1. Report Industry Investment Rating No relevant content provided. 2. Core Views of the Report - In the fourth quarter, the cost - effectiveness of the coupon strategy is further enhanced against the backdrop of high uncertainty in the bond market direction. The 1 - 3 - year weak - qualification urban investment sinking strategy is recommended, and the yields of 1 - 2 - year AA(2), 2 - 3 - year AA, and AA(2) urban investment bonds are between 2.09% - 2.32%, with a large balance of outstanding bonds. Second, the super - decline feature of secondary perpetual (Er Yong) bonds is obvious, and the yields of 3 - year large - bank capital bonds and 2 - year AA perpetual bonds are between 2.0% - 2.07%, having fallen to a level with coupon value. The 4 - 5 - year large - bank capital bonds have a large decline in this round of adjustment, and the current yields are all above 2.1%, which are high - quality coupon assets for accounts with stable liability ends. For ultra - long - term bonds, although the cost - effectiveness of coupons continues to increase after adjustment, the liquidity has not seen marginal improvement, and it is still only recommended for allocation - type institutions to consider [3][35]. 3. Summary by Relevant Catalog Current Bond Market Situation - Last week, the bearish force in the bond market remained strong, but with the bond - buying by large banks and the central bank's liquidity support, interest rates generally stabilized, while the decline of credit bonds was relatively high, especially for Er Yong bonds and ultra - long - term credit bonds, showing an "over - decline" trend. From September 22 to September 26, 2025, the yields of 1Y, 2Y, 3Y, 4Y, 5Y treasury bonds decreased by 0.7BP, increased by 2.7BP, 2.8BP, 1.8BP, 0.5BP respectively, while the yields of AAA medium - term notes with the same maturities increased by 5.3BP, 6.5BP, 6.8BP, 9.0BP, 9.7BP respectively [1][10]. - The performance of ultra - long - term credit bonds continued to weaken, with the decline exceeding that of the same - maturity interest - rate bonds. The yields of 10Y AAA/AA + medium - term notes increased by 11.32BP and 10.32BP respectively, and the yields of 10Y AAA/AA + urban investment bonds increased by 11.90BP and 8.90BP respectively. The yield of 10Y AAA - bank secondary capital bonds increased by 16.19BP, while the yield of 10Y treasury bonds recovered by 0.21BP [1][12][13]. - The "volatility amplifier" feature of Er Yong bonds reappeared, with the decline of each maturity exceeding that of ordinary credit bonds. The yields of 1 - 5 - year, 7 - year, and 10 - year AAA - bank secondary capital bonds increased by 5.15BP, 8.94BP, 11.60BP, 12.29BP, 17.93BP, 18.31BP, 16.19BP respectively. The part of the curve above 2 - year is still 30BP - 63BP away from the lowest yield point since 2025, and the yields of maturities above 3 - year have exceeded the levels of the bear - flattening period in the first quarter [2][17]. Analysis of Trading Behavior - In terms of active trading, the bearish force of Er Yong bonds was strong overall, with the selling force of trading desks stronger than the buying force of allocation desks. From September 22 to September 26, the proportion of low - valuation transactions of Er Yong bonds was 92.50%, 0.00%, 0.00%, 10.00%, 100.00% respectively. Last week, trading desks represented by public funds strongly sold Er Yong bonds and only had net purchases of short - term credit products. At the same time, allocation desks such as wealth management and insurance institutions bought oversold Er Yong bonds at high prices, but the buying force was weaker than the selling force of public funds [2][19][20]. - The selling market of ultra - long - term credit bonds continued to strengthen throughout the week. From September 22 to September 26, the proportion of discount transactions of ultra - long - term credit bonds was 65.00%, 72.50%, 95.00%, 100.00%, 75.00% respectively. The discount range was not low, and about 25.5% of the discount transactions had a range of more than 4BP, indicating a strong selling willingness in the market [22]. Comparison of the Two Rounds of Bond Market Adjustments in 2025 - The bond market adjustment in the first quarter was mainly driven by the unexpected tightening of the capital market, resulting in weaker performance of the short - and medium - term credit bonds. The yields of 1 - 5 - year AAA urban investment bonds increased by more than 40bp, while the yields of long - term bonds increased by less than 35bp [26][29]. - The bond market adjustment since mid - July in the third quarter was mainly due to the strong performance of the commodity and equity markets, which increased institutional risk appetite. Institutions were very cautious about duration, and short - duration bonds had strong anti - decline properties. From July 18 to September 29, the yield increase of 1 - year urban investment bonds was within 15bp, while the yields of AAA and AA + urban investment bonds with maturities of 7 - year and above increased by more than 40bp [26][32].

Group 1 - The second batch of Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs will be listed on September 24, with 14 public funds participating in the issuance, following the first batch launched on July 17 [1] - The total issuance scale of the second batch of 14 Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs reaches 40.786 billion yuan, with 13 of them exceeding 2.9 billion yuan each [1] - The total scale of Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs has surpassed 170 billion yuan, while the overall scale of bond ETFs has exceeded 600 billion yuan for the first time [1] Group 2 - The largest bond ETFs include Convertible Bond ETF at 59.218 billion yuan, Short-term Bond ETF at 58.516 billion yuan, and Policy Financial Bond ETF at 45.615 billion yuan [3] - Other notable bond ETFs include 30-Year Treasury Bond ETF at 30.895 billion yuan and City Investment Bond ETF at 24.767 billion yuan [3] - The newly launched Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs are expected to enhance the liquidity and market presence of bond ETFs [8] Group 3 - According to Guotai Junan Securities, the ticket interest strategy will dominate from 2025 onwards, with Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs showing resilience during market adjustments [7] - The performance of actively managed pure bond funds indicates that short-term bonds outperform medium to long-term bonds, and credit bonds are favored over interest rate bonds [7] - The liquidity of bond ETFs is expected to improve as the current market environment gradually stabilizes [7] Group 4 - The new sales fee regulations by the China Securities Regulatory Commission are anticipated to create greater development opportunities for bond ETFs [8] - The proposed changes in redemption fees may lead to a shift in institutional investment from interest rate bond funds to bond ETFs, enhancing their attractiveness [8]

Group 1 - The report highlights a recovery in the over-sold perpetual bonds (二永) after a significant reduction in holdings the previous week, with a slight easing of selling pressure observed [1][9][15] - The overall sentiment in the bond market is mixed, with short-term credit showing resilience, while long-term credit continues to decline, leading to a steepening of the yield curve [1][8][15] - The report notes that funds are in a process of reducing duration, particularly cautious towards long and ultra-long credit, with a cumulative reduction of over 50% in long credit since late July [1][15] Group 2 - Historical data indicates that in the last week before holidays, the scale of wealth management products typically declines significantly, with a drop of over 800 billion yuan noted since 2022, and over 900 billion yuan in 2024 due to equity market influences [2][23][32] - The report states that the credit spread has fluctuated around the holiday periods, with a tendency to compress in the first week after the holiday [2][32] Group 3 - The report recommends a focus on coupon strategies for credit bonds, suggesting that avoiding significant exposure to credit varieties is prudent due to potential market disturbances [3][38] - Specific recommendations include selecting short-term coupon assets, particularly those with yields above 2%, and considering trading opportunities in 3-4 year high-grade perpetual bonds, which currently yield 1-3 basis points higher than benchmark bonds [3][38] - Caution is advised for ultra-long credit, with suggestions to reduce holdings as the trading profit potential appears limited [3][38]

Core Viewpoint - The second batch of Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs is set to be issued, with rapid expansion in scale enhancing liquidity and pricing efficiency in the market [1][2]. Group 1: Market Expansion and Product Details - As of September 8, 2025, the total scale of the first batch of 10 Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs has exceeded 120 billion yuan, representing a growth of over 300% from the initial fundraising amount [1]. - The second batch consists of 14 Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs, which received approval on September 8, 2025, and will be launched on September 12, 2025 [1]. - The introduction of new products is expected to further enrich investor choices and enhance market liquidity and pricing efficiency, thereby increasing the activity level of the Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETF market [1]. Group 2: Competitive Landscape and Management Strength - The second batch of Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs will face heightened competition, necessitating stronger capabilities in fixed income management, company empowerment, and ETF operation from the issuers [2]. - Huatai-PineBridge Fund stands out among the issuers, leading in the aforementioned areas. As of the end of Q2 2025, Huatai-PineBridge's assets under management exceeded 1 trillion yuan, with bond fund assets surpassing 260 billion yuan [2]. - The firm has also achieved an ETF management scale exceeding 100 billion yuan, ranking it among the top issuers in this category [2]. Group 3: Fund Management and Performance - The performance of actively managed pure bond funds in 2025 has shown that short-term bonds outperform medium to long-term bonds, and credit bonds outperform interest rate bonds [12]. - During the recent market adjustment, the decline in the value of Sci-Tech Innovation Bond ETFs was less severe compared to other interest rate bond ETFs, indicating better market resilience [12]. - The liquidity of bond ETFs is expected to continue improving as the current market environment stabilizes [12]. Group 4: Regulatory Changes and Future Opportunities - New sales fee regulations issued by the China Securities Regulatory Commission on September 5, 2025, are anticipated to create greater development opportunities for bond ETFs [17]. - The proposed changes in redemption fees may lead to a shift in institutional investment from interest rate bond funds to bond ETFs, enhancing the latter's growth prospects [17].

Group 1 - The second batch of 14 science and technology innovation bond ETFs will begin fundraising, with 9 products available for one day and 4 for three trading days, while 1 product will have a five-day fundraising period [1] - The first batch of 10 science and technology innovation bond ETFs has exceeded a total scale of 120 billion yuan, growing over 300% from the initial fundraising amount [2] - The introduction of the new batch of products is expected to further accelerate the expansion of the bond ETF market, with science and technology innovation bond ETFs becoming the highest market capitalization subcategory [2] Group 2 - According to Guotai Junan Securities, the interest rate strategy has been dominant since 2025, with science and technology innovation bond ETFs showing certain resilience during adjustment periods [3] - The bond market has experienced significant volatility since 2025, with the value of duration strategies declining, while credit bond interest rate strategies have shown advantages [3] - The recent regulatory changes regarding fund sales fees are expected to create greater development opportunities for bond ETFs, as higher redemption fee thresholds may redirect investments from other bond funds to bond ETFs [3]

Group 1 - The overall performance of credit bonds has shown structural differentiation, with short-term credit outperforming long-term and ultra-long-term credit [1][8] - The secondary market for credit bonds has seen a decline in trading duration since mid-July, particularly for public credit bonds, indicating a significant pressure on ultra-long credit [2][9] - Credit bonds have demonstrated enhanced "anti-drawdown" and "resilience" characteristics this year, with short-term credit showing independent performance during market adjustments [3][32] Group 2 - The current market sentiment remains cautious, with expectations of limited chances for significant overcorrection or negative feedback from redemptions [4][42] - Selected mid-to-short-term credit assets are recommended for consideration, with a focus on 3-5 year bonds that have adjusted to a favorable risk-return profile [4][42] - Caution is advised for ultra-long credit, as trading profitability is not evident and there is a tendency for increased allocation at high levels [4][42]

Core Viewpoint - The rapid development of dim sum bonds since 2022 is primarily driven by urban investment bonds, with the outstanding dim sum bond scale exceeding 1.5 trillion yuan by early September 2025 [1] Supply Side - The supply of urban investment offshore bonds remains strictly regulated, making significant short-term increases in urban investment dim sum bonds unlikely [1] - High-quality financial/industrial bonds and green bonds are expected to expand under regulatory support [1] Demand Side - The expansion of cross-border investment channels, strong willingness of institutions to invest overseas, and potential appreciation of the renminbi indicate promising incremental demand for dim sum bonds [1] Investment Strategy - It is recommended to focus on coupon strategies for dim sum bond investments, primarily in the short to medium term, while also considering the extension of duration for investment-grade financial/industrial bonds and moderate allocation in short to medium-term urban investment bonds [1]

Core Viewpoint - Despite the weak sentiment in the bond market influenced by the "stock-bond seesaw" effect, credit bonds are currently outperforming interest rate bonds, with analysts suggesting that institutions can still capture coupon assets and seek capital gains in the short term [1][2][3] Group 1: Credit Bond Performance - In August, credit bonds structurally "outperformed" interest rate bonds, with credit spreads not significantly widening [2] - The economic fundamentals remain weak, as indicated by the manufacturing PMI of 49.4 in August, which is below the growth line [2] - The "stock-bond seesaw" effect has weakened, reducing the negative feedback from a bullish stock market on the bond market [2] Group 2: Funding Support - The funding environment is expected to remain stable, with monetary policy maintaining a supportive tone [3] - The second quarter monetary policy report emphasizes a "moderately loose monetary policy" to adapt to domestic and international economic conditions [3] - There is an increasing expectation of interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve, which could lead to more trading opportunities in the bond market [3] Group 3: Demand Side Support - As of September 2, the yields on credit bonds in the interbank market have decreased, with the 3-month AAA yield down 1 basis point to 1.59% [3] - Bank wealth management products were the main buyers of credit bonds in August, with net purchases of approximately 180 billion yuan [4] - Insurance companies also significantly increased their purchases of credit bonds, with a net buying scale of 56.2 billion yuan in August [4] Group 4: Investment Strategy - It is recommended to focus on short-duration high-yield bonds, particularly city investment bonds with maturities around 2 years [7] - Institutions are advised to selectively consider mid-to-short duration coupon assets with ratings of AA+ and above [7] - Caution is advised for long-duration credit bonds due to limited buying power in the bond market and the absence of clear stabilization in interest rates [7][8]

Group 1: Report's Investment Rating - No information provided on the report's industry investment rating Group 2: Core Views - This week, the simulated portfolio's returns turned negative, with the credit - style portfolio's retracement relatively controllable. Among the interest - rate style portfolios, the short - end sinking of urban investment bonds and the sinking strategy of certificates of deposit (CDs) had relatively high weekly return readings, both around - 0.41%. Among the credit - style portfolios, the short - end sinking of urban investment bonds and the sinking strategy of CDs had smaller retracements, with return readings of - 0.16% and - 0.16% respectively [2][15][16]. - Since July, the CD strategy has a higher odds. The average weekly return of the credit - style CD heavy - position portfolio dropped to - 0.17%, a decrease of about 24bp from last week. It is also one of the few strategies with positive cumulative returns in the past three weeks. The corresponding interest - rate style portfolio underperformed the defensive strategy again after two weeks [2][19]. - In terms of return sources, the coupon of the credit - style urban investment bond heavy - position strategy is approaching the annual low and can hardly withstand recent fluctuations. The coupon contributions of the credit - style portfolio this week generally fell within the range of - 25% to - 5%, and capital gains significantly dragged down the comprehensive return [3][27]. - In the past four weeks, except for the short - end sinking of urban investment bonds, the remaining mainstream strategies generally lacked excess returns. From the perspective of strategy terms, short - term strategies significantly outperformed. Short - term CD strategies outperformed the benchmark, and the excess return of urban investment sinking reached the highest since late June [4][31][33]. Group 3: Summary by Relevant Catalogs 1. Portfolio Strategy Return Tracking 1.1 Portfolio Weekly Return Overview - As of August 15, this year, the cumulative returns of the interest - rate style and credit - style portfolios have significantly lagged behind the same period in the past two years. Among the main credit - style portfolios, the cumulative comprehensive returns of the long - term industrial portfolio, the short - end sinking of urban investment bonds, and the duration portfolio led, reaching 1.48%, 1.39%, and 1.22% respectively. The cumulative returns of the credit - style portfolios all exceeded the corresponding interest - rate style portfolios, while the cumulative returns of the interest - rate style portfolios basically fell back to within 1% [10]. - The average weekly return of the credit - style CD heavy - position portfolio dropped to - 0.17%, a decrease of about 24bp from last week. The weekly return of the urban investment bond heavy - position portfolio decreased by 38.6bp to - 0.27% compared with the previous week. The weekly return of the secondary bond heavy - position portfolio decreased by more than 40bp, but its absolute return performance was slightly stronger than that of the interest - rate style portfolio. The average return of the long - term bond heavy - position strategy dropped to - 0.55%, a decrease of about 64bp compared with the previous week [2][19]. 1.2 Portfolio Weekly Return Sources - The coupons of the main strategy portfolios continued to decline. The coupons of the short - end sinking and dumbbell - shaped portfolios of urban investment bonds were around an annualized 1.92% and 1.97% respectively, less than 5bp away from the annual low. The coupon of the secondary bond duration portfolio was still 14bp away from the low point, and the coupon volatility remained high [3][27]. 2. Credit Strategy Excess Return Tracking - In the past four weeks, the cumulative excess returns of the short - end sinking of urban investment bonds, the bullet - shaped portfolio of commercial financial bonds, and the sinking strategy portfolio of secondary bonds reached 16.2bp, 0.9bp, and 0.6bp respectively, while the cumulative readings of the remaining strategy portfolios dropped to the negative range. This week's weak performance widened the gap between the cumulative returns of the heavy - position strategy of Tier 2 and perpetual bonds and the urban investment bond heavy - position strategy, with the cumulative excess return dropping to below - 22bp [4][31]. - From the perspective of strategy terms, short - term strategies significantly outperformed. Short - term CD strategies outperformed the benchmark, and the excess return of urban investment sinking reached the highest since late June. In the medium - and long - term, all strategies showed negative excess returns, except that the excess return of the short - end sinking of urban investment bonds reached 9.7bp. The negative deviations of Tier 2 capital bonds and the bullet - shaped portfolio of commercial financial bonds from the benchmark were within 2bp, also having a certain defensive property [4][33]. Appendix: Simulated Portfolio Allocation Method - The simulated portfolio has some limitations, including the distortion of the portfolio allocation method and errors in the return calculation method. The actual product's bond allocation in terms of grade and term distribution is more complex and may change strategies according to market conditions. The fixed bond ratio in the simulated portfolio may be distorted, and there are some assumptions and simplifications in the calculation method of coupon and capital gains [5][47]

九泰聚鑫混合型证券投资基金 基金管理人：九泰基金管理有限公司 基金托管人：华夏银行股份有限公司 报告送出日期：2025 年 7 月 21 日 九泰聚鑫混合 2025 年第 2 季度报告 §1 重要提示 基金管理人的董事会及董事保证本报告所载资料不存在虚假记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏， 并对其内容的真实性、准确性和完整性承担个别及连带责任。 基金托管人华夏银行股份有限公司根据本基金合同规定，于 2025 年 7 月 17 日复核了本报告 中的财务指标、净值表现和投资组合报告等内容，保证复核内容不存在虚假记载、误导性陈述或 者重大遗漏。 基金管理人承诺以诚实信用、勤勉尽责的原则管理和运用基金资产，但不保证基金一定盈利。 基金的过往业绩并不代表其未来表现。投资有风险，投资者在作出投资决策前应仔细阅读本 基金的招募说明书。 | 本报告中财务资料未经审计。 | 2025 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 30 | 本报告期自 | 年 | 月 | 日起至 | 月 | 日止。 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | ...