Disclaimers July 22, 2025 Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements The following slides are part of a presentation by Synchrony Financial in connection with reporting quarterly financial results and should be read in conjunction with the earnings release and financial supplement included as exhibits to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed today and available on our website (www.investors.synchrony.com) and the SEC's website (www.sec.gov). All references to net earnings and net income are in ...

近期，南都·湾财社记者据企查查查询发现，盛银消费金融其第二大股东大连德旭经贸有限公司(下称"德旭经贸")所持有的盛银消费金融全部股权被法院冻 结。 具体信息显示，该笔股权数额有7500万元，占盛银消费金融全部股权的25%，冻结期限自2025年7月至2028年7月。且德旭经贸法定代表人王新宇已被限制高 消费。 | 序号 | 更新日期 | 标题 | 摘要 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | | 公示日期： 2025- | | | | | 执行通知书文号： | | | | | 被执行人： 大连德 | | | 07-10 | 大连德旭经贸有限公司所持股份被冻结 | 冻结标的企业： | | | | | 被冻结股权数： 7 | | | | | 冻结状态： 股权冯 | | | | | 执行法院: 辽宁省 | | | | | 收起 | 不满注资标准且排名垫底 成立之初，盛银消费金融共有三名股东：盛京银行、德旭经贸和顺峰投资实业，分别持股60%、20%、20%。不过2023年7月，盛银消费金融进行了一轮股权 调整，顺峰实业退出，盛京银行的出资比例上升至75%，德旭经贸出资比例为25%。 | 序号 ...

Core Viewpoint - The progress of the IPO guidance for Mashang Consumer Finance is accelerating, with comprehensive investigations and improvements in corporate governance being implemented by CICC and CITIC Securities [1][3]. Group 1: IPO Guidance Progress - CICC and CITIC Securities are assisting Mashang Consumer Finance in addressing existing issues and enhancing corporate governance structures, including amendments to the company's articles of association and internal control systems [1]. - The guidance report indicates that the company is working to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements, particularly regarding the composition of the board of directors [3]. Group 2: Corporate Governance Issues - The departure of independent director Deng Gang has resulted in the board having fewer than one-third independent directors, prompting the company to expedite the election and appointment of a new independent director [3]. - The company plans to strengthen its internal control systems and conduct ongoing due diligence to address key issues identified during the guidance period [5]. Group 3: Financial Performance - In the 2024 annual report, Mashang Consumer Finance reported a revenue of 15.149 billion yuan, a year-on-year decrease of 4.09%, while net profit reached 2.281 billion yuan, reflecting a year-on-year increase of 15.1% [7]. - The company ranks third among licensed consumer finance companies in terms of net profit, significantly outperforming its competitors, including Ping An Consumer Finance [7].

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory body is conducting a special investigation into licensed consumer finance companies, focusing on the charging policies of membership rights services and whether they are forcibly bundled with loans, following the implementation of the "new lending regulations" [1][2]. Group 1: Regulatory Investigation - The investigation employs a questionnaire format to assess the operation of the "24% + rights" model, covering the current rights services offered by consumer finance companies and the issues faced [2][3]. - The "24% + rights" model emerged due to strict constraints on comprehensive financing costs imposed by the new regulations, leading some lending institutions to explore this combination to maintain profitability [2][3]. - The model separates the income previously included in loan interest into a "not exceeding 24% annual interest rate" and "independently priced rights services" [2][3]. Group 2: Consumer Complaints - There are significant consumer complaints regarding the bundling of rights services with loan approvals and limits, with many users reporting experiences of being forced to purchase rights packages to secure loans [4][5]. - Complaints include issues such as default selections for rights services leading to unexpected charges, high refund thresholds, and unfulfilled promises regarding the benefits of purchased rights [4][5]. - The lack of a standard for rights services has led to numerous complaints and concerns, including issues of bundling sales, false advertising, and discrepancies between price and quality [5]. Group 3: Industry Response and Challenges - Some leading consumer finance institutions claim that their rights services are voluntarily chosen by users and offer a 30-day no-reason refund policy [5]. - The challenge lies in balancing compliance with profitability, as relying solely on voluntary participation may not cover the costs associated with high-risk borrowers [5]. - Regulatory measures should focus on enhancing information disclosure, clarifying the value of rights, prohibiting forced bundling, and simplifying refund processes to address the ongoing issues [5].

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory body is conducting a special investigation into licensed consumer finance companies, focusing on the charging policies of membership rights services and their potential mandatory bundling with loans, following the implementation of the new lending regulations [2][3]. Group 1: Regulatory Investigation - The investigation employs a questionnaire format to assess the operation of the "24% + rights" model, including the services offered and the main issues faced by consumer finance companies [3]. - The "24% + rights" model emerged due to strict constraints on comprehensive financing costs, leading institutions to explore this combination to maintain profitability within regulatory limits [3][4]. - The model separates income into a "not exceeding 24% annual interest rate" and "independently priced rights services," which include various offerings such as e-commerce coupons and credit consulting [3][4]. Group 2: Industry Challenges - The current cooperation between financial institutions and lending agencies primarily involves fixed income guarantees and profit-sharing, with rights products becoming a means for lending agencies to increase revenue [4]. - The lack of standardization in membership rights services has led to varied charging policies and resource allocation among institutions, complicating the operational landscape [5]. - Complaints regarding forced bundling of rights services with loan approvals have surged, indicating a significant consumer protection issue [5][6]. Group 3: Consumer Complaints - Over 40,000 complaints related to "loan rights" have been recorded, highlighting issues such as default selections for rights services, high refund thresholds, and unfulfilled service promises [6]. - Some leading consumer finance institutions claim their rights services are voluntary and offer a 30-day no-reason refund policy, contrasting with the complaints from users [10]. - The absence of execution standards for rights products has led to rampant issues such as bundling sales and false advertising, raising concerns about whether these services increase the overall financing costs for borrowers [10]. Group 4: Recommendations for Improvement - Regulatory measures should focus on enhancing information disclosure, clarifying the value of rights, prohibiting mandatory bundling, and simplifying refund processes to address the identified issues [10].

Core Insights - Zacks Premium provides tools for investors to enhance their stock market strategies and confidence [1] - The Zacks Style Scores serve as complementary indicators to the Zacks Rank, helping investors identify stocks with high potential for market outperformance [2] Zacks Style Scores Overview - Stocks are rated A, B, C, D, or F based on value, growth, and momentum characteristics, with higher scores indicating better chances of outperforming the market [3] - The Style Scores are categorized into four types: Value Score, Growth Score, Momentum Score, and VGM Score [3][4][5][6] Value Score - Focuses on identifying undervalued stocks using financial ratios such as P/E, PEG, Price/Sales, and Price/Cash Flow [3] Growth Score - Concentrates on a company's financial health and future growth potential, analyzing projected and historical earnings, sales, and cash flow [4] Momentum Score - Targets stocks with upward or downward price trends, utilizing factors like one-week price change and monthly earnings estimate changes [5] VGM Score - Combines all three Style Scores to identify stocks with attractive value, strong growth forecasts, and promising momentum [6] Zacks Rank Integration - The Zacks Rank uses earnings estimate revisions to simplify portfolio building, with 1 (Strong Buy) stocks achieving an average annual return of +23.62% since 1988, significantly outperforming the S&P 500 [7] - There are over 800 stocks rated 1 or 2, making it essential to use Style Scores to narrow down choices [8] Stock Example: OneMain Holdings (OMF) - OneMain Holdings is a financial services company with a Zacks Rank of 3 (Hold) and a VGM Score of A [11] - The stock has a Momentum Style Score of A, with a 9% increase in shares over the past four weeks and a positive earnings surprise average of +8.7% [12]

Core Viewpoint - Zhejiang Ningyin Consumer Finance Co., Ltd. (Ningyin) was fined 1.65 million yuan due to various regulatory violations, marking the largest penalty for a consumer finance company in 2025 [2][4][5]. Regulatory Violations - Ningyin's main violations include inadequate control over customer credit limits, issuing loans to ineligible customers, negligent management of cooperative business, data quality deficiencies, and imprudent management of related transactions [4][5]. - The company received a "double penalty" with warnings issued to Zhang Yang and Zheng Xiangxiang for their respective roles in the violations [4]. Financial Performance - In 2024, Ningyin reported total assets of 59.815 billion yuan, a 31.9% increase year-on-year, with operating income reaching 2.99 billion yuan, up 65.9%, and net profit exceeding 300 million yuan at 303 million yuan, reflecting a 50% increase [12][8]. Market Position - As of 2024, Ningyin ranks 7th among 31 licensed consumer finance companies in terms of asset size, while its net profit places it in the 12th position [12][13]. Regulatory Context - The recent penalty comes in light of new regulations aimed at strengthening the management of internet lending by commercial banks, effective from October 1, 2025, which require banks to manage partnerships with lending platforms more rigorously [5][7].

Core Viewpoint - The upcoming implementation of the "New Regulations on Strengthening the Management of Internet Loan Business by Commercial Banks" has led to the rise of the "24% + Equity Services" business model in the consumer finance sector, prompting regulatory scrutiny on member rights and associated fees [1][2]. Group 1: Regulatory Focus - Regulatory authorities have issued a survey to 31 consumer finance companies regarding their member rights services, focusing on self-provided and partnered services, potential impacts, and existing issues [1][2]. - Key concerns include false advertising, binding member rights to loan approvals, and discrepancies between service quality and pricing [1][2][4]. Group 2: Fee Structure and Compliance - Consumer finance institutions are required to clarify their member rights service fees, including standards, collection methods, and any hidden charges or unreasonable conditions [2][4]. - The income from self-operated member rights services is categorized as off-balance-sheet income, included under fees and commissions, with one company reporting member service income of 53.49 million yuan in its 2024 annual report [2][3]. Group 3: Product Offerings - The "24% + Equity" products typically come in various subscription formats (monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, annual) and include financial rights (e.g., priority approval, interest-free loans) and lifestyle benefits (e.g., discounts on services) [3][5]. - Regulatory scrutiny extends to ensuring that member rights fees are included in the overall financing costs for borrowers, ensuring compliance with the 24% cap [4][5]. Group 4: Customer Complaints and Challenges - There is significant pressure on licensed financial institutions regarding customer complaints related to member rights, including issues of forced bundling, automatic renewals, and refund difficulties [7]. - Complaints on platforms highlight concerns over users being unaware of charges, mandatory membership for loan approval, and challenges in obtaining refunds [7][8].

Core Viewpoint - The "24% + equity service" model has become a popular business model in the lending industry as the implementation of new regulatory measures approaches [1] Group 1: Regulatory Developments - Regulatory authorities have issued a survey notice to 31 consumer finance companies regarding member rights, focusing on four main areas: the provision of rights services by consumer finance companies, the rights services provided by cooperative lending platforms, impact analysis, and problem analysis [1] - The survey addresses detailed issues related to the potential impacts and problems associated with the "24% + equity" products currently in the industry [1] Group 2: Industry Response - Consumer finance institutions are accelerating their research on relevant policies to prepare for potential future regulations concerning member rights [1]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the upcoming implementation of the "New Regulations on Internet Lending by Commercial Banks" on October 1, which aims to regulate the "24% + rights" model in the lending industry, focusing on the impact of membership fees on borrowers' overall financing costs [1][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Developments - Regulatory authorities are conducting surveys among licensed consumer finance companies to understand the operational specifics of the "24% + rights" model, particularly how membership fees affect overall financing costs [2][4]. - The new regulations require that guarantee service fees be included in the comprehensive financing costs, indicating a trend towards reducing annualized interest rates below 24% [1][4]. Group 2: Industry Challenges - The "24% + rights" model is emerging as a solution for consumer finance companies to serve high-risk borrowers while adhering to the new regulations, but it faces challenges in balancing compliance and profitability [4][5]. - There is a significant rise in consumer complaints related to the "loan + rights" model, with over 5000 complaints reported, primarily concerning default selections and complex refund processes [5]. Group 3: Market Reactions - Consumer finance companies are exploring business transformation paths to adapt to the new regulatory environment, with the "24% + rights" model being one of the key strategies [4]. - The industry is still searching for viable compliance solutions, as the current model raises concerns about whether it can effectively match service value with pricing while reducing complaint rates [5].