Core Viewpoint - The recent case of financial fraud involving *ST Jiuyou highlights the persistent issue of financial misconduct in the capital market, which undermines fairness and transparency, making it difficult for investors to make informed decisions [2] Group 1: Financial Fraud Impact - Financial fraud severely disrupts the healthy development of capital markets, leading to misallocation of resources and hindering the growth of genuinely capable companies [2] - The prevalence of financial fraud increases risks for investors who rely on false financial data, likening their investment decisions to navigating in the dark [2] Group 2: Regulatory Measures - Recent tightening of regulatory policies and improvements in laws have provided a robust framework for combating financial fraud, with the new Securities Law significantly increasing penalties for such violations [3] - The regulatory authorities are enhancing collaboration with judicial departments to establish a comprehensive punishment and prevention system for financial fraud [3] - The issuance of the "Opinions on Strictly Implementing the Delisting System" in April 2024 aims to enforce stricter delisting standards, targeting companies with severe or long-term fraudulent activities [3] Group 3: Market Integrity and Future Outlook - Strict punishment for financial fraud is essential for maintaining the principles of openness, fairness, and justice in the market, thereby enhancing the vitality and resilience of the capital market [4] - A transparent and healthy market environment is expected to attract more investors and quality companies, fostering a virtuous cycle [4] - Continuous improvement of the regulatory system and maintaining a high-pressure stance against financial fraud are crucial for adapting to new fraudulent methods and hidden risks [4]

Core Viewpoint - The deep integration of technological innovation and industrial innovation has become the core driving force for economic growth in the context of a profound restructuring of the global economic landscape [5][6]. Group 1: Capital Market Development - The chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, Wu Qing, emphasized the need to fully activate the hub function of a multi-level capital market to promote the integration of technological and industrial innovation [5][6]. - China's capital market has made significant progress in supporting the innovation-driven development strategy, but there is still room for improvement in marketization, investor structure, and institutional flexibility compared to mature international markets [6][7]. - The multi-level capital market system in China has been continuously improved, expanding its service coverage for technology innovation enterprises [5][6]. Group 2: Challenges and Opportunities - There are structural differences between China's capital market and mature international markets, including insufficient long-term capital supply and a tendency for short-term investments [8][12]. - The average transaction price of technology contracts in China is only one-fifth of that in the United States, indicating a need for a scientific intangible asset valuation system [8][12]. - As of 2024, A-share listed companies' R&D investment is expected to reach 1.88 trillion yuan, accounting for over 50% of the total social R&D investment, with technology companies' market capitalization share increasing from 12% to 27% over the past decade [7][12]. Group 3: Financial Ecosystem and Innovation - A differentiated capital market ecosystem that aligns with technological innovation and industrial transformation requires continuous institutional and product innovation [10][11]. - The need to enhance the diversity of financial products and improve the multi-level capital market structure is crucial for supporting the financing needs of technology enterprises throughout their lifecycle [10][11]. - The establishment of a scientific and reasonable delisting standard that includes innovation capability indicators, in addition to financial metrics, is essential for maintaining market order and protecting investor interests [11][12]. Group 4: Future Directions - Future efforts should focus on cultivating patient capital and providing comprehensive financial services that cater to the entire lifecycle of technology enterprises [12][13]. - Enhancing market inclusiveness and openness by relaxing market access restrictions will attract more domestic and international quality technology enterprises and investors [13][14]. - The capital market is positioned as a core hub linking technological innovation and industrial upgrading, with the potential to create a globally influential innovation capital aggregation hub [14].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of capital markets in supporting technological innovation and highlights the existing gaps between capital supply and innovation demand, which need to be addressed for a thriving innovation ecosystem [1] Group 1: Current State of Technological Innovation - Global technological innovation is currently in a period of intense activity, with China advancing its innovation-driven development strategy and modern industrial system [1] - Technological innovation is transitioning from isolated breakthroughs to systematic integration, and from technological breakthroughs to market applications [1] Group 2: Role of Capital Markets - Capital markets are crucial for providing the necessary long-term capital to support technological innovation, which is essential for the growth of the innovation ecosystem [1] - There are existing issues such as mismatches in capital supply and innovation demand, as well as service gaps that hinder the effectiveness of capital markets in supporting innovation [1] Group 3: Challenges in Capital Formation - The current capital formation mechanisms are not fully aligned with the needs of innovation, leading to short-term funding and low risk tolerance in financial supply [1] - The article suggests that capital markets should leverage their unique risk-sharing mechanisms to support the entire chain from venture capital to public financing, thereby facilitating the transition of technological achievements from laboratories to production lines [1]

在2025陆家嘴论坛上，中国证监会主席吴清表示，充分发挥多层次资本市场枢纽功能，推动科技创新和 产业创新融合发展。这释放出一个鲜明信号：进一步深化资本市场改革，以更好支持科技创新和新质生 产力发展为核心，突出发挥资本市场枢纽功能，助力科技创新和产业创新深度融合。 资本市场通过对关键要素和资产的合理定价，能够激发企业家精神和人才创新创造活力，进而带动人 才、技术、数据等生产要素有机融合与协同集聚，更好服务传统产业升级、新兴产业壮大和未来产业培 育。从国内外实践经验看，无论是大而强的科技巨头，还是小而美的科创新秀，都离不开资本市场的有 力支持。创新始于科技、兴于产业、成于资本的特点越来越明显。 当前，全球科技创新进入密集活跃期。我国在深入实施创新驱动发展战略、加快构建现代化产业体系的 引领下，科技创新正在从点状突破向系统集成加快推进，技术突破向市场应用加快转化，恰似一株株幼 苗向森林生长。而资本市场能否成为适配的灌溉水源，直接关系创新生态的繁茂程度。 客观来看，目前资本供给与科创需求间仍存在周期错配、服务断层等堵点。科技创新需要长期资本"助 跑"，但当前适应创新规律的资本形成机制还不完善，金融供给存在资金短期化、 ...

记者：刘慧、刘羽佳、桑彤 海报制作：刘羽佳 来源：新华社国内部出品 中国证监会主席吴清6月18日在2025陆家嘴论坛上宣布，将聚焦提升制度的包容性和适应性， 以深化科创板、创业板改革为抓手，着力打造更具吸引力、竞争力的市场体系和产品服务矩阵。更 好发挥科创板"试验田"作用，加力推出进一步深化改革的"1+6"政策措施，统筹推进投融资综合改 革和投资者权益保护，加快构建更有利于支持全面创新的资本市场生态。 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint emphasizes that the path of developed countries shows that high-end manufacturing and the position of industry chain leaders are crucial for a country's comprehensive competitiveness [1] - To enhance manufacturing competitiveness, a deep integration and efficient circulation of technology, industry, and finance are necessary [1] - The capital market can provide platform and mechanism support, and should improve regulation, enhance service efficiency, and align with the needs of the real economy [1] Group 2 - China's financial supply still faces issues such as short-term funding and low risk tolerance, indicating a lack of long-term and patient capital [2] - There is a need for proactive and open reform measures to strengthen the institutional guiding function of the capital market [2] - Suggestions include allowing angel and venture capital to exit through IPO mechanisms, making the listing pricing process more market-oriented, and facilitating mergers and acquisitions for quality tech enterprises [2] Group 3 - The financial product service system to meet the full lifecycle financial needs of tech companies is still not well-developed [3] - Policy support should be provided for various investment institutions that carry industrial and financial capital, with tax and other incentives based on investment duration [3] - The reintroduction of listing standards for unprofitable companies on the Sci-Tech Innovation Board aims to better serve hard tech innovation enterprises [3] Group 4 - The current issue in China's capital market is not the lack of financing channels, but rather the absence of a "financing civilization" [4] - Key stakeholders, including listed companies and large investment institutions, should take on social responsibilities to foster a healthy market ecosystem [4] - Strengthening internal compliance and anti-corruption measures, along with enhancing information disclosure and governance, is essential for maintaining market integrity [4]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint emphasizes the importance of capital markets in supporting the integration of technology, industry, and finance, particularly through innovative financial tools and policies aimed at enhancing the financing efficiency of "hard technology" enterprises [1][2] - In 2024, over 90% of new listings on the Sci-Tech Innovation Board, Growth Enterprise Market, and Beijing Stock Exchange will belong to strategic emerging industries or high-tech enterprises, with A-share listed companies' R&D investment reaching 1.88 trillion yuan, accounting for more than half of the total social R&D expenditure [1][2] - The increasing "tech" attribute of A-shares is highlighted, with listed companies becoming the main force in technological innovation, driven by deep structural changes in the capital market [1][2] Group 2 - A series of policies supporting high-quality development of venture capital and the capital market's service to technology enterprises have been introduced since 2024, including the "1+6" policy measures for deepening the reform of the Sci-Tech Innovation Board [2][3] - The Sci-Tech Innovation Board allows unprofitable technology innovation companies to list under the fifth standard, with 20 innovative biopharmaceutical companies having successfully listed since its inception [2][3] - Mergers and acquisitions are increasingly recognized as important tools for promoting deep integration of technological and industrial innovation, with a significant number of listed companies actively pursuing M&A to drive transformation and industry consolidation [3][4] Group 3 - The recent reforms in the merger and acquisition market aim to support listed companies in aligning with technological innovation and industrial upgrades, guiding resources towards new productive forces [3][4] - The revised "Major Asset Restructuring Management Measures" is expected to invigorate the M&A market, supporting corporate transformation and accelerating the development of new productive forces [3][4] - A multi-dimensional financing system, including private equity funds and technology bonds, is emerging to facilitate the integration of technology, capital, and industry elements [4][5] Group 4 - Approximately 90% of companies listed on the Sci-Tech Innovation Board received private equity investment prior to their listing, with efforts to broaden funding sources and optimize exit channels for private equity funds [4][5] - The issuance of over 200 technology bonds, with a total issuance scale exceeding 400 billion yuan, reflects the capital market's commitment to serving innovation [4][5] - The new policies and standards for the Sci-Tech Innovation Board and Growth Enterprise Market are designed to open financing channels for unprofitable innovative enterprises, while the M&A reforms aim to accelerate vertical and horizontal integration within industries [5]

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Stock Exchange (SSE) has completed the "Action Plan for Promoting the Improvement of ESG Ratings of Listed Companies in the Shanghai Market," aiming to enhance the ESG rating levels of listed companies through six major initiatives [1][2]. Group 1: ESG Rating Initiatives - The action plan includes six major initiatives to improve ESG ratings, starting with providing rating guidance, which involves developing guidelines for key rating indicators and enhancing disclosure examples [3]. - The second initiative focuses on promoting communication between listed companies and rating agencies, including training and industry sharing activities [3]. - The third initiative encourages improved information disclosure, urging companies to identify financially significant issues and enhance their analysis and reporting [3]. Group 2: Best Practices and Incentives - The action plan aims to form best practices by summarizing successful cases from leading ESG-rated companies and sharing experiences among industry benchmarks [4]. - Financial institutions are encouraged to develop more ESG-themed investment products, integrating ESG ratings into investment decisions [4]. - The plan also promotes the involvement of professional investors as active shareholders to enhance ESG management performance [4]. Group 3: Current ESG Rating Landscape - As of the end of 2024, 342 listed companies in the Shanghai market were included in the MSCI ESG rating, with 100 companies receiving upgrades in their ratings [7]. - The number of companies rated AAA-A has significantly increased to 52, indicating a strong upward trend in ESG ratings among Shanghai-listed companies [7]. - Despite the improvements, the number of companies at the global leading level remains relatively low, indicating room for further enhancement in ESG rating performance [7].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint emphasizes the importance of allowing more capable and innovative enterprises to enter the market, which will help expand the innovation asset pie and enhance the investment value of China's capital market [2][3] - The 2025 Lujiazui Forum outlined a roadmap for China's financial development, including a transformation of the monetary policy framework, greater financial openness, and reforms in the capital market [2] - The announcement by the Chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) regarding the establishment of a growth tier for the ChiNext board and the resumption of listing standards for unprofitable companies has sparked widespread discussion in the market [2][3] Group 2 - Unprofitable innovative enterprises are seen as the "seeds" of China's economy, but they have faced liquidity challenges due to a still-developing VC and PE market, leading some to seek value realization through overseas partnerships [3] - There is a need for more operationally feasible measures to open up market access, as relaxing listing requirements will alter the existing stress structure of the ChiNext and Sci-Tech Innovation Board [3][4] - A market-based incentive and constraint framework should be established based on the principle of equal rights and responsibilities, ensuring that sponsors bear clear responsibilities without exceeding their risk management capabilities [4] Group 3 - The capital market's role as a "testing ground" for innovative assets requires improvements in the standards for qualified investors, moving beyond a narrow definition based solely on financial capacity [4][5] - Regulatory efforts should focus on providing sufficient space for market self-governance rather than heavily regulating sponsors and defining qualified investors, which would facilitate the acceptance of unprofitable innovative enterprises [5] - The nurturing of the market's trial-and-error process is essential for the capital market to effectively support China's innovative assets, with a focus on protecting the legitimate rights and interests of market participants [5]

Core Viewpoint - The core regulatory principle of "tracing the actual controllers of listed companies to natural persons or state-owned entities, with clear and stable equity" aims to ensure effective corporate governance and protect the rights of minority investors, but it has led to issues due to the predominance of natural persons as actual controllers [1] Existing Issues and Contradictions - There are institutional limitations in corporate governance structures, as the dominance of natural persons as actual controllers in A-share companies leads to a model where ownership and management are combined, restricting modern governance development and causing short-term strategic focus [2] - Natural person controllers face limitations in resources, strategy, governance, and integration, leading to challenges in industry upgrading and sustained growth as companies mature [2] - Private equity (PE) firms are unable to become actual controllers of listed companies, which suppresses effective participation of long-term capital and weakens the long-term growth potential of listed companies [3] - Most private equity funds cannot meet the requirements for actual controllers, leading to a focus on short-term trading in the secondary market, which exacerbates the disconnect between primary and secondary investment markets and diminishes governance levels [3][4] - Regulatory policies often fail to produce sustainable effects, trapping the A-share market in a cycle of limited growth, with IPO controls and merger policies failing to break through the actual controller principle [4] Systemic Reform Suggestions and Path Design - The first phase involves clarifying governance structure reform directions and initiating pilot programs for long-term capital and professional management teams to form evergreen funds, allowing them to participate in the management of listed companies [5] - The second phase encourages the separation of ownership and management, establishing a governance structure linked to long-term development, and allowing evergreen funds to qualify as actual controllers for IPOs [6] - The third phase focuses on comprehensive marketization and modernization of governance, promoting legal reforms to support mergers and acquisitions as a standard growth path for companies [8] Strengthening Long-term Capital Guidance Mechanisms - The goal is to enhance corporate quality and investor confidence, creating a virtuous cycle in the Chinese capital market, fostering competitive companies, and activating substantial financial risk capital [9]