March 30, 2026 06:18 PM GMT China – Banks: 4Q25 Wrap | Asia Pacific Improving revenue outlook, credit cost likely key divergent driver for 2026 We saw more signs of stabilizing NIM and healthy fee income growth in 4Q25 results. We believe CCB, BOC, CITIC, Industrial Bank, and PAB can report above-peer rebound in revenue and profit growth in 2026, considering both revenue growth and room to reduce or maintain credit costs. More modest NIM pressure and healthy fee income to support improving revenue growth tr ...

智通财经APP获悉，中银国际发布研报称，建设银行(00939)2025年第四季归母净利润同比增长2.2%， 2025年首三季同比增长0.6%。2025年第四季资产质量持续改善，截至12月末不良贷款率降至1.31%， 2025年9月末为1.32%。该行指，建设银行当前估值吸引，其目标价由原先10.44港元上调至11.28港元， 维持其评级为"买入"。 ...

Key Points - The total bond market in mainland China reached 199.70 trillion yuan by the first quarter of 2026, an increase of 3.52 trillion yuan from the beginning of the year [2] - The total issuance of bonds in the first quarter of 2026 was 19.7 trillion yuan, a year-on-year decrease of 4% [2] - The issuance of interest rate bonds increased by 8% year-on-year to 8.5 trillion yuan, while credit bonds remained flat at 4.5 trillion yuan [2][4] - The issuance of interbank certificates of deposit decreased by 19% year-on-year to 6.7 trillion yuan [2] Bond Issuance Breakdown - Interest rate bonds: 837 issues, 851.47 billion yuan, 8% growth [4] - Government bonds: 43 issues, 362.00 billion yuan, 9% growth [4] - Local government bonds: 521 issues, 310.59 billion yuan, 9% growth [4] - Policy bank bonds: 273 issues, 178.82 billion yuan, 3% growth [4] - Credit bonds: 5528 issues, 445.65 billion yuan, 0% growth [4] - Financial bonds: 267 issues, 62.57 billion yuan, 23% decline [4] - Insurance company bonds: 8 issues, 1.81 billion yuan, 63% decline [4] - Securities company bonds: 185 issues, 47.87 billion yuan, 147% growth [4] Bond Underwriting Rankings - The top three banks in bond underwriting for the first quarter of 2026 were China Bank, Construction Bank, and Industrial and Commercial Bank, with underwriting amounts of 359.35 billion yuan, 357.37 billion yuan, and 331.23 billion yuan respectively [10][11] - The top three securities firms in bond underwriting (excluding local government bonds) were CITIC Securities, Guotai Junan, and CITIC Jinpu, with underwriting amounts of 305.59 billion yuan, 245.82 billion yuan, and 198.23 billion yuan respectively [20][24] Trends in Financing Costs - The "CCB-Wind Interbank Bond Issuance Index" indicated a downward trend in financing costs in the first quarter of 2026, with the index currently at around 31.6 [6]

中银国际发表研报指，建设银行2025年第四季归母净利润按年增长2.2%，资产质量持续改善，截至12 月末不良贷款率降至1.31%。该行指，建行当前估值吸引，将其目标价由10.44港元上调至11.28港元， 维持"买入"评级。 ...

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].

格隆汇3月31日丨建设银行(601939.SH)公布，本行董事会收到生柳荣先生辞呈。因年龄原因，生柳荣先 生提请辞去本行首席财务官职务。生柳荣先生的辞任自2026年3月31日起生效。 ...

北京商报讯（记者 孟凡霞 周义力）3月31日，建设银行发布公告称，该行董事会收到生柳荣辞呈。因年 龄原因，生柳荣提请辞去建设银行首席财务官职务。生柳荣的辞任自2026年3月31日起生效。公告显 示，生柳荣确认与建设银行董事会无不同意见，没有其他事项需要通知该行股东，并已按照有关要求做 好交接工作。 ...

21世纪经济报道记者冯紫彤 3月31日晚，建设银行公告称，该行董事会收到生柳荣的辞呈，表示因年龄原因，生柳荣提请辞去建设 银行首席财务官职务。其辞任已自2026年3月31日起生效。 建设银行在公告中对生柳荣在任期间的重要贡献给予高度评价并深表感谢。公告指出，生柳荣担任该行 首席财务官期间，勤勉敬业、履职尽责，在完善资产负债管理体系和财务会计管理体系，保障稳健经营 与财务合规；加强战略研究与政策协调，推动集团规划落地实施；优化子公司经营管理，推动集团一体 化发展；加强信息披露，做好投资者关系维护等方面做出重要贡献。 公开资料显示，生柳荣出生于1965年11月，是一位拥有深厚学术背景与丰富一线实战经验的"老建行 人"。 1998年，生柳荣调入中国建设银行厦门分行，开启了其二十余年的建行职业生涯。在厦门分行期间，他 历任国际业务部总经理、公司业务部总经理、副行长及行长等职，积累了扎实的基层管理经验。 进入总行后，生柳荣的职务履历进一步拓宽。2017年9月至2020年3月任建行金融市场部主要负责人、总 经理；2020年3月至2024年5月任资产负债管理部总经理。自2022年11月起，他出任建行首席财务官，并 从202 ...

"黄金十年"落幕后, 中国银行业步入深度转型周期。 导语：以数智化全面重构银行经营逻辑、资产结构与服务模式。 宏观经济结构调整、利率市场化深化、金融监管趋严叠加科技革命冲击 ,低利率、低息差、高风险、强监管四重压力 在行业内持持续凸显 。 截至 3月29日,已 披露财报的 13家银行2025年平均净息差 收窄至 1.5%左右, 同比回落 10bps , 较 2020年下降近60个基点 。 国家金融监督 管理总局数据显示 ,2025年商业银行累计实现净利润约2. 4 万亿元 ,同比 增长约 2.3%。 在行业整体承压的背景下 ,银行业分化加剧,传统的规模扩张模式已难以为继。 部分银行固守传统业务 ,陷入资产荒、负债成本高、风险抬升的困境,亦有银行试图以数字化转型破局。 截至 2025年5月, 大中型银行已在总行和省分行层面都设立了专门的科技金融部门 ,全国设立科技支行达 2178家。 根据行业调研 ,全国性商业银行已普遍制定数字化战略,大中型银行大多设立了数字化专营部门,但多数银行的数字化仍停留在"工具替代人工"的初 级阶段：线上渠道、移动办公、电子审批。 经济转型期 ,传统基建、房地产、批发零售等行业融资需求 ...

年报发布 中国建设银行发布2025年度业绩 2026年3月27日，中国建设银行公布2025年度经营业绩。集团资产总额45.63万亿元、增幅12.47%；负债 总额41.95万亿元、增幅12.68%；高质高效完成增资工作，核心一级资本净额3.46万亿元、增幅9.46%。 盈利能力稳，实现经营收入7,408.71亿元、增幅1.69%，净利润3,397.90亿元、增幅1.04%。资产质量 稳，不良贷款率1.31%，拨备覆盖率233.15%。客户基础稳，服务公司类客户1,273万户、个人全量客户 7.85亿人。 点击图片查看年报详情 年报发布 交通银行发布2025年度业绩 2026年3月27日，交通银行发布2025年度业绩。截至2025年末，集团资产总额突破15.5万亿元，较上年 末增长4.35%；全年实现归属于母公司股东净利润956.22亿元，同比增长2.18%；营业收入2,650.71亿 元，同比增长2.02%；资产质量稳中向好，不良贷款率1.28%，较上年末下降0.03个百分点，拨备覆盖率 提升至208.38% 中国邮政储蓄银行发布2025年度业绩 3月27日，中国邮政储蓄银行发布2025年年报。截至2025年 ...