记者丨李山 编辑丨彭康一 2026年开年至今，A股市场的退市节奏明显加快。东方退（300379）、*ST长药（300391）、*ST奥维 （002231）、*ST立方（300344）、广道数字（400295）五家公司皆因财务造假、信披违规被监管处 罚。 退市不是终点，监管部门正在打破"一退了之"的旧有格局，针对上述公司的违规追责与民事索赔才刚刚 开始。符合索赔条件的投资者可关注"投资快报"公众号，通过右侧"股民索赔"菜单栏挽回损失。 东方退：财务造假与欺诈发行 作为2026年首批退市公司之一，东方退的陨落极具代表性。1月22日，该公司正式从深交所摘牌，结束 了其在资本市场的旅程。 东方退的退市源于其长达四年的系统性造假。监管部门查明，在2019年至2022年期间，东方退通过全资 子公司虚构业务、提前确认收入等方式，累计虚增收入4.32亿元、虚增利润3.14亿元。 更严重的是，公司在2022年向特定对象发行股票时，《募集说明书》引用了这些虚假财务数据，构成了 欺诈发行，当时募集资金高达约22亿元。 两类投资者可参与索赔：（1）2019年3月30日—2024年4月29日期间买入，并在2024年4月30日之后卖出 ...

2026.02.26 本文字数：2797，阅读时长大约5分钟 作者 |第一财经 安卓 连续三年财务造假的*ST立方（300344.SZ），正式走向了退市之路。 该公司在农历蛇年的最后一个交易日公告称，已于2月14日收到深交所下发的《事先告知书》，拟决定 终止该公司上市交易，其股票已于2月24日起停牌。 根据行政处罚决定书，该公司2021年至2023年年报存在虚假记载，其中，2021年和2022年连续两年虚假 记载的营业收入金额合计达到5亿元以上，且超过同期披露年度营业收入合计金额的50%，属于重大违 法强制退市情形。 与《事先告知书》同步披露的，是深交所对*ST立方给予公开谴责的处分决定，以及安徽证监局的《行 政处罚决定书》。 经查明，*ST立方存在三项违法事实：通过开展代理业务虚增营业收入、营业成本；通过开展融资性贸 易虚增营业收入、营业成本；通过开展虚假贸易虚增营业收入、营业成本、利润总额。对此，安徽证监 局对*ST立方责令改正、警告，并处1000万元罚款。 去年11月28日，该公司收到安徽证监局下发的《行政处罚及市场禁入事先告知书》，对时任董事长汪逸 等10名责任人警告，合计罚款3000万元，其中，三名 ...

净化市场生态。 连续三年财务造假的*ST立方（300344.SZ），正式走向了退市之路。 该公司在农历蛇年的最后一个交易日公告称，已于2月14日收到深交所下发的《事先告知书》，拟决定 终止该公司上市交易，其股票已于2月24日起停牌。 根据行政处罚决定书，该公司2021年至2023年年报存在虚假记载，其中，2021年和2022年连续两年虚假 记载的营业收入金额合计达到5亿元以上，且超过同期披露年度营业收入合计金额的50%，属于重大违 法强制退市情形。 第一财经梳理发现，开年以来，已有4家上市公司因触及重大违法强制退市情形被摘牌或进入退市流 程。 上海知信律师事务所证券诉讼团队认为，监管层对重大违法强制退市坚持零容忍、严执法，大幅提高违 法成本，精准打击实控人、董监高等关键少数，市场禁入常态化，形成有力震慑，符合注册制改革方 向，也有利于净化市场生态。 已有4公司触及重大违法强制退市 退市制度是市场新陈代谢的重要一环，自退市新规发布实施以来，资本市场正加速形成"应退尽退、及 时出清"的常态化退市格局。2026年，资本市场"零容忍"监管态势持续升级，针对连续多年、系统性财 务造假的上市公司，监管部门严厉打击、严肃惩 ...

登录新浪财经APP 搜索【信披】查看更多考评等级 金融市场瞬息万变，投资与经济政策深刻影响全球。我们为您带来昨夜今晨的财经新闻，涵盖股市动 态、经济数据、企业财务和政策更新，帮助您全面把握金融世界。 从狂热到踩踏，贵金属市场的"两脚刹车" 2026年1月底，国际金银价格在创历史新高后突发暴跌，创40年来最大单日跌幅。分析指出，这并非偶 然，而是市场过热后的技术性回撤。第一脚刹车源于极端上涨后的获利了结与杠杆资金平仓引发的踩 踏。第二脚刹车则因美联储鹰派主席提名及核心PPI数据超预期，动摇了市场对提前降息的押注，推高 实际利率与美元，削弱了黄金的吸引力。中长期看，地缘紧张与全球去美元化趋势仍构成结构性支撑， 但短期市场情绪脆弱，高波动风险需警惕。 组件价格跟着金属期货价格走 义乌中小光伏企业：不敢报价接单 新能源出口退税政策调整与银、铜、铝等金属价格大幅上涨形成双重冲击，导致义乌中小光伏企业陷入 经营困境。组件价格随金属期货剧烈波动，企业无法稳定报价，客户观望情绪浓厚，交易频现毁约。成 本结构中，飙升的白银价格使银浆取代硅料成为最大成本项。面对压力，企业纷纷清空库存避险，并尝 试拓展储能、逆变器业务或使用新材料 ...

Core Viewpoint - The A-share market is entering a new phase of "clearing" as the first batch of companies facing delisting emerges, with *ST Changyao being the first to receive a notice of termination of listing, indicating an acceleration of the market-oriented delisting process [1][2]. Group 1: *ST Changyao - *ST Changyao has been penalized for financial fraud, with its 2021-2023 annual reports containing false records, leading to a fine and a notice of termination of listing from the Shenzhen Stock Exchange [2][3]. - The company's financial performance has been deteriorating, with losses reported from 2022 to the first three quarters of 2025 amounting to -23.27 million, -606 million, -628 million, and -210 million respectively, and owner equity dropping to -668 million by September 2025 [2]. - The stock price has been below the "1 yuan red line" since December 30, 2025, triggering potential delisting under the Shenzhen Stock Exchange rules [3]. Group 2: *ST Aowei - *ST Aowei is the first company to face delisting due to market value, having recorded a total market value below 500 million yuan for 20 consecutive trading days, alongside a stock price below 1 yuan for 11 consecutive days [6][8]. - The company has reported losses from 2022 to the first three quarters of 2025, with figures of -53.18 million, -34.20 million, -46.11 million, and -188 million respectively, while its revenue has also been declining [6][8]. Group 3: Guandao Digital - Guandao Digital is noted as the first company to be forcibly delisted from the Beijing Stock Exchange due to major violations, with false records in multiple annual reports leading to its delisting in January 2026 [8][9]. Group 4: Debang Shares - Debang Shares has opted for voluntary delisting, with plans to integrate into JD Logistics, while maintaining its independent brand and operations [10][11]. - The company has set a cash option price of 19 yuan per share for shareholders, which is above the current market price [11]. Group 5: Other Companies at Risk - Several companies are at risk of delisting due to poor financial performance, including *ST Jinglun, *ST Lifan, and *ST Xiongmao, which have reported negative net profits and may face delisting warnings following their annual reports [13][14][15]. - The ongoing registration system reform is normalizing the "should delist" mechanism in the A-share market, with a focus on companies with poor financial indicators [15].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the emergence of three key mechanisms for investor rights protection in China's securities market, which are enhancing the accessibility and certainty of investor claims, thereby creating a new ecosystem for shareholder rights protection [1][5][7]. Group 1: Mechanisms for Investor Rights Protection - The three mechanisms include ordinary lawsuits, special representative lawsuits, and advance compensation, which are collectively forming a new ecosystem for investor rights protection [5][8]. - The special representative lawsuit has seen successful cases, such as the judgment against Jintongling, where 43,269 investors were awarded a total of 775 million yuan [2][3]. - Advance compensation has been implemented for the fifth time, with Wukuang Securities contributing 210 million yuan for compensation related to Guangdao Digital's false statements [3][4]. Group 2: Legal Framework and Changes - The cancellation of the prerequisite for administrative penalties or criminal judgments allows investors to file lawsuits without waiting for regulatory actions, significantly shortening the time for rights protection [2][6]. - The introduction of the Supreme Court's regulations in 2022 has facilitated the filing of civil compensation lawsuits for securities false statements, enhancing investor rights [2][9]. - The new ecosystem emphasizes civil liability as a core mechanism, moving away from reliance on administrative penalties, thus improving the predictability and stability of civil accountability [7][10]. Group 3: Implications for Market Integrity - The development of these mechanisms is expected to enhance the quality of information disclosure and compliance management among listed companies, as the market increasingly recognizes the costs associated with violations [7][11]. - The article highlights that the new ecosystem is likely to restore investor confidence in the capital market, contributing positively to its healthy development [8][9]. - Experts suggest that further improvements are needed to ensure the sustainability and effectiveness of these mechanisms, including clearer standards for civil liability and better integration of responsibilities among intermediaries [9][10][11].

Core Viewpoint - Wenkang Securities, a subsidiary of Wenkang Capital, reported a significant decline in both revenue and net profit for the year 2025, primarily due to a massive increase in "non-operating expenses" related to investor compensation in the Guangdao Digital case [1][4][11]. Financial Performance - Wenkang Securities' operating revenue for 2025 was 1.226 billion yuan, a year-on-year decrease of 8.52% [4][17]. - The net profit plummeted to 133.82 million yuan, reflecting a staggering decline of 51.88% compared to the previous year [4][18]. - Non-operating expenses surged by 2608.13%, amounting to 221.64 million yuan, which significantly impacted the overall financial performance [7][18]. Business Segment Analysis - The company's main business segments showed a mixed performance, with two segments increasing and three declining: - Brokerage business revenue reached 104 million yuan, up 33.59% year-on-year [5][17]. - Proprietary trading revenue was 542 million yuan, a slight increase of 0.86% [5][17]. - Asset management revenue fell sharply to 40 million yuan, down 44.87% [6][17]. - Investment banking revenue decreased to 262 million yuan, a decline of 20% [6][17]. - Interest income from credit business was 275 million yuan, down 11.82% [6][17]. Impact of Guangdao Digital Case - The Guangdao Digital case, where the company was implicated in fraudulent activities leading to inflated revenues, resulted in Wenkang Securities taking on compensation responsibilities [9][21]. - A compensation fund of 210 million yuan was established to address investor losses, which aligns closely with the increase in non-operating expenses reported [10][22]. - The case highlighted significant risks associated with compliance and operational integrity, necessitating improvements in risk management and professional capabilities moving forward [11][23].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the increasing scrutiny and enforcement actions by regulatory bodies in China against financial fraud in publicly listed companies, highlighting a significant rise in the number of cases and the decline in the amount of inflated revenue reported by these companies [1][2]. Regulatory Actions - Since July 2024, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has handled 159 financial fraud cases, resulting in 111 administrative penalties totaling 8.1 billion yuan [2]. - The regulatory framework has been strengthened to include criminal referrals and civil claims against third parties involved in financial fraud, ensuring a comprehensive accountability system [1][2]. Trends in Financial Fraud - In 2025, approximately 43 companies were penalized for inflating revenue, with a total inflated revenue of about 15 billion yuan, a significant decrease from over 600 billion yuan in 2024 [2][3]. - The number of companies involved in financial fraud is increasing, but the total amount of inflated revenue has decreased significantly, indicating a potential improvement in compliance [2][3]. Common Fraud Techniques - Common methods of financial fraud include fictitious business operations, premature revenue recognition, and transactions with related parties lacking commercial substance [3][4]. - Companies have also been found to underreport costs and expenses to inflate profits, with some instances of fraud lasting several years before detection [3][4]. Case Studies of Fraudulent Companies - Notable cases include: - Evergrande Group, which inflated revenue by over 560 billion yuan [3]. - ST Huawen, which inflated revenue by 3.62 billion yuan through improper accounting practices [4][5]. - ST Chuangyi, which inflated revenue by 3.93 billion yuan by misreporting income from sales [6][7]. - ST Meichen, which inflated revenue by 14.39 billion yuan over five years through fraudulent procurement practices [13][14]. Impact of Regulatory Actions - The regulatory crackdown has led to the delisting of several companies, including ST Meichen and ST Huawen, due to severe financial misconduct [12][21]. - The enforcement actions have resulted in a more stringent environment for financial reporting, with companies facing significant penalties and reputational damage for non-compliance [2][20].

Group 1 - The Nanjing Intermediate Court made a first-instance judgment on the Jin Tong Ling Securities false statement representative lawsuit, involving over 43,000 investors with a total compensation amount exceeding 770 million yuan, primarily benefiting individual investors [1] - The Jin Tong Ling case is the third instance of a substantive judgment under the special representative lawsuit procedure, following the Kangmei Pharmaceutical and Zeda Yisheng cases, highlighting the effectiveness of this legal mechanism in protecting investor rights [1] - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) emphasized that the special representative lawsuit serves as a significant legal method for coordinating regulatory and judicial governance, deterring potential violations in the securities market [1] Group 2 - The CSRC has taken administrative actions against the Jinzhou Port Securities false statement case, which severely disrupted market order and harmed investor rights, with over 50 investors authorizing the Investor Protection Agency to apply for a special representative lawsuit [2] - The implementation of the special representative lawsuit system aligns with the new "National Nine Articles" aimed at enhancing the application of this legal framework to protect investor rights effectively [2] - The CSRC will continue to support the Investor Protection Agency in fulfilling its legal public service role in civil litigation, promoting judicial cooperation to better safeguard the rights of investors, especially small and medium-sized investors [2] Group 3 - On December 30, 2025, Wenkang Securities announced the establishment of a special fund for advance compensation regarding the Guangdao Digital false statement, with an initial fund size of 210 million yuan, managed by the China Securities Investor Protection Fund [3] - The advance compensation mechanism is part of the diversified resolution mechanism for securities disputes as stipulated in the Securities Law, allowing for voluntary commitments from controlling shareholders and related securities companies to establish a special fund [3] - The CSRC supports market institutions in proactively conducting advance compensation work to effectively resolve market disputes and efficiently protect investor rights [3]

一笔高达2.1亿元的赔付款，几乎相当于其去年全年的净利润。 近日，五矿证券公告设立"广道数字事件先行赔付专项基金"，为其保荐上市公司的严重财务造假"买 单"。该基金存续期3个月，委托中国证券投资者保护基金有限责任公司管理，用于赔偿受损投资者。 炒股就看金麒麟分析师研报，权威，专业，及时，全面，助您挖掘潜力主题机会！ 根据其母公司五矿资本股份有限公司（600390.SH）披露的2025半年度报告，五矿证券上半年实现合并 净利润1.17亿元，此次赔付额远超其上半年的盈利水平。 | | □ 吴制选中 | % 秒转数据 | | --- | --- | --- | | | | 早世: 月元、 70 | | 业务类型 | 营业总收入 | 点比 | | 本六体育知品 | 14.309.99 | 28.21 | | 授资银行业务 | 14.391.52 | 28.37 | | 对自管理业务 | 19.161.99 | 37.77 | | 资产管理业系 | 2.407.91 | 4.75 | | 你可要就 | 459.14 | 0.90 | | 合计 | 50,730.55 | 100.00 | 此次赔付的源头，是广道数字持续 ...