Group 1 - The bond market has faced significant challenges in 2023, with fund managers focusing on maintaining stable net value curves and market predictions [1][4] - Future bond yields are unlikely to replicate the significant decline seen in 2022, with duration strategies expected to weaken marginally, making coupon strategies a more stable choice [1][4] - Recent adjustments in deposit rates by domestic banks have led to cautious investor sentiment regarding the bond market, with concerns over profit-taking and pressure on bank liabilities [2][3] Group 2 - Credit bonds have outperformed interest rate bonds recently, driven by a shift of funds from bank deposits to wealth management products due to lower deposit rates [2] - The performance of interest rate bonds has been lackluster, influenced by rapid market movements and weak expectations for short-term liquidity easing [2][4] - Future bond market dynamics will depend on fundamental economic conditions and the People's Bank of China's (PBOC) policy expectations, including potential resumption of government bond purchases [3][5] Group 3 - In a low-interest-rate environment, fund managers need to adopt more refined strategies, focusing on individual bonds and optimizing portfolio structures to maximize risk-return ratios [4][6] - The newly launched fund by the company, which has a 12-month holding period, aims to leverage a stable liability structure and employ a yield curve riding strategy to enhance positive returns [4][5]

Group 1: Credit Bond Strategy - The credit bond market is expected to continue in a volatile state, with a focus on interest rate strategies and band trading being more favorable than pure selection of varieties [5][38] - The strategy suggests focusing on short to medium-term credit bonds and high-grade long-term bonds to seek opportunities for interest rate compression [5][38] - The recommendation is to increase allocation in high-grade bonds from local government financing vehicles, real estate, and stable industries during market adjustments [5][38] Group 2: Local Government Financing Bonds - The transformation of local government financing vehicles is entering a complex phase, with potential pricing discrepancies as platforms adapt to new regulations [2][43] - The issuance of local government bonds is expected to remain low due to strict regulatory oversight and the ongoing transition of platforms [2][43] - Focus on short to medium-term bonds from regions with stable cash flows, particularly in Guangdong, Hubei, Jiangsu, and Henan, is recommended [2] Group 3: Financial Bonds and Varieties - High-grade perpetual bonds can be traded in response to interest rate fluctuations, but the trading space is limited and requires high trading standards [3][39] - The strategy includes focusing on high-grade bonds with a maturity of 3-5 years for stable institutions, while actively trading lower-grade bonds during market adjustments [3][39] - The expansion of TLAC non-capital instruments and their comparison with secondary capital bonds is highlighted as an area of interest [3][39] Group 4: Industrial Bonds - Industrial bonds have shown some recovery in profitability, but performance remains varied across sectors, with strong performance in automotive, machinery, and utilities, while real estate and construction sectors lag [4] - The recommendation is to focus on high-quality state-owned enterprises and stable private enterprises for medium-term investments [4] Group 5: Real Estate Bonds - The real estate sector is under pressure, with a recommendation to focus on high-grade bonds from state-owned enterprises while monitoring the recovery of the sector [4] - The potential for policy support in the real estate market could enhance recovery in core cities, but caution is advised for lower-tier cities [4] Group 6: Asset-Backed Securities (ABS) and Public REITs - The market for consumer finance ABS is expanding, with opportunities for variety exploration in a volatile market [3][39] - Public REITs are recommended to balance opportunities in both primary and secondary markets, focusing on stable projects [3][39]

债市的长期方向和短期过渡策略 20250602 从历史数据来看，票息策略是否能够长期有效？ 摘要 当前债市利差分化，部分品种利差收窄，而如 20 年期票息、不同期限 国开债与非国开债、长久期地方债等利差则出现分化。投资者应提前布 局兼顾票息和流动性的品种，而非过度追求高票息。 历史数据显示，自 2020 年以来，单纯的票息策略难以长期有效，尤其 是在 2022 年至 2023 年期间。未来市场中，票息策略更多是过渡性策 略，需结合市场整体利率走势进行调整。 宏观政策转向可能导致流动性收紧，各类利率及信用风险溢价上升；石 油价格快速上涨可能突破国债收益率下限，扩大信用风险溢价。高信用 风险溢价或低流动性品种难以跑赢其他资产。 政策降息空间有限，但广谱贷款降幅尚未完全定价，后续仍有调整空间。 今年三季度资本收益预期较高，7 至 8 月或存在资本收益机会，值得关 注。 6 月是关键过渡期，资金利率不确定性降低，银行提前发存单补充流动 性。策略应从票息转向兼顾流动性，关注 10 年和 30 年非活跃券、10 年非国开债、10 年地方债、五年以上高评级信用债及新一代 ETF。 Q&A 当前市场利差压缩的主要特征是什么？ ...

Core Viewpoint - June is identified as a critical transitional period for the bond market, with a focus on the downward trend of general interest rates leading to stronger bond market rates, and the increasing certainty of looser funding around the quarter-end [1][4][11]. Group 1: Market Performance - Since early May, the bond market has entered a transitional phase under funding constraints, with a gradual compression of spreads [1]. - The credit spread, particularly at the short end, has compressed to historical lows, while the spread between government bonds and policy bank bonds turned negative in late May [1][4]. - The spread between active and less active 10-year government bonds has narrowed significantly, indicating a clear trend of spread compression in the market [1][4]. Group 2: Investment Recommendations - It is recommended to focus on 10-year and 30-year non-active government bonds, including new and old special government bonds, as well as 10-year local government bonds, which offer both liquidity and static returns [1]. - For credit bonds, attention should be given to high-rated (AAA) credit bonds with a maturity of over five years that possess certain liquidity [1]. - Credit bond ETFs that are eligible for general pledged repos are also suggested for consideration [1]. Group 3: Strategic Transition - The bond market is expected to transition from a pure coupon strategy to a strategy that balances coupon and liquidity [1][11]. - The next phase of spread compression may lead to either a bear market driven by macro policy shifts or a rapid rise in bond prices if government bond rates decline sharply [11]. - The recommendation is to prepare for a shift to more liquid instruments in anticipation of the next round of interest rate declines, considering the uncertainty of funding fluctuations at the end of June [11].

从"故事"回归经济和降息视角：对比存款利率，长期中债市并未过度定价。 融资、通胀的修复相对"滞 后"。回顾 2022 年以来的广谱利率走势，以贷款利率为锚来看，当前债市利率下行步伐是合理的。当前 债市进入平台期的主要原因是：资金短摩擦，海内外因素导致国内长期低利率"故事" 持续性存疑。 双降的长短期影响：货币政策的再置换，回归"正常"的资金。 降准资金落地后，资金反而边际收紧，其 背后的直接原因或是货币政策投放节点变化所造成的波动。在 2024 年之前存款利率对资金出表的扰动并 不明显，在 2024 年之后扰动有所显现。资金短摩擦或于二季度末结束。 走楼梯之后策略轮动再起：短期票息策略占优， Q3 或有拉久期空间。 国内对长期中利率反弹风险的认知 上升抑制债市"抢跑"。短期内票息策略的性价比较高，建议维持久期但不追涨长利率债，关注曲线上的凸 点区域债种（流动性风险减低）。 Q3 建议以贷款利率为锚，降息可能都将进一步驱动利率下行。 低利率环境下的降本增利：新策略和新资产。 资产关注科创债、 REITs 等扩容。策略关注债基 ETF 的扩 容与轮动，债市量化策略的兴起。 风险提示。 基本面超预期变化、外部环境不 ...

截至5月22日，30年国债ETF博时近1年净值上涨15.29%，指数债券型基金排名3/378，居于前0.79%。从收益能力看，截至2025年5月22日，30年国债ETF博时 自成立以来，最高单月回报为5.35%，最长连涨月数为4个月，最长连涨涨幅为10.58%，涨跌月数比为9/4，上涨月份平均收益率为2.20%，月盈利百分比为 69.23%，月盈利概率为71.48%，历史持有1年盈利概率为100.00%。截至2025年5月22日，30年国债ETF博时近6个月超越基准年化收益为0.29%。 截至2025年5月16日，30年国债ETF博时近1年夏普比率为1.01。 回撤方面，截至2025年5月22日，30年国债ETF博时成立以来最大回撤6.89%，相对基准回撤1.28%。 费率方面，30年国债ETF博时管理费率为0.15%，托管费率为0.05%。 ETF方面，30年国债ETF博时(511130)下跌0.15%，最新报价111.61元。流动性方面，30年国债ETF博时盘中换手13.12%，成交8.87亿元，市场交投活跃。拉 长时间看，截至5月22日，30年国债ETF博时近1月日均成交25.59亿元。 利率债方面，中 ...

Core Viewpoint - The overall sensitivity of deposit scale to the reduction in deposit interest rates is low under the trend of low interest rates [1] Group 1: Deposit Scale and Interest Rate Sensitivity - The deposit scale is not sensitive to the reduction in non-interbank deposit rates, primarily due to the manual interest compensation rectification in April 2024, which caused a short-term outflow of deposits to asset management products [2] - Despite several rounds of deposit rate cuts since 2022, the year-on-year growth rate of personal and corporate deposits has aligned with the growth rate of broad money supply, with the proportion of deposits in broad money supply rising from around 48% to a peak of 52% by March 2024 [2][3] - The proportion of deposits in low-risk preference funds has shown a slight decline from a peak of 79.3% in March 2023, indicating manageable outflow pressure [2] Group 2: Impact of Deposit Rate Cuts - The disturbances caused by deposit rate cuts on fund outflows were not significant before 2024, but became more pronounced afterward due to increased price comparison willingness in a low-interest environment [3] - Following the deposit rate cuts in July and October 2024, there was a noticeable decline in the year-on-year growth of large bank deposits, indicating a shift towards asset management products [3][4] - The current round of deposit rate cuts is not expected to lead to a significant tightening of the funding environment, as the year-on-year growth of deposits has remained stable despite the cuts [4] Group 3: Future Expectations - The attractiveness of asset management products relative to deposits is expected to decrease due to the ongoing adjustments in performance benchmarks and the gradual implementation of net value rectification [4] - The company anticipates that the ticket interest strategy will continue to prevail, with high-grade short-duration credit bonds likely to benefit from some funds flowing from deposits to asset management products [4]

Core Insights - The overall sensitivity of deposit scale to the reduction of deposit rates is low, indicating a strong willingness among individuals and businesses to allocate funds to bank deposits despite rate cuts [1][10] - The shift of deposits from the banking system to asset management products is primarily attributed to the manual interest compensation rectification in April 2024, which had a short-term impact but began to stabilize by July of the same year [1][10] - The proportion of personal and corporate deposits in the broad money supply has increased from approximately 48% to 52% by March 2024, reflecting a robust demand for bank deposits [1][10] Deposit Rate Adjustments - The reduction in deposit rates in July and October 2024 led to a noticeable decline in the year-on-year growth of large bank deposits, dropping from 5.8 trillion yuan to 5.2 trillion yuan and from 5.0 trillion yuan to 4.8 trillion yuan respectively [3] - The asset management product scale saw a rebound, with a shift from a year-on-year decrease of 629.5 billion yuan in August 2024 to a slight increase of 10 billion yuan, and a similar trend was observed in November 2024 [3] Deposit Growth Trends - Large banks' personal and corporate deposit year-on-year growth fluctuated, with notable increases and decreases observed in various months, indicating a dynamic response to interest rate changes [5] - The year-on-year growth of deposits in small and medium-sized banks also showed variability, with a peak growth of 81.56 billion yuan followed by a decrease of 25.29 billion yuan [5] Market Reactions - The bond market typically reacts in advance to expectations of deposit rate cuts, with rates generally declining before the official announcement, although the actual impact on market trends remains limited [10] - Following the last three deposit rate cuts, the yields on various bonds, including government bonds and credit bonds, generally trended downward over the subsequent trading days [10] Future Outlook - The current round of deposit rate cuts is expected to have a limited impact on the outflow of funds, with the probability of a return to a tight liquidity situation similar to the first quarter of the year being low [10] - The attractiveness of asset management products is anticipated to decrease due to ongoing adjustments in performance benchmarks, which may lead to a shift of funds back to deposits [10]

报告导读： "双降"中可以看出货币政策导向的三项变化，后续资金或成为债市持续的安全 垫，票息策略持续占优。 前期央行在内外约束下，对降息相对谨慎，倾向于推动"不降之降"。 自 2024 年 9 月落地 20bp OMO 降息后，央行在超过半年的时间段内未推动政策利率调降，更倾向于通过"不降之降"或"看不见的降息"操 作向银行体系加力投放中长期流动性，典型工具是新的买断式逆回购以及改革为多价位操作的 MLF 。优 化后的流动性管理工具"能紧能松"，使"看不见的降息"成为可能，央行精准调控的能力提升。在各项流动 性管理工具中， MLF/ 买断式逆回购 / 国债买卖这类中长期投放工具对银行关键的流动性考核指标如 LCR 和 NSFR 有明显的改善作用。尽管从 2024 年 9 月末至 2025 年 4 月末政策利率未有调整，但 OMO 、 MLF 、买断式逆回购三项工具的加权平均成本已下行 52bp 。截止 4 月末，央行公开市场投放 的平均成本仅 1.79% 。 本文摘自：2025年5月9日发布的 双降之后，资金市场从博弈预期到支撑现实 唐元懋 ，资格证书编号： S0880524040002 更多国泰海通研究和服 ...

文 ｜ 明明 李晗 徐烨烽 俞柯帆 来正杰 近期债市波动明显加大，债券发行人更多的选择推迟或取消发行信用债以避免市场波动的影响，由 此信用债的取消发行规模也明显抬升。与2 0 2 2年以来历轮债券取消发行所对比，我们认为本轮取 消发行是多方因素共振的结果，其一是发债主体主动进行融资成本管理，其二是发债主体保护自身 对于未来市场的"定价权"，避免因高融资成本释放"负面印象"，其三是后续地方债供给放量引起市 场偏谨慎。往后看，若后续负债端赎回压力可控，预计本轮信用债取消发行潮高峰并不会持续过 久。从配置角度看，在当前基准利率波动时期，信用债票息性价比会更加显著，年初更应把握短端 收益率反弹的机会。 ▍ 受债市波动影响，近期信用债推迟或取消发行规模明显抬升。 受资金面偏紧影响，近期债券市场波动加剧，且为避免市场波动对债券发行定价的不利影响，近 期发行人更多的选择推迟或取消发行信用债。根据企业预警通数据，2 0 2 5年2月1 7日至2月2 3 日，累计公告信用债取消或推迟发行共2 8只，合计1 4 8 . 8 0亿元，为近一年第二高单周取消发行规 模。具体来看，今年以来取消发行的信用债主体集中在中高等级的国企，且主 ...