Core Viewpoint - Several listed banks reported positive performance for the first half of 2025, with both operating income and net profit increasing year-on-year, while maintaining steady asset growth [1][2]. Group 1: Financial Performance - Five banks reported year-on-year growth in both operating income and net profit, with Ningbo Bank and Hangzhou Bank each exceeding 200 million yuan in operating income [2]. - Ningbo Bank's total assets reached 3.47 trillion yuan, growing by 11.04% year-on-year, while Hangzhou Bank's total assets were 2.24 trillion yuan, up by 5.83% [2]. - The net profit attributable to shareholders for Ningbo Bank and Hangzhou Bank exceeded 100 million yuan, with figures of 147.72 million yuan and 116.62 million yuan respectively [2][3]. Group 2: Asset Quality - The non-performing loan (NPL) ratios for the five banks remained stable, with Qilu Bank reporting an NPL ratio of 1.09%, down by 0.1 percentage points from the beginning of the year [3]. - Changshu Bank's NPL ratio was 0.76%, also showing a slight decrease, while both Ningbo Bank and Hangzhou Bank maintained an NPL ratio of 0.76% [3]. Group 3: Service to the Real Economy - Banks have increased credit support to key sectors such as small and micro enterprises, manufacturing, and infrastructure, enhancing their service to the real economy [4]. - Hangzhou Bank reported that its credit issuance had exceeded 50% of its annual target by mid-year [4]. Group 4: Market Performance and Investment Trends - Bank stocks have performed well in 2025, with nine stocks in the A-share market showing a cumulative increase of over 20% [6]. - Public funds have increased their holdings in bank stocks, with the proportion reaching 4.85%, the highest since Q2 2021 [6]. - Analysts suggest that the appeal of bank stocks lies in their high dividend yields and stable performance, making them attractive to long-term investors [6].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the news highlights a positive performance in the Hong Kong banking sector, with several banks experiencing significant stock price increases, particularly Agricultural Bank of China, which rose over 3% [1] - As of July 31, five A-share listed rural commercial banks, including Qingdao Bank and Ningbo Bank, reported positive growth in both operating income and net profit attributable to shareholders for the first half of the year, indicating stable asset quality [1] - According to a report by Zhongtai Securities, the overall asset quality of listed banks remains stable, and the industry's profit-generating capacity from provisioning is still strong, with expectations for continued positive profit growth in the sector [1] Group 2 - The net interest margin is supported by a decrease in funding costs and a larger reduction in deposit rates compared to loan rates this year, with a forecast that the decline in net interest margin for the entire year will be significantly smaller than in 2024 [1] - The recovery in scale expansion speed under a low base in the mid-year report will also support interest income [1]

上市银行中报季拉开序幕，目前已有杭州银行、常熟银行、宁波银行、齐鲁银行4家区域性银行发布了 2025年半年度业绩快报，营收和归母净利润均实现同比增长，且资产质量稳中向好，不良率较年初持平 或有所下降。 记者注意到，随着中报披露脚步临近，A股银行已于日前完成了2024年度分红派息。此外，多家银行已 释放出2025年中期分红意向，受到市场关注。 四家区域性银行率先发布业绩快报 盈利预喜的同时，上述四家银行的资产规模也在稳步增长。截至6月末，宁波银行总资产达3.47万亿 元，较上年末增长11.04%。另一家万亿元规模的杭州银行，6月末总资产达2.24万亿元，较上年末增长 5.83%。 此外，齐鲁银行资产总额突破7500亿元，较上年末增长8.96%；常熟银行资产总额也迈过4000亿元关 口，较年初增长9.46%。 从信贷情况来看，这四家银行的信贷增速均维持正增长，其中宁波银行贷款和垫款总额较上年末增长 13.36%，齐鲁银行贷款总额较上年末增长10.16%；杭州银行和常熟银行的上半年贷款增幅分别为7.67% 和4.40%。 资产质量方面，这四家银行的不良贷款率较上年末持平或有所下降。其中，杭州银行、宁波银行、常熟 银 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article provides a comparative analysis of two major city commercial banks in Henan, China: Zhongyuan Bank and Zhengzhou Bank, highlighting their differences in background, capital market presence, regional distribution, subsidiaries, personnel, financial performance, and asset quality [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][9][10][11][31]. Background Comparison - Zhongyuan Bank was formed through the merger of city commercial banks in 2014 and 2022, making it a provincial-level city commercial bank, while Zhengzhou Bank originated from urban credit cooperatives in 1996 and is classified as a municipal-level city commercial bank [1]. - The administrative level of Zhongyuan Bank is likely higher than that of Zhengzhou Bank, based on the backgrounds of their respective leadership [1]. Capital Market Presence - Zhengzhou Bank was the first to enter the capital market, listing in Hong Kong in 2015 and on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange in 2018 [2]. - Zhongyuan Bank followed later, listing in Hong Kong in 2017 and has not yet entered the A-share market [3]. Regional Distribution - Zhongyuan Bank has a comprehensive network covering all cities in Henan province due to its merger origins, while Zhengzhou Bank has not yet achieved full provincial coverage, lacking branches in Sanmenxia and Jiaozuo [4]. Subsidiary Overview - Both banks have financial leasing subsidiaries, with Zhongyuan Bank having two and Zhengzhou Bank having one [5]. - Zhongyuan Bank operates 13 village and town banks and has a consumer finance company, while Zhengzhou Bank has 7 village and town banks and no consumer finance subsidiary [6]. Personnel Situation - As of the end of 2024, Zhongyuan Bank has 20,987 employees, significantly more than Zhengzhou Bank's 6,180 employees [7]. - Zhongyuan Bank's overall employee count is 3.4 times that of Zhengzhou Bank, indicating a larger workforce [8]. Financial Performance - As of the end of 2024, Zhongyuan Bank's total assets reached 1.364 trillion yuan, double that of Zhengzhou Bank's 676.365 billion yuan [10]. - Key financial metrics show that Zhongyuan Bank's operating income and net profit are also approximately double those of Zhengzhou Bank [10]. - Despite the larger scale, Zhongyuan Bank's efficiency is lower, with a higher employee count leading to lower per capita profitability compared to Zhengzhou Bank [11]. Asset Quality Comparison - Both banks exhibit relatively high non-performing loan (NPL) ratios, with Zhongyuan Bank at 2.02% and Zhengzhou Bank at 1.79% as of the end of 2024 [11][23]. - The article notes that both banks have experienced challenges in maintaining asset quality, with high overdue loan ratios compared to their NPL ratios [29][26]. Long-term Growth Analysis - Over the past decade, Zhongyuan Bank's asset scale has consistently exceeded that of Zhengzhou Bank, primarily due to mergers, while Zhengzhou Bank's growth has been more organic [12]. - Recent years have seen fluctuations in both banks' operating income, with Zhengzhou Bank experiencing negative growth in 2023 and 2024, while Zhongyuan Bank faced negative growth in 2021 and 2024 [14][16]. Income Structure and Profitability - Both banks rely heavily on net interest income, with Zhongyuan Bank maintaining a net interest margin above 80% [18]. - However, net interest margins have been declining for both banks, impacting their revenue and profitability [20][21]. Cost and Efficiency - Zhongyuan Bank's operational costs are significantly higher than those of Zhengzhou Bank, with business and management expenses in 2024 being 2.66 times greater [28]. - The average salary at Zhongyuan Bank is lower than that at Zhengzhou Bank when adjusted for employee numbers, indicating lower per capita efficiency [28].

Core Viewpoint - The report indicates a continuous decline in bank deposit rates across various terms, reflecting broader trends in the banking sector and the impact of market reforms [1][2][3]. Deposit Rate Trends - The average deposit rates for different terms in June 2025 are as follows: 3-month at 0.949% (down 5.5 BP), 6-month at 1.156% (down 5.6 BP), 1-year at 1.287% (down 5.2 BP), 2-year at 1.372% (down 5.6 BP), 3-year at 1.695% (down 1.6 BP), and 5-year at 1.538% (down 3.5 BP) [2][3]. - The 5-year average rate has decreased by approximately 1 percentage point from 2.433% in June 2024 to 1.538% in June 2025 [2]. Market Reactions - Major state-owned banks adjusted their deposit rates on May 20, with the 1-year fixed deposit rate falling below 1%, prompting other banks to follow suit [3]. - The ongoing trend of declining deposit rates is attributed to the pressure on banks' net interest margins due to lower Loan Prime Rates (LPR) [3]. Structural Deposit Products - The average term for structured deposits in June 2025 is 103 days, with an average expected middle yield of 1.78% (down 7 BP) and an average expected maximum yield of 2.14% (down 11 BP) [4]. - Different types of banks show varying average terms and yields for structured deposits, with state-owned banks averaging 70 days and a maximum yield of 1.99% (down 19 BP) [4]. Performance by Linked Assets - For structured deposits linked to different assets, the average expected middle yield for currency-linked deposits is 1.77% (down 24 BP), while gold-linked deposits yield 1.78% (down 2 BP) [5]. - Deposits linked to indices, funds, and stocks show an increase in average expected middle yield to 2.00% (up 1 BP) [5].

Group 1 - The Loan Prime Rate (LPR) remains unchanged for July 2025, with the 1-year LPR at 3.0% and the 5-year LPR at 3.5%, consistent with the levels set after a reduction in June 2025 [1] - Market expectations indicated a high probability of the LPR remaining stable due to unchanged policy rates and recovering economic data reducing the urgency for rate cuts [2] - The pricing mechanism for LPR remains stable, as the Medium-term Lending Facility (MLF) rate and reverse repurchase operation rate have not been adjusted, limiting the downward space for LPR [2] Group 2 - The economic policy is currently in an observation phase following the June LPR reduction, with the GDP growth rate for the first half of the year at 5.3%, leading to a decreased necessity for further rate cuts [3] - Commercial banks are experiencing pressure on net interest margins, which are at historical lows of 1.54%, limiting the motivation to compress interest spreads further [4] - The interest rate differential between China and the U.S. is constraining domestic rate cuts, especially with the Federal Reserve maintaining high rates [5] Group 3 - Mortgage rates remain low, with the average first-home loan rate at 3.90% and second-home loan rate at 4.81%, showing a decline compared to the previous year [6] - The reduction in LPR has eased the repayment pressure for borrowers, with a typical monthly payment decrease of 54.32 yuan for a 1 million yuan loan over 30 years [7] - Current corporate loan rates are around 3.2%, indicating manageable financing costs for businesses [8] Group 4 - Short-term adjustments to the LPR are limited, with expectations of stability if economic data continues to improve in Q3 2025; however, a reserve requirement ratio cut is more likely than a rate cut [8] - There remains potential for a medium to long-term reduction in LPR if the Federal Reserve initiates rate cuts or if domestic demand weakens [8] - Regulatory measures may shift towards reducing non-interest costs and enhancing fiscal support to stimulate the economy [8]

Group 1: Bank Liability Pressure - Since the second half of 2024, listed banks have shown stable asset expansion, primarily driven by a recovery in deposit growth, with a notable increase in bond and interbank financing[2][14]. - The structure of deposits has shifted, with personal deposits growing faster than corporate deposits, leading to an increase in the proportion of personal deposits in listed banks[2][20]. - Large banks face relatively greater pressure on their deposit growth compared to smaller banks, as their deposit structure is more balanced but has been significantly impacted by the cessation of manual interest supplementation in April 2024[2][26]. Group 2: Financial Investment Trends - The importance of financial investments has increased, with banks actively increasing their financial investments in response to rising interest rate spreads[3][34]. - Different types of banks exhibit varying preferences for trading and investment accounts, with rural commercial banks showing a higher trading attribute compared to state-owned banks[3][40]. - The contribution of financial investment to income has shown volatility, with a negative correlation observed between the 10-year government bond yield and the income contribution from financial investment trading[3][51]. Group 3: Net Interest Margin Dynamics - The net interest margin (NIM) is primarily influenced by the yield on interest-earning assets and the cost of interest-bearing liabilities, with the latter being more rigid[4][59]. - Recent trends indicate that the decline in loan yields and the rise in deposit costs have been the main factors compressing NIM in recent years[4][73]. - The central bank's monetary easing can temporarily boost NIM by lowering interbank financing costs and improving asset yields through enhanced investment and consumption willingness[4][74].

1. Report Industry Investment Rating - The industry investment rating is Neutral (expected to perform within ±5% of the CSI 300 Index in the next 6 months) [100] 2. Core Viewpoints of the Report - The essence of the bank's net interest margin is the return on capital investment, with a cycle of 5 - 9 years. The main influencing factors are technology, capital, labor, corporate organizational efficiency, and the whole - society distribution relationship. In the long run, improving social distribution relations, increasing the KTI value - added ratio, and enhancing the unit output of labor through education to increase the proportion of high - value - added KTI services are effective. Monetary policy can significantly improve the real - economy's capital cost in the short cycle and boost the bank's net interest margin, but it won't affect the long - term trend [3][70]. - Economic short - cycle fluctuations can temporarily increase the bank's net interest margin under the following conditions: continuous 200BP reduction in policy rates, bottoming - out and recovery of both the real - estate and export - manufacturing sectors, and continuous improvement of leading indicators such as PPI turning positive and M1 year - on - year growth exceeding nominal GDP growth and maintaining this for at least one quarter [70][72][73] - Since 2020, the policy rate has been transmitted efficiently to the bank's asset side but poorly to the liability side, mainly due to the rigidity of deposit prices. To achieve "neutral" interest rate cuts, it is necessary to reduce the proportion of time deposits, crack down on high - interest deposit - soliciting, formulate a scientific loan - scale assessment mechanism, and maintain a necessary interest - rate cut rhythm [4][80][91] 3. Summary According to the Directory 3.1 What is the Essence of the Bank's Net Interest Margin? - The net interest margin is the ratio of a bank's net interest income to all interest - earning assets, a key indicator of a bank's profitability. It can be regarded as the return on debt - type capital investment. In a country, the trends of equity and debt investment returns are consistent [13] - The yields of Chinese and US government bonds are basically synchronized with ROIC, reflecting a country's capital return. Currently, China's government bond pricing matches the fundamentals, while US government bonds are attractively valued relative to the fundamentals [17] 3.2 What Factors Are Related to the Bank's Net Interest Margin? 3.2.1 Cycle - The cycle of the bank's net interest margin may be 5 - 9 years. Since 2006 in China and 1992 in the US, the net interest margin has been in a long - term downward trend. The net interest margin cycle in the US is about 6 - 9 years, and in China, it is about 5 - 7 years. In the past 20 years, China's net interest margin has rebounded in 2004 - 2008, mid - 2009 to Q3 2012, and Q1 2017 to 2019 [20][24] 3.2.2 Long - term Influencing Factors - The bank's net interest margin is related to technology, labor combination, and the whole - society organizational efficiency. China has an advantage in KTI manufacturing, while the US leads in KTI services. To improve the social investment return rate, it is necessary to increase the proportion of the KTI industry and the share of service - sector KTI [25][31] 3.2.3 Relationship with Fundamentals - Empirically, the correlation between the net interest margin and economic fundamentals is not significant. Economic expansion does not necessarily lead to an increase in the net interest margin. In the economic crisis, macro - policies can drive the net interest margin to bottom out and rebound [32][37] 3.2.4 Relationship with Policy Rates - In the US, before 2015, the net interest margin was often opposite to the policy rate; after 2015, they were in the same direction. In China, the net interest margin and the policy rate generally move in the same direction, but due to policy intensity and structural factors, the net interest margin has been difficult to rebound since 2020 [40][43][47] 3.2.5 Relationship with Prices - In the US, the net interest margin is inversely related to CPI and leads CPI by 2 - 4 quarters. In China, the net interest margin is positively related to PPI and has a certain leading effect. Since 2020, the decoupling of the net interest margin and PPI is due to supply - side impacts, uneven profit improvement among different sectors, and structural factors affecting the transmission of bank liability prices [48][50][55] 3.2.6 Impact of Land Finance and Export - Manufacturing Chains - In China, real - estate investment and export - manufacturing investment are positively correlated with the net interest margin. Real - estate investment and export - manufacturing investment can lead the net interest margin, but since 2020, due to real - estate de - leveraging, the net interest margin has continued to decline [65] 3.2.7 Relationship with M1 - M1 is an early leading indicator of the economy and may have a leading effect on the bank's net interest margin. However, the rebound of M1 from 2022 - 2023 did not achieve this effect. The absolute level of M1 year - on - year growth is more important, and whether M1 can exceed nominal GDP is a key indicator [69] 3.3 How to Achieve "Neutral" Interest Rate Cuts? - Since 2020, the policy rate has been transmitted efficiently to the bank's asset side but poorly to the liability side, mainly due to the rigidity of deposit prices. The reasons for deposit price rigidity include the trend of time - deposit conversion, price - transmission blockages, and the more rigid deposit costs of large - scale banks [80][81][90] - To achieve "neutral" interest rate cuts, it is necessary to reduce the proportion of time deposits, crack down on high - interest deposit - soliciting, formulate a scientific loan - scale assessment mechanism, and maintain a necessary interest - rate cut rhythm [91][92]

Core Viewpoint - The banking sector has shown strong performance in the stock market, with significant gains over the past three years, leading to increased market capitalization and investor interest despite rising valuation concerns [1][3][7]. Group 1: Market Performance - The banking sector index rose by 18.38% this year, outperforming the overall market by 14 percentage points [1]. - Over the past year, the banking sector's total market capitalization increased by approximately 4.5 trillion yuan, with A-shares contributing over 3 trillion yuan [1]. - As of July 9, 2023, 34 out of 42 banking stocks closed higher, with notable gains from Xiamen Bank and Chongqing Rural Commercial Bank [2]. Group 2: Stock Gains and Valuation - The banking sector has been a "dark horse," with a two-year gain exceeding 50% and a three-year gain around 38% [3][4]. - Ten banking stocks have doubled in price over the past three years, with Agricultural Bank of China leading with a 153% increase [4]. - The median price-to-book (PB) ratio for banking stocks remains below 0.7, indicating potential undervaluation despite some banks breaking the net asset value [7]. Group 3: Dividend and Investment Appeal - The banking sector is projected to distribute approximately 373.7 billion yuan in dividends for the 2024 fiscal year, with many banks already announcing their dividend plans [8]. - The high dividend yield remains attractive to long-term investors, especially in a low-interest-rate environment [7][8]. - Analysts suggest that the current banking stock rally reflects a reassessment of the sector's fundamental stability, supported by regulatory policies and stable asset quality [8][9]. Group 4: Economic Outlook and Risks - The macroeconomic policy is expected to be gradually implemented, with a focus on fiscal measures over monetary policy [9]. - Concerns about rising non-performing loans and net interest margin pressures have been raised, but analysts argue that these risks are manageable [9][10]. - The banking sector is transitioning to a "weak cycle" model, indicating a shift in operational strategies and risk management [8].

这是今年以来机构踊跃调研上市银行的一个缩影。东方财富Choice数据显示，今年上半年，19家A股上 市银行累计接待超千家机构调研，创下近年来新高。 "我们上半年已经接待了两轮调研，主要是券商和保险资管，今年股价涨得比较好，前几年银行股基本 没什么机构关注，今年热度明显不一样。"某上市城商行投资者关系负责人对智通财经记者说。 41只银行股年内收涨 在这场调研盛宴中，区域银行成为机构投资者的主要目标。长三角地区的银行尤其受到青睐，宁波银 行、常熟银行和杭州银行三家的调研机构数量和调研总次数均位居前列。 国际资本也积极参与这场调研热潮。例如，5月21日，国际对冲巨头Millennium（千禧年资本）的两位 分析师对宁波银行展开调研；5月12日，杭州银行也接受了拉扎德资产管理有限公司等12家外资机构调 研。 苏商银行特约研究员薛洪言对智通财经记者说，近期机构高频密集调研上市银行，既释放出市场对银行 股投资关注度显著升温的信号，也可视作市场在经济弱复苏背景下对银行板块价值重估的深度博弈信 号。 智通财经记者 | 曾令俊 7月3日下午，青岛农商行召开了一场投资者关系活动，此次活动类别为分析师会议，参与单位包括招商 证券及 ...