Core Viewpoint - The banking wealth management market has surpassed 30 trillion yuan in scale in the first half of this year, but some institutions are engaging in misleading marketing practices that could harm investor rights and lead to a short-term funding tendency in the market [1][5]. Group 1: Misleading Marketing Practices - Some institutions display high returns on their wealth management products on the homepage, but the actual returns are significantly lower when investors delve into the product details [2][3]. - There is a lack of uniform standards for displaying performance metrics, leading to discrepancies between homepage listings and detailed product information [4][6]. - Instances of "high yield" displays on the homepage followed by lower actual returns have been reported, causing confusion and distrust among investors [5][6]. Group 2: Regulatory Concerns - The China Banking Association has issued guidelines for the display of past performance, but many institutions still do not comply fully, leading to potential violations of asset management regulations [4][8]. - Regulatory bodies have imposed significant fines on institutions for non-compliance with investment management standards, indicating ongoing issues within the industry [7]. Group 3: Recommendations for Improvement - Experts suggest that there should be a continuous refinement of disclosure rules regarding key performance information to curb unreasonable marketing behaviors and better protect investor interests [8]. - There is a call for banks and wealth management companies to enhance their research and investment capabilities to provide differentiated products and services that meet diverse investor needs [8].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing challenges and changes in the valuation methods of bank wealth management products, particularly focusing on the introduction of third-party valuation models and the implications for the industry [1][5][12]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes and Industry Response - Regulatory authorities have mandated that by the end of 2025, all bank wealth management products must rectify their valuation methods, prohibiting practices like using closing prices for smoothing net value fluctuations [1][3]. - Many wealth management subsidiaries have completed the required adjustments to their valuation techniques, but concerns remain about the adequacy and credibility of new third-party valuation models being adopted [1][2][3]. Group 2: Third-Party Valuation Models - Recent trends show that some wealth management subsidiaries are utilizing new third-party valuation methods provided by companies like China Chengxin Index and Zhongdai Credit Rating, which aim to stabilize product net values [1][5][12]. - These third-party models are seen as a way to mitigate net value fluctuations, but there are concerns about their simplicity and the potential for misrepresentation of fair value [2][3][12]. Group 3: Market Competition and Performance Pressure - There is a competitive pressure within the industry, where some wealth management firms feel compelled to adopt these new valuation methods to avoid losing market share, despite potential regulatory risks [2][3][14]. - The need for high returns in a competitive market has led to the creation of "high-yield" products that may not be sustainable, raising concerns about fairness among investors [15][19]. Group 4: Valuation Methodology and Market Impact - Valuation methods can be categorized into cost and market value approaches, with third-party valuations being increasingly favored for their perceived stability [4][6]. - The reliance on average transaction prices over extended periods is intended to smooth out volatility, but this approach may lead to significant deviations from fair market value [12][13][17]. Group 5: Industry Trust and Long-Term Viability - The industry faces a critical challenge in maintaining investor trust while navigating the pressures of performance and regulatory compliance [3][19]. - There is a call for unified standards in investment management to prevent "bad money driving out good," ensuring that high-yield products do not mislead investors [3][19].

Core Viewpoint - The recent emergence of a new "ranking" method for wealth management products has raised concerns about the manipulation of short-term performance to create an illusion of high returns, prompting scrutiny from regulators [4][10]. Group 1: New "Ranking" Method - A new "ranking" method involves wealth management institutions manipulating performance or improperly displaying returns to attract investors and enhance product visibility [4]. - Some wealth management companies are reportedly using trust accounts' T-1 valuation rules to achieve value transfer between new and old products, effectively creating a "fund pool" [4]. - This "valuation arbitrage" allows managers to exploit known market movements to maximize returns for new products while shifting losses to older products, redistributing benefits unfairly [4]. Group 2: Display of Wealth Management Returns - The practice of "ranking" has been ongoing and can harm existing product holders while misleading new investors about potential returns [6]. - Various banks employ different methods to display returns, which can create a "high yield illusion" for investors [6]. - For instance, a bank's app features a "golden list" showcasing products with varying holding periods, highlighting high annualized returns that may not be sustainable over time [8]. Group 3: Regulatory Attention and Market Dynamics - Regulatory bodies have increasingly focused on the display of past performance and the "ranking" practices, with guidelines established to ensure transparency and prevent misleading representations [10]. - The China Banking Association has issued guidelines emphasizing that past performance does not guarantee future results, urging investors to exercise caution [10]. - In a declining net interest margin environment, banks are increasingly focused on wealth management income, leading to competitive practices that may violate asset management regulations [11].