Zhejiang and Jiangsu were still the core heavy - holding regions, but the allocation intensity decreased. Institutions' preference for regions such as Sichuan, Shanghai, and Hunan increased. In terms of term distribution, the scale of each province was mainly concentrated around 1 - year, and as the term lengthened, the holding preference converged significantly towards strong provinces [5]. - For heavy - holding of financial bonds, bank Tier 2 and perpetual bonds dominated the allocation, and there was an obvious trend of variety downgrading. Financial bonds accounted for 72% of all heavy - holding credit bonds, with bank Tier 2 and perpetual bonds as the core varieties, and the allocation was relatively concentrated in the medium - to - high - yield range of 2.0% - 2.5%. In terms of term, a dumbbell - shaped allocation was preferred [5]. - For heavy - holding of industrial bonds, the allocation was concentrated in core industries, and institutions were more cautious about real - estate bonds. Non - bank finance and public utilities were the top two industries in terms of total market value of holdings, and were significantly increased in holdings compared with the previous period. Industries such as real estate, transportation, and coal were significantly reduced in holdings [5]. 3. Summary According to Relevant Catalogs 3.1 Bond Fund Heavy - Holding Overview 3.1.1 Overall Situation - As of the end of Q4 2025, there were 3,993 bond - type funds in the whole market, with a total scale of 11.10 trillion yuan, an increase of 0.36 trillion yuan compared with the end of the previous quarter. Bond - type funds were mainly medium - and long - term pure - bond funds, presenting a structure characterized by "dominated by medium - and long - term pure - bond funds and supplemented by hybrid bond funds" [11]. 3.1.2 Credit Bond Heavy - Holding from a Return Perspective - Most bond funds had a stable investment style and tended to adopt relatively conservative investment strategies. The yields of heavy - holding bond issuers were highly concentrated in the range below 1.8%. The supply of high - yield assets continued to shrink, and the high - yield assets above 2.5% further contracted compared with Q3 2025 [19]. - In Q4, the "asset shortage" continued, and the yields of credit bonds declined again. The concentration range of heavy - holding bond yields shifted downward. Compared with Q3, the balance of heavy - holding bonds with issuer yields below 1.8% increased significantly, while the holding balances of heavy - holding bonds in the ranges of 1.8 - 2.0%, 2.0 - 2.5%, and above 2.5% decreased to varying degrees [19]. 3.1.3 Types of Bond Fund Heavy - Holding Bonds and Their Performance in Different Dimensions - In Q4 2025, bond fund heavy - holding bonds generally showed a configuration trend of low - return concentration and high - return contraction. Financial bonds dominated with over 540 billion yuan, with bank Tier 2 and perpetual bonds as the core configuration. Industrial bonds tended to have medium - to - low returns, and urban investment bonds were concentrated in the 1.8% - 2.0% range [29]. - In terms of implicit rating distribution, financial and industrial bonds preferred high - rating issuers, while urban investment bonds showed an obvious downward trend. In Q4, incremental allocation was concentrated in high - rating bonds, and institutions were relatively cautious about credit downgrading [32]. 3.2 Characteristics of Urban Investment Bond Heavy - Holding 3.2.1 Regional and Hierarchical Characteristics of Heavy - Holding Urban Investment Bonds - In Q4 2025, the heavy - holding regions of urban investment bonds showed a certain downward trend, including prefecture - level cities in key provinces, district - level cities in non - key provinces, and park - level areas in municipalities. Zhejiang and Jiangsu were still the core heavy - holding regions, but the allocation intensity decreased. Institutions' preference for regions such as Sichuan, Shanghai, and Hunan increased [38]. 3.2.2 Term Characteristics of Heavy - Holding Urban Investment Bonds - Urban investment bonds generally preferred short - term durations. As the term lengthened, the holding preference converged significantly towards strong provinces. In Q4 2025, the term distribution of urban investment bond heavy - holdings was significantly differentiated, with the scale of each province mainly concentrated around 1 - year. The overall heavy - holding duration lengthened, but institutions were still cautious about ultra - long - term urban investment bonds [43]. 3.2.3 Analysis of the Top 20 Heavy - Holding Urban Investment Bond Issuers - The top 20 heavy - holding urban investment bond issuers in Q4 2025 were mainly medium - level prefecture - level platforms, with less obvious head - concentration characteristics. In Q4, the number of provincial - level platforms increased, and the degree of credit downgrading decreased. Some platforms were significantly reduced in holdings, while some provincial - level transportation platforms were increased in holdings [48]. 3.3 Overview of Financial Bond Heavy - Holding 3.3.1 Analysis of the Duration of Heavy - Holding Financial Bonds - Bank Tier 2 and perpetual bonds were mainly heavy - held by national and joint - stock banks, with a dumbbell - shaped term configuration preference. Compared with Q3, institutions' preference for state - owned banks and 3 - year terms increased significantly. The heavy - holding scale of Tier 2 and perpetual bonds increased, with state - owned banks showing obvious increases in holdings. Non - Tier 2 and perpetual bonds focused on 1 - year commercial financial bonds, and secondary - type bonds focused on 4 - year insurance bonds and 2 - 3 - year TLAC bonds [52]. 3.3.2 Analysis of the Top 20 Heavy - Holding Financial Bond Issuers - The top 20 heavy - holding bank Tier 2 and perpetual bond issuers were mainly state - owned banks, joint - stock banks, and relatively leading city commercial banks. State - owned banks generally increased their holdings, while joint - stock banks showed obvious differentiation. The yields of heavy - holding bonds generally declined rapidly, and there was significant differentiation in the remaining terms among issuers [61]. 3.4 Situation of Industrial Bond Heavy - Holding 3.4.1 Analysis of Heavy - Holding Industrial Bond Industries - Industrial bond allocation was still centered on industries with strong quasi - public attributes and industries with high financial relevance. Non - bank finance, public utilities, and transportation were the top three industries in terms of total market value of holdings. Non - bank finance and public utilities were significantly increased in holdings, while industries such as real estate, transportation, and coal were significantly reduced in holdings [71]. - Short - term duration varieties were still the main allocation. Most industries had a proportion of 0 - 2 - year terms exceeding 50%. Non - bank finance significantly lengthened the heavy - holding duration, while public utilities further increased the allocation of short - term duration bonds [72]. 3.4.2 Analysis of the Top 20 Heavy - Holding Industrial Bond Issuers - The top 20 heavy - holding industrial bond issuers were all central and local state - owned enterprises, mainly distributed in industries such as non - bank finance, public utilities, transportation, and coal. The allocation of industrial bond issuers was relatively concentrated. The average valuation yields of the top 20 heavy - holding industrial bond issuers generally declined, and there was significant differentiation in term changes among issuers [76]. 3.4.3 Analysis of the Top 10 Heavy - Holding Real - Estate Bond Issuers - State - owned and central - enterprise - affiliated real - estate bond issuers still occupied a core position. Some issuers were significantly increased in holdings, while some were significantly reduced in holdings. The real - estate bond allocation showed the characteristics of "medium - to - short - term duration + concentration on strong - credit issuers", and there was obvious differentiation in the return and duration strategies [79].

Core Viewpoint - The A-share market saw a collective rise in bank stocks, with Agricultural Bank of China and Bank of China leading the gains, both increasing by over 3% [1] Group 1: Stock Performance - Agricultural Bank of China and Bank of China rose by more than 3%, leading the banking sector [1] - Ningbo Bank, Huaxia Bank, and Shanghai Pudong Development Bank increased by over 2% [1] - Shanghai Rural Commercial Bank, Qingdao Bank, Jiangsu Bank, and Hangzhou Bank saw nearly 2% gains [1] Group 2: Technical Indicators - A MACD golden cross signal has formed, indicating a positive trend for these bank stocks [1]

Investment Rating - The industry investment rating is "Buy" [3] Core Insights - The report indicates that large banks have limited net buying activity, with a monthly cumulative net purchase of 46.8 billion yuan as of March 26, which is a decrease of approximately 200 billion yuan month-on-month but an increase of about 50 billion yuan year-on-year. It is expected that credit issuance may slightly decline compared to March 2025, but the initial performance remains strong [7][20] - The central bank's operations included a net injection of 281.9 billion yuan through various monetary policy tools, with a focus on maintaining liquidity stability as the quarter-end approaches [16] - The report highlights that the liquidity environment is expected to tighten in April due to tax payments and annual settlement pressures, with potential increases in funding rates towards the end of the month [16][17] Summary by Sections Section 1: March Credit Performance - The data shows that the funding environment remains stable as the quarter-end approaches, with large banks gradually reducing their lending from 4.37 trillion yuan to 3.78 trillion yuan [16] - The report emphasizes the importance of monitoring the upcoming PMI data and bank annual reports for insights into future liquidity trends [23] Section 2: Central Bank Dynamics and Market Rates - The central bank conducted 4.742 trillion yuan in 7-day reverse repos, with a net injection of 281.9 billion yuan after accounting for maturing operations [16] - Market rates for various instruments, including treasury bonds and NCDs, have shown slight fluctuations, with the 1-year treasury yield at 1.25% and the average NCD issuance rate at 1.52% [17][18] Section 3: Bank Financing Tracking - The total outstanding amount of interbank certificates of deposit (NCDs) is 18.19 trillion yuan, with a weighted average issuance rate of 1.65% [21] - The report notes that there were no new issuances of commercial bank bonds during the period, and the total outstanding amount of commercial bank bonds is 3.32 trillion yuan [22]

Investment Rating - The report assigns an "Accumulate" rating for the banking sector [4]. Core Insights - The expected revenue and net profit growth for the sample banks in Q1 2026 are projected at 2.7% and 2.2%, respectively, indicating a trend of upward revenue recovery and stable profit growth due to a significant reduction in the decline of net interest margin and alleviation of other non-interest pressures [2][4]. - The report highlights three main investment themes for 2026: identifying banks with potential for growth or maintaining high growth rates, focusing on banks with convertible bond expectations, and continuing dividend strategies [4]. Summary by Sections Revenue and Profit Growth - Expected revenue growth for Q1 2026 is 2.7%, while net profit growth is anticipated at 2.2, supported by a notable convergence in the decline of net interest margin and reduced pressures from non-interest income [2][4]. Asset Growth - The growth rates for interest-earning assets and loans are projected at 7.77% and 7.62%, respectively. In February 2026, the growth rates for bank loans and bond investments were 6.5% and 14.1%, showing a slight decrease and increase compared to December 2025 [4]. Net Interest Margin - The net interest margin for Q1 2026 is expected to be 1.37%, a decrease of 3 basis points from 2025. The growth rate of net interest income is projected at 2.6%, benefiting from the maturity and repricing of high-cost long-term deposits [4]. Non-Interest Income - The growth rate for non-interest income is expected to be -0.8% in Q1 2026, with a focus on wealth management income growth due to the appeal of dividend insurance products in a low-interest environment [4]. Asset Quality - The credit cost for Q1 2026 is projected at 0.73%, slightly down by 3 basis points year-on-year. The non-performing loan ratio is expected to decrease to 1.20%, while the provision coverage ratio is anticipated to decline slightly to 237.1% [4]. Investment Recommendations - The report recommends focusing on banks with expected performance growth, such as Ningbo Bank, Nanjing Bank, Hangzhou Bank, and Suzhou Bank. It also highlights banks with convertible bond expectations and those likely to continue dividend strategies [4].

本公司董事会及全体董事保证本公告内容不存在任何虚假记载、 误导性陈述或者重大遗漏，并对其内容的真实性、准确性和完整性承 担个别及连带责任。 江苏银行股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）第六届董事会第二 十六次会议通知于 2026 年 3 月 17 日以电子邮件方式发出，3 月 27 日以书面传签方式召开。本次会议应参与表决董事 15 名，实际参与 表决董事 15 名。会议符合《公司法》等法律法规及公司章程的有关 规定，表决所形成的决议合法、有效。 会议审议通过以下议案： 一、关于江苏银行股份有限公司 2025 年度主要股东（大股东） 评估报告的议案 二、关于江苏银行股份有限公司 2025 年度负债质量管理评估报 告的议案 证券代码：600919 证券简称：江苏银行 公告编号：2026-004 优先股代码：360026 优先股简称：苏银优 1 江苏银行股份有限公司董事会决议公告 表决结果：同意 15 票，反对 0 票，弃权 0 票。 本议案需向公司股东会报告。 表决结果：同意 15 票，反对 0 票，弃权 0 票。 三、关于江苏银行股份有限公司 2026 年度工资总额预算方案的 议案 表决结果：同意 15 票，反对 ...

Group 1 - The Bank ETF Fuquo (159887) opened down 0.39% at 1.288 yuan on March 27 [1][2] - Major holdings in the Bank ETF Fuquo include: - China Merchants Bank down 0.15% - Industrial Bank down 0.42% - Industrial and Commercial Bank down 0.13% - Agricultural Bank down 0.31% - Bank of Communications down 0.15% - Pudong Development Bank down 0.50% - Jiangsu Bank down 0.09% - Ping An Bank down 0.27% - Shanghai Bank unchanged - Minsheng Bank down 0.26% [1][2] - The performance benchmark for the Bank ETF Fuquo is the CSI 800 Bank Index return, managed by Fuquo Fund Management Co., Ltd. [1][2] - Since its establishment on May 12, 2021, the Bank ETF Fuquo has returned 29.40%, with a return of 3.16% over the past month [1][2]

Group 1 - The Bank ETF Hu'an (516210) opened with a gain of 2.88%, priced at 1.393 yuan [1][2] - Major holdings in the Bank ETF Hu'an include several banks, with the following opening performances: China Merchants Bank down 0.15%, Industrial Bank down 0.42%, Industrial and Commercial Bank down 0.13%, Agricultural Bank down 0.31%, Bank of Communications down 0.15%, Pudong Development Bank down 0.50%, Jiangsu Bank down 0.09%, Ping An Bank down 0.27%, Shanghai Bank unchanged, and Minsheng Bank down 0.26% [1][2] - The performance benchmark for the Bank ETF Hu'an is the CSI Bank Index return, managed by Hu'an Fund Management Co., Ltd., with a fund manager named Su Qingyun [1][2] - Since its establishment on September 3, 2021, the Bank ETF Hu'an has achieved a return of 35.46%, with a return of 3.04% over the past month [1][2]

Group 1 - The Bank ETF E Fund (516310) opened at 1.312 yuan, experiencing a decline of 0.15% on March 27 [1] - Major holdings in the Bank ETF include China Merchants Bank, Industrial Bank, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of Communications, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, Jiangsu Bank, Ping An Bank, Shanghai Bank, and Minsheng Bank, with most showing declines [1] - The performance benchmark for the Bank ETF is the CSI Bank Index return, managed by E Fund Management Co., Ltd., with a return of 31.33% since its inception on May 20, 2021, and a return of 3.05% over the past month [2] Group 2 - A MACD golden cross signal has formed, indicating potential upward momentum for certain stocks [3]

Group 1 - The Bank ETF Huaxia (515020) opened down 0.18% at 1.682 yuan on March 26 [1][2] - Major holdings in the Bank ETF Huaxia include: China Merchants Bank down 0.28%, Industrial Bank down 0.05%, Industrial and Commercial Bank down 0.41%, Agricultural Bank down 0.31%, Bank of Communications down 0.44%, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank down 0.30%, Jiangsu Bank down 0.37%, Ping An Bank down 0.27%, Shanghai Bank down 0.31%, and Minsheng Bank down 0.26% [1][2] - The performance benchmark for the Bank ETF Huaxia is the CSI Bank Index return, managed by Huaxia Fund Management Co., Ltd., with a fund manager named Li Jun [1][2] - Since its establishment on October 24, 2019, the Bank ETF Huaxia has achieved a return of 68.51%, with a return of 2.52% over the past month [1][2]