2025年末，伴随券商参公大集合产品整改期限的到来，这一已有22年历史的重要资管业务正式谢幕。 目前，券商参公大集合已基本完成变更，还存续的券商大集合产品仅3只，包括国联现金添利、银河水星现金添利和粤开现金惠等尚未完成平 移。据悉，大多数的大集合转为公募产品，有的转为私募，有的则选择清盘。 在经历了去通道、强监管的转型期后，券商资管正回归主动管理本源，通过产品创新和服务升级提升竞争力。 最新数据显示，证券行业资管业务总规模已超9万亿元。截至2025年11月末，券商（包含资管子公司）私募资管规模达5.8万亿元，此外，东证 资管等4家券商资管公募管理规模也超千亿元。 对于券商资管大集合产品的公募化改造的收官，以及公募牌照申请的放缓，有业内人士表示，行业回归"受人之托，代人理财"本源，资管行业 开启新一轮竞速。 图片来源：摄图网 大集合谢幕 券商大集合产品是券商集合资管业务的历史遗留产物。 2003年，券商资产管理业务迎来规范化时代。2004年10月25日，光大证券率先向证监会申报集合资产计划，成为首只申报获批的券商集合理财 产品，也是券商首只大集合理财产品，该产品于2005年4月成立。 按照集合理财的规模和认购最 ...

仅余3只 2025年末，伴随券商参公大集合产品整改期限的到来，这一已有22年历史的重要资管业务正式谢幕。 目前，券商参公大集合已基本完成变更，还存续的券商大集合产品仅3只，包括国联现金添利、银河水 星现金添利和粤开现金惠等尚未完成平移。据悉，大多数的大集合转为公募产品，有的转为私募，有的 则选择清盘。 在经历了去通道、强监管的转型期后，券商资管正回归主动管理本源，通过产品创新和服务升级提升竞 争力。 最新数据显示，证券行业资管业务总规模已超9万亿元。截至2025年11月末，券商（包含资管子公司） 私募资管规模达5.8万亿元，此外， 东证资管等4家券商资管公募管理规模也超千亿元。 对于券商资管大集合产品的公募化改造的收官，以及公募牌照申请的放缓，有业内人士表示，行业回 归"受人之托，代人理财"本源，资管行业开启新一轮竞速。 大集合谢幕 券商大集合产品是券商集合资管业务的历史遗留产物。 2003年，券商资产管理业务迎来规范化时代。2004年10月25日，光大证券率先向证监会申报集合资产计 划，成为首只申报获批的券商集合理财产品，也是券商首只大集合理财产品，该产品于2005年4月成 立。 按照集合理财的规模和认购最 ...

Core Viewpoint - 2025 is a pivotal year for the Chinese securities industry, focusing on deepening functional positioning and high-quality development, with an emphasis on mergers and acquisitions, international expansion, and technological innovation, particularly through AI applications [1][2]. Mergers and Acquisitions - The year marks a critical phase for mergers and acquisitions in the securities industry, with major firms like Guotai Junan and Haitong Securities merging to form Guotai Haitong Securities, and other significant consolidations such as Guolian Securities and Minsheng Securities [3][4]. - The competitive landscape is shifting, with Guotai Haitong leading in net profit, and Guolian Minsheng's ranking improving significantly from around 40th to the top 20 [3]. - New merger cases are emerging, such as CICC's plan to merge with Xinda Securities and Dongxing Securities, potentially creating a new entity with over 1 trillion yuan in total assets [3]. Industry Integration Logic - Two main integration strategies are evident: resource consolidation under the same actual controller and market-driven mergers aimed at enhancing national influence [4]. - Analysts suggest that resource integration may become the most important way for securities firms to quickly enhance scale and comprehensive strength [4]. Classification Evaluation Reform - A significant revision of the classification evaluation for securities firms is underway, emphasizing the need for firms to enhance their functional roles and professional capabilities [5][6]. - The new regulations aim to shift focus from revenue expansion to improving operational efficiency and professional skills, thereby enhancing overall industry competitiveness [5]. Margin Trading Market - The margin trading market is heating up, with a record balance of 2.54 trillion yuan, reflecting a 36.6% increase from the beginning of the year [7]. - Several firms have raised their margin trading limits, and a price war on interest rates has begun, with some firms offering rates below 4% [8][9]. Investment Banking and Technology - The securities industry is adapting to a new era of "hard technology," with reforms aimed at providing more inclusive financing paths for tech companies [10][11]. - Securities firms are establishing research institutes focused on emerging industries and enhancing their service capabilities through collaboration and talent development [11]. AI Integration - The adoption of AI technologies is rapidly transforming the industry, with applications expanding across various business functions, significantly improving efficiency [12][13]. - Firms are moving towards an "AI-native" model, enhancing client engagement and operational management through AI tools [12]. Internationalization of Securities Firms - The internationalization of Chinese securities firms is accelerating, with a focus on comprehensive service capabilities and participation in global market competition [14][15]. - This trend is driven by the growing demand for cross-border services and the strategic goal of building first-class investment banks [14]. Asset Management Transformation - The public offering process for asset management is at a turning point, with firms reassessing their positioning in the broader asset management landscape [16][17]. - The industry is witnessing a decline in the rush for public fund licenses, with many firms withdrawing applications, indicating a shift in focus towards existing business optimization [16]. Impact of Fund Fee Reforms - The implementation of public fund fee reforms is pushing securities firms to enhance their research and wealth management capabilities, with a notable decline in commission revenues [18]. - Firms are transitioning towards a buyer advisory model, focusing on asset management and providing comprehensive solutions rather than merely selling products [18]. Regulatory Environment - Regulatory signals indicate a potential easing of capital requirements for high-quality institutions, aimed at improving capital utilization efficiency [19]. - Analysts suggest that enhancing leverage and capital efficiency could drive growth in high-value capital-intensive businesses [19]. Name Changes Reflecting Strategic Shifts - A wave of name changes among securities firms signifies strategic realignments and resource restructuring following mergers and acquisitions [20][21]. - These changes reflect deeper integration and the influence of new stakeholders, indicating a shift in strategic focus and operational capabilities [20].

Core Insights - The securities industry reported strong growth in the first three quarters of 2025, with 42 listed brokerages achieving a revenue increase of over 42% year-on-year and a net profit growth of over 62% [1][2] - However, the asset management (AM) sector lagged significantly, with a mere growth rate of 2.43%, indicating deeper industry concerns and challenges [1][2] Revenue Performance - Total revenue for the 42 listed brokerages reached 419.56 billion yuan, marking a year-on-year increase of 42.55% [2] - The self-operated business accounted for 44.54% of total revenue, while brokerage services contributed 26.64%, together making up over 70% of the revenue [2] - The AM business's growth was starkly contrasted by other sectors, with brokerage services leading at a 74.64% growth rate, followed by interest and self-operated businesses at 54.52% and 43.83%, respectively [2] Institutional Performance - The top three firms in AM revenue were CITIC Securities, GF Securities, and Guotai Junan, with revenues of 8.703 billion yuan, 5.661 billion yuan, and 4.273 billion yuan, respectively [3] - Only 14 out of the 42 listed brokerages reported positive growth in their AM business, indicating a significant divide within the industry [3] Challenges in Asset Management - The AM sector faces dual pressures from scale and profitability, with existing large collective products undergoing a standardization transformation, impacting management scale and revenue [4] - Intense competition from public funds and bank wealth management subsidiaries further constrains the AM sector, which is still developing its active management capabilities [4] - The decline in interest rates and frequent credit risks have limited the supply of high-yield assets, challenging previous investment strategies reliant on high returns [4] Strategic Shifts - A notable trend has emerged where brokerages are withdrawing their applications for public fund licenses, contrasting sharply with the previous rush to apply [5][6] - This withdrawal is seen as a rational choice based on a deep assessment of resources, market conditions, and profit models, signaling a shift from a "license-driven" to a "capability-driven" model [6] - The consensus is forming that public fund licenses are not a panacea, with private fund operations emphasizing professional services and customized solutions becoming more appealing for certain brokerages [6] Recovery in Private Asset Management - Despite the withdrawal from public fund applications, the private asset management sector is experiencing a resurgence, with the scale of private fund products reaching 5.73 trillion yuan, an increase of approximately 270 billion yuan from the end of 2024 [7] - The growth in private fund product registrations indicates the necessity for differentiated strategies, focusing on multi-asset allocation and innovative strategies [7] Future Growth Drivers - Future growth in the AM sector is expected to be driven by two main factors: the completion of public fund transformations leading to secondary growth, and the stabilization and differentiation of private asset management offerings [8] - The focus will likely shift towards low-volatility, high-liquidity products, as well as alternative investments and cross-border allocations [8] Competitive Dynamics - Successful firms like Changcheng Securities and Guojin Securities have achieved over 30% growth by upgrading their "fixed income plus" strategies and integrating financial technology into their operations [9] - The emphasis is on a diversified product matrix and precise timing in investment strategies to capture macro opportunities [9][10] - The integration of AI technology into research and decision-making processes is becoming a core competitive advantage for asset management firms [10]

Core Viewpoint - The transition period for the transformation of "publicly offered collective products" is nearing its end, prompting several brokerage firms to change the management of their collective products to avoid liquidation and successfully convert them into public fund products [1][4]. Group 1: Changes in Management of Collective Products - As of November, at least 25 publicly offered collective products have officially changed their management to public fund companies, with notable changes including products from Guangfa Fund, Huafu Fund, and others [1][3]. - The process for changing management involves obtaining approval from the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) and holding a meeting for product holders to vote on the change [3][4]. - The changes not only involve the management but may also affect product names, investment strategies, and fee structures [3][4]. Group 2: Shift in Focus for Brokerage Asset Management - Brokerage asset management firms are increasingly abandoning the pursuit of public fund licenses, with several firms like Guangfa Asset Management and Guotou Securities Asset Management withdrawing their applications [6][7]. - The reasons for this shift include the lengthy wait for license approval, high initial investment costs for establishing independent operations, and the competitive landscape of the public fund industry [7][9]. - Firms are now focusing on differentiated strategies in private asset management and wealth management, which are seen as more advantageous compared to the public fund sector [2][8]. Group 3: Strategic Implications of the Transition - The transition to changing management for collective products is viewed as a necessary response to regulatory compliance requirements, allowing firms to retain clients and avoid fund liquidation [4][5]. - The current trend indicates a move away from "license worship" towards a more rational understanding of the profitability challenges associated with public fund operations [7][9]. - Brokerage firms are now concentrating on creating value-driven products that cater to specific client needs, emphasizing absolute returns and tailored investment strategies [10].

Core Viewpoint - The current favorable conditions for broker asset management relying on city investment bonds are expected to last only for about a year, as credit spreads are rapidly compressing, leading to a decline in the performance of fixed-income investment managers [1][2]. Group 1: Market Conditions and Trends - The strategy of holding low-credit city investment bonds to maturity has been widely adopted by broker asset management firms, relying on bond yields and a bull market for bonds to achieve excess returns [3][4]. - Since 2022, the market for city investment bonds has been evolving along two main lines: a continuous decline in risk-free interest rates and increased constraints on local government debt issuance, leading to extreme compression of credit spreads [6][7]. - As of now, high-grade long-term city investment bond yields have entered the "2" era, with yields for AAA-rated bonds under three years dropping to the "1" range [7]. Group 2: Challenges Faced by the Industry - The fixed-income investment sector is facing three major challenges: a sharp decline in static returns, passive duration extension leading to significant net value fluctuations, and intertwined credit and liquidity risks due to tightening city investment policies [8][9]. - The reliance on city investment bonds is becoming increasingly difficult to meet the performance benchmarks set by banks, with expectations that many fixed-income products will fail to meet these benchmarks starting next year [10]. Group 3: Transformation and Strategic Shifts - Broker asset management firms are undergoing a transformation to diversify their investment strategies, moving from a reliance on city investment bonds to a multi-asset and multi-strategy approach, including domestic and international stocks, commodities, and bonds [2][11]. - The industry is seeing a significant increase in the issuance of Fund of Funds (FOF) products, with 52 firms having issued a total of 405 FOF products as of July 30, indicating a shift towards more diversified asset management strategies [17][18]. - Successful transformation in the broker asset management sector will likely depend on talent and differentiation, with firms needing to leverage their comprehensive capabilities and deep market knowledge to provide customized solutions [12][19].

Core Viewpoint - The current favorable conditions for broker asset management relying on city investment bonds are expected to last only for about a year, as credit spreads are rapidly compressing, leading to a decline in the performance of fixed-income products and potential job losses for fixed-income investment managers [1][4][10]. Group 1: Current Market Conditions - The strategy of holding low-credit city investment bonds to earn management fees is becoming less viable due to extreme compression of credit spreads [1][4]. - The fixed-income investment managers are facing a significant decline in business opportunities, with expectations of widespread underperformance in fixed-income products starting next year [1][10]. - The yield on high-grade long-term city investment bonds has dropped significantly, with 3-year AAA-rated bonds now yielding in the "1" range [8][9]. Group 2: Historical Context and Strategy Shift - Historically, broker asset management relied heavily on city investment bonds due to their government backing and low default risk, especially after the 2016 supply-side reforms led to widespread defaults in corporate bonds [5][6]. - The past decade saw investment managers achieving over 6.4% annualized returns with minimal volatility by primarily investing in city investment bonds [4][7]. - The transition to a more diversified asset strategy has begun, with a shift from city investment bonds to a multi-asset approach that includes domestic and international stocks, commodities, and bonds [3][11]. Group 3: Challenges and Future Outlook - The fixed-income sector is facing three major challenges: a sharp decline in static returns, increased duration risk, and intertwined credit and liquidity risks [9][10]. - The asset management industry is expected to undergo significant transformation, with successful firms likely to be those that can differentiate themselves and leverage talent effectively [11][12]. - The growth of FOF (Fund of Funds) products is seen as a strategic move to adapt to changing market conditions, with a notable increase in issuance from 2021 to 2024 [16][18].