2025年1－9月发债城投票据逾期情况梳理-20251120

Report Summary 1. Investment Rating No investment rating information is provided in the report. 2. Core Viewpoints - In 2025 from January to September, the number of consecutive overdue occurrences of bonds - issuing urban investment entities' bills increased significantly year - on - year, while the number of entities with consecutive bill overdue decreased year - on - year. High - frequency overdue enterprises became the main risk source. AA - rated and district - county - level platforms remained the main overdue groups, and the risk differentiation effect of administrative levels and credit ratings was further strengthened. Risks were mainly concentrated in Shandong, Yunnan, Henan, Guizhou and other provinces. Entities with consecutive bill overdue faced relatively large short - term concentrated debt repayment pressure, and attention should be paid to the cross - variety risk spread caused by credit risk transmission [2][22]. 3. Summary by Directory 3.1 Overview of Urban Investment Entities' Bill Overdue - Change in the number of bonds - issuing urban investment entities with consecutive bill overdue: From January to September 2025, bonds - issuing urban investment entities were included in the list of consecutive bill overdue 508 times, a year - on - year increase of 38.04%, involving 65 entities, a year - on - year decrease of 4.41%. The monthly number of urban investment entities included in the list was between 54 - 58, and the monthly number of newly - added entities was 2, 3, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 2 respectively [5]. - Credit rating of bonds - issuing urban investment entities with consecutive bill overdue: From January to September 2025, entities with consecutive bill overdue were mainly AA - rated, accounting for 63.08%, a year - on - year increase of 1.31 percentage points, with 41 entities, a year - on - year decrease of 1. AA + - rated entities ranked second, accounting for 23.08%, with 15 entities, a year - on - year decrease of 2 [8]. - Administrative level of bonds - issuing urban investment entities with consecutive bill overdue: From January to September 2025, district - county - level platforms accounted for the highest proportion among entities with consecutive bill overdue, and there were no provincial - level platforms. District - county - level platforms numbered 39 (60.00%, a year - on - year increase of 4.12 percentage points), municipal - level platforms numbered 21 (32.31%), and there was 1 provincial - level park platform, 2 national - level development zone platforms, 1 national - level high - tech zone platform, and 1 national - level new area platform [11]. - Geographical distribution of bonds - issuing urban investment entities with consecutive bill overdue: From January to September 2025, the geographical distribution of bonds - issuing urban investment entities with consecutive bill overdue was highly concentrated, mainly in Shandong, Yunnan, Henan, and Guizhou. There were 11 provinces involved in bill overdue risks, 2 less than the same period last year. Shandong had the largest number of such entities, reaching 26, accounting for 40.00%. Yunnan had 12, and both Henan and Guizhou had 8. In terms of the proportion of the number of entities with consecutive bill overdue to the total number of bonds - issuing urban investment entities in each province, Qinghai, Yunnan, and Shandong ranked in the top three [13]. - Existing bonds of bonds - issuing urban investment entities with consecutive bill overdue: As of October 27, 2025, the total balance of existing bonds of 65 bonds - issuing urban investment entities with consecutive bill overdue from January to September 2025 was 144.82 billion yuan. Among them, corporate (enterprise) bonds accounted for 54.25% (78.558 billion yuan), medium - term notes accounted for 18.29% (26.488 billion yuan), private placement financing instruments accounted for 15.61% (22.6 billion yuan), and short - term and ultra - short - term financing bonds accounted for 9.63% (13.944 billion yuan). 39.26% (56.861 billion yuan) of the bonds would mature within 1 year, and 26.31% (38.104 billion yuan) would mature within 1 - 3 years. These entities faced relatively large short - term concentrated debt repayment pressure. Some entities had non - standard financing defaults, and attention should be paid to the cross - variety risk spread [15][21].