岁末本是银行揽储旺季，但在净息差持续承压的背景下，银行业存款产品结构调整进入深水区。 记者近日发现，存款市场已进入差异化竞争阶段：一边是5年期大额存单正加速退出市场，部分国有大行收缩长期高成本存款，推出更高起存门槛的大额存 单；一边是中小银行差异化调整，逆势上调存款利率。 中信证券首席经济学家明明表示，近期多家银行下架5年期定期存款产品，背后或暗含银行负债端久期开始缩短的信号；此外，一般性存款增长波动加大、 核心存款增长乏力等也难以为商业银行资产端拉长久期提供较多支撑。然而，政府债供给期限以及银行提高收益的诉求下，银行客观存在拉长配债久期的需 求，因此如何兼顾收益与风险，将成为商业银行稳健发展的重要课题。 5年大额存单逐步退场 按照以往惯例，大额存单作为商业银行年底揽储的重磅产品，此时应是银行加大布局的旺季，但近期5年期大额存单逐步退出市场成为显著趋势。 近日，六家国有大型商业银行对存款产品进行调整，集体下架五年期大额存单。目前仅剩三年期、二年期、一年期、六个月等短期限大额存单产品供投资者 选择。 以中国银行为例，"大额存单"栏目下仅剩余1个月、3个月、6个月、1年、2年、3年六个期限产品。其中，3年期大额存 ...

Summary of Key Points from Conference Call Industry Overview - The focus is on the bond market strategy for 2026, characterized by a "slow bear" and "divergence" in "relative value" [1] - The real estate industry is expected to bottom out in Q2 2026, with sales, inventory, and new construction growth rates having reached their lowest points [1][6] Core Insights and Arguments - The projected upper limit for interest rates in 2026 is 2.25%, driven primarily by nominal GDP recovery, which is expected to exceed 5% [1][3] - The current policy framework emphasizes stability to address uncertainties and structural challenges, avoiding large-scale stimulus while supporting emerging industries [1][7] - The CPI is forecasted to center around 0.8% next year, while PPI is expected to recover to above -1%, influenced by monetary activation and the bottoming out of real estate investment [1][8] - The market's focus on the lower limit of interest rates is determined by the cost of bank liabilities, which is currently stable at around 1.6% [1][9] Important but Overlooked Content - The phenomenon of monetary activation is reflected in the M1-M2 differential, which has decreased from over 8% to 1%-2% recently, indicating a shift from time deposits to demand deposits [4][5] - The real estate sector is currently experiencing negative growth across all metrics, but improvements are expected as investment growth bottoms out [6] - The sales regulations are aimed at protecting investors and promoting long-term holding, which has led to behavioral changes in the market [21][22] - Non-bank institutions are facing challenges due to new sales regulations and valuation adjustments, leading to potential liquidity opportunities [14] - The macro trading strategy for 2026 will focus on the expected recovery of fundamentals and the panic caused by new redemption fee regulations [15] Market Dynamics - The bond market in 2026 will be characterized by "trading," with structural gaming opportunities arising from the rotation between interest rates and credit [20] - The current monetary policy is expected to have limited room for rate cuts, with only 1-2 potential cuts anticipated [11] - The anticipated rise in funding prices for 2026 is expected to be around 1.5%, slightly higher than the current levels [12] Conclusion - The bond market strategy for 2026 will require a focus on trading and structural opportunities, with an emphasis on liquidity and the impact of regulatory changes on market behavior [20][21]

Investment Rating - Industry Rating: Outperform the Market (maintained rating) [8] Core Insights - The resumption of government bond trading will primarily lead to asset replacement rather than extending the duration of liabilities for commercial banks. The operations will adjust the asset structure without expanding the balance sheet [2][3][19]. - The impact on the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) from government bond trading is minimal due to the low net buying scale and the 5% coefficient for government bonds in the NSFR calculation [4][5][26]. - Government bond trading can help alleviate pressure on banks' interest rate risk indicators, providing a feasible option for managing the increasing supply of government bonds [6][28][29]. - The improvement in banks' funding costs from government bond trading is limited, with a potential cost reduction of approximately 1 basis point if the central bank buys 1 trillion yuan of bonds [7][30][32]. Summary by Sections 1. Impact of Government Bond Trading on Bank Asset and Liability Structure - The essence of government bond trading for commercial banks is asset replacement, with liquidity from bond sales being utilized in various ways, including maintaining excess reserves or replacing other monetary policy tools [2][15][19]. - The operations do not lead to a balance sheet contraction but may tighten overall liquidity due to reduced excess reserves [16][19]. 2. Limited Improvement in NSFR - The resumption of government bond trading may not significantly alleviate the pressure on banks' funding costs, as the current high balances of MDS and MLF remain a concern [4][21][22]. - The potential for NSFR improvement is small, with estimates suggesting a reduction in required stable funding of about 500 billion yuan from a net buying scale of 1 trillion yuan [26][27]. 3. Alleviation of Interest Rate Risk Pressure - The increasing supply of government bonds necessitates strategies to manage interest rate risk, including the use of government bond trading as a tool to absorb some of the supply [6][28][29]. 4. Limited Effect on Funding Cost Improvement - The mechanism for improving funding costs involves replacing MDS and MLF with liquidity from bond sales, with a projected minimal impact on overall funding costs [7][30][31].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles highlights the trend of increased liquidity in corporate and household deposits, indicating a shift towards demand deposits while maintaining a significant level of time deposits [1][2] - In June, the proportion of demand deposits in new corporate and household deposits reached 83% and 95% respectively, compared to historical ranges of 40% to 70% [1] - The decline in deposit interest rates is identified as a key factor driving the trend towards liquidity in deposits, as banks adjust rates to stabilize interest margins [1][2] Group 2 - Despite the trend towards liquidity, the proportion of time deposits remains high, with household time deposits accounting for 73.5% as of mid-year, showing only a slight decrease from the previous month [2] - The asset side of banks has seen a more significant decline in interest rates compared to the liability side, contributing to a narrowing net interest margin [2][3] - The average interest rate for new corporate loans was approximately 3.3%, down about 45 basis points year-on-year, while personal housing loan rates were around 3.1%, down about 60 basis points [2] Group 3 - Financial regulatory authorities emphasize the importance of maintaining a reasonable net interest margin to support both the real economy and the health of the banking system [3][4] - The People's Bank of China aims to enhance the market-oriented interest rate transmission mechanism to support banks in lowering their funding costs [3][4] - Structural monetary policy tools are expected to play a more significant role in supporting key sectors and weak links in the economy, thereby reducing banks' funding costs [3]