AGRICULTURAL BANK OF CHINA(SH:601288) Sou Hu Cai Jing·2025-09-23 00:14Core Viewpoint - Agricultural Bank of China (601288.SH) experienced a rapid decline in market value after briefly becoming the largest in A-shares, highlighting volatility in the banking sector and investor sentiment [1][3]. Group 1: Market Performance - On September 4, Agricultural Bank reached a market value of 2.55 trillion yuan, becoming the largest in A-shares, but by September 19, it fell back to second place, trailing Industrial and Commercial Bank by 136.7 billion yuan [1]. - The bank's stock price dropped 9% over eight trading days, surprising many investors who entered the market seeking low valuations [1]. - The overall banking sector is struggling, with the China Securities Banking Index hitting a new low since May, and the year-to-date increase shrinking from 20.38% to 3.05% [3]. Group 2: Financing Trends - Interestingly, financing funds have been quietly accumulating, with a net buy of 76.29 million yuan on September 18, marking the highest financing balance since September 5 [3]. - This divergence of "falling stock prices and increasing financing" recalls the situation in 2020 when Kweichow Moutai's stock price fell below 1,000 yuan, yet financing continued to increase, leading to further adjustments [3]. Group 3: ETF Fund Flows - Among 10 banking ETFs, 8 saw an increase in shares, but the Banking ETF Index Fund (516210) experienced an 11.2% decrease in shares, indicating a divergence in market sentiment [4]. - The market is playing a "differential expectation" game, where the focus on low price-to-earnings ratios (6.86 times) and high dividend yields (4.24%) may not reflect the true drivers of market performance [4]. Group 4: Institutional Inventory Insights - The case of Agricultural Bank illustrates that while low valuations and high dividends attract attention, institutional inventory data showed divergence even when stock prices reached new highs [9]. - The focus should shift from static indicators like price-to-earnings ratios to the dynamics of institutional trading characteristics, which provide a clearer picture of market behavior [10][11]. Group 5: Behavioral Insights - The emphasis on behavioral traces rather than static metrics is crucial, as stock prices are outcomes while institutional trading characteristics are the underlying causes [10]. - Questions regarding the current state of institutional inventory and the logic behind ETF fund flow divergences may yield more valuable insights than traditional analyses [11].