Group 1 - The German 10-year government bond yield increased by 0.2 basis points to 2.528%, trading within a range of 2.504%-2.540% during the day, mostly hovering around 2.525% [1] - The 2-year German bond yield rose by 1.2 basis points to 1.798%, with daily trading between 1.764%-1.804%, showing a pattern of "high-level fluctuations" [1] - The 30-year German bond yield decreased by 1.8 basis points to 2.999%, reaching a daily high of 3.034% before experiencing a downward adjustment [1] Group 2 - The yield spread between the 2-year and 10-year German bonds fell by 1.091 basis points to +72.550 basis points [1]

南非10年期国债收益率跌破10%，为3年来首次。 ...

美国2年期至10年期国债收益率跌至5月9日以来的最低水平。 ...

丨证券研究报告丨 固定收益丨点评报告 [Table_Title] 震荡市，寻找可能的边际变化 报告要点 [Table_Summary] 当前债市震荡行情已经维持较长时间，债市为何震荡——当前债市的估值偏贵，这使得债市难 以对一般的利好信息进行定价反映；债市将出现哪些边际变化——债市对中美贸易摩擦已逐渐 脱敏，当前资金价格已基本接近上沿，且当前债市对基本面的变化也并不十分敏感。预计在稳 增长政策出台前债市收益率整体依然震荡下行，建议 10 年期国债收益率在 1.65%-1.7%之间逢 调配置，另外关注短端同业存单的配置机会。 分析师及联系人 [Table_Author] 赵增辉 SAC：S0490524080003 SFC：BVN394 请阅读最后评级说明和重要声明 %% %% %% %% research.95579.com 1 丨证券研究报告丨 cjzqdt11111 2025-06-04 固定收益丨点评报告 [Table_Title2] 震荡市，寻找可能的边际变化 [Table_Summary2] 事件描述 今年以来债市的典型特点是快速走完行情+随后长时间窄幅震荡，直到后一个超预期事件发生， 债市再次短时 ...

Report Industry Investment Rating - Not provided in the given content Core View - In May, the bond market showed differentiation. Interest rate bonds mostly had rising yields, while credit bonds generally had falling yields. There was no obvious α in the industry dimension of credit bonds, a significant negative α in 10 - year - plus treasury bonds, and a certain α in insurance company bonds. Among public bond funds, hybrid bond - type secondary funds had the leading average increase in May [1][2][10]. Summary by Relevant Catalogs 1. Each Variety Yield Panorama - In May, the bond market performance was differentiated. For interest rate bonds, the yields of treasury bonds and China Development Bank bonds increased by an average of 4BP, and the yields of local government bonds decreased by an average of 1BP. For credit bonds, almost all credit bond varieties had falling yields, with the 7 - year, AA + and below implicit - rated commercial bank ordinary bonds having the largest yield decline of 19BP on average [11]. - As of May 31, the historical percentile levels of interest rate bond yields were relatively high, especially for short - term varieties. Most interest rate bond varieties had a three - year historical percentile level of over 8%, and the 1 - year treasury bond had the highest three - year historical percentile of 20%. For credit bonds, low - grade long - term financial bond varieties had relatively high historical percentile levels of yields, with the 7 - year, 10 - year, and 5 - year AA - bank secondary capital bonds having the top three percentile levels of 18%, 17%, and 15% respectively [13]. 2. Industry Alpha Tracking - In the industry dimension, credit bonds in various industries generally rose in May, with an average net - price change of 0.14%. The increases in each industry were relatively balanced, and there was no obvious α. The mining and financial industries had relatively small increases of 0.09% and 0.07% respectively [17]. - In the real - estate bond sector, AAA - rated and public - enterprise real - estate bonds had obvious positive α in May. The average net - price increase of AAA real - estate bonds was 0.18%, significantly higher than other real - estate bond varieties. Public - enterprise bonds had an average increase of 1.38%, far higher than other enterprise - type real - estate bonds. The top - rising bond was Vanke Bond with a net - price increase of about 4%, while the top - falling bonds were 24 Lianfa MTN004 and 22 Longhu 03, with net - price decreases of 0.56% and 4.48% respectively [21]. - In the urban investment bond sector, all regional urban investment bonds had rising net prices in May, with an overall increase of 0.15%. Hebei and Tianjin had obvious positive α, with average increases of 0.23% and 0.22% respectively. Guangxi had the smallest increase of 0.06%. AA - urban investment bonds had negative α, with an average net - price decrease of 0.02% [28]. - In the financial bond sector, there was little difference in the net - price changes of financial bonds of various ratings and types in May, and no obvious α appeared. The top - rising bonds were 24 Yuandong IV, 24 Yuandong Leasing MTN005, and 25 Ganzhou Leasing 01, with net - price increases of 1.03%, 1.03%, and 0.84% respectively. The top - falling bonds were 21 Shenzhen Jushenghua 02 and 21 Shenzhen Jushenghua 01, with net - price decreases of 6.55% and 6.69% respectively [31]. 3. Term Alpha Tracking - In May, 10 - year - plus treasury bonds had a significant negative α. The change rate of 10 - year - plus treasury bonds in May was - 1.5%, significantly higher than other interest rate bond varieties. The reasons were that the yield increase of ultra - long - term interest rate bonds in May exceeded other term varieties, and the yield increase of ultra - long - term treasury bonds was significantly higher than that of local government bonds [37]. - Among long - term representative bonds, the ultra - long - term credit bond 23 Sanxia K2 led the increase in May, with a monthly increase of 0.49% [42]. 4. Sub - Alpha Tracking - In May, insurance company bonds had a certain α. The average increase of insurance company bonds in May was 0.1%, 0.03% higher than that of commercial bank ordinary bonds and sub - bonds. The α of insurance company bonds mainly came from the fact that the yield decline of insurance capital supplementary bonds within 7 years in May was greater than that of commercial bank bonds and sub - bonds, and the long - term bond scale of these three varieties was relatively small, so short - and medium - term interest rate fluctuations had a more significant impact on the overall price [44]. 5. May Public Bond Fund Ranking - In May, hybrid bond - type secondary funds led other types of public bond funds in average change rate. The average change rate of hybrid bond - type secondary funds was 0.41%, that of hybrid bond - type primary funds was 0.27%, that of short - term pure - bond funds was 0.18%, and that of medium - and long - term pure - bond funds was 0.12% [47].

日本20年期国债收益率上涨1个基点，至2.405%。 ...

关税政策再生变数，叠加资金面宽松，债市震荡回暖 ——利率债周报（2025.5.26-2025.6.1） 作者 东方金诚 研究发展部 分析师 瞿瑞 部门执行总监 冯琳 关注东方金诚公众号 获取更多研究报告 利率债周报 一、上周市场回顾 时间 2025 年 6 月 3 日 核心观点 ⚫ 上周债市震荡回暖，长债收益率明显下行。上周（5 月 26 日当 周），基金等机构赎回压力、存单价格走高、美国法院"叫停" 特朗普关税等因素对债市造成利空扰动，但在资金面宽松以及 上周五美国上诉法院暂时恢复实施特朗普政府关税政策提振下， 债市整体震荡回暖，长债收益率明显下行。短端利率方面，尽 管上周央行持续净投放支撑资金跨月无忧，但债市短端利率下 行动力不足，整体小幅上行，收益率曲线趋于平坦化。 本周（6 月 2 日当周）债市料将震荡偏暖。从基本面来看，虽 然 5 月官方制造业 PMI 回升至 49.5，但仍处于收缩区间，显示 关税政策带来的外部压力犹存。从资金面来看，尽管本周逆回 购到期量大，但适逢月初资金较为充裕，资金面大概率将维持 宽松格局。同时考虑到中美贸易摩擦不确定性再度攀升，俄乌 冲突进一步升级，市场避险情绪快速升温，预 ...

Group 1: Report Industry Investment Rating - No relevant content provided Group 2: Core Views of the Report - In May, the interest rate was in a volatile market, and the decline of the capital center opened up the carry trade space. Institutions chased credit products with relatively high coupon yields, and funds became the main buyers, driving the credit spreads to narrow across the board. The 3 - 5 - year medium - and low - grade bonds performed better. In June, the supply - demand pattern of credit bonds is unfavorable, and the cost - performance of credit bonds has declined, which may lead to the widening of credit spreads. It is not recommended to chase low - grade medium - and long - term bonds, but there is no need to rush to take profits on medium - and long - term credit bonds. Instead, consider taking profits in mid - to late July. In June, when the coupon and credit spreads are both at low levels, it is appropriate to explore the riding opportunities of medium - and high - grade varieties, especially the 4 - year medium - and high - grade bonds. [1][2][24] - For bank capital bonds, the cost - performance of long - term large - bank capital bonds for insurance institutions is still low, and the allocation demand is difficult to recover in the short term. It may depend more on the start of the trading market. In the process of waiting, coupon assets can still be pursued, and there is still cost - performance in sinking the credit of medium - and short - term bonds. [3] Group 3: Summary According to the Directory 1. June Credit: Sinking within 3 Years and Riding Medium - and High - Grade Bonds 1.1. It is not advisable to chase high for low - grade medium - and long - term bonds. Explore the riding opportunities of medium - and high - grade 4 - year bonds - In May, the bond market was defensive, and the long - end interest rate fluctuated. The decline of the capital center opened up the carry trade space, and funds became the main buyers of credit bonds, driving the credit spreads to narrow across the board. The 3 - 5 - year medium - and low - grade bonds in urban investment bonds performed better, with yields down 12 - 16bp and credit spreads narrowing 12 - 18bp. [8][9] - In June, the demand for credit bonds is facing a decline in the scale of wealth management products at the end of the quarter, while the supply side will see an increase in issuance and net financing month - on - month. The unfavorable supply - demand pattern and the decline in the cost - performance of credit bonds may lead to the widening of credit spreads. [13][16] - In May, the market for low - grade 3 - 5 - year bonds was extreme. There is no need to rush to take profits on medium - and long - term credit bonds in June, but it is not recommended to chase low - grade medium - and long - term bonds. [22][24] - In June, when the coupon and credit spreads are at low levels, it is appropriate to explore the riding opportunities of medium - and high - grade varieties. The current convex point is at the 4 - year term, and the 4 - year medium - and high - grade urban investment bonds are worth deploying. It is also possible to consider replacing 5 - year bonds with similar 4 - year bonds to improve the risk - return ratio of the portfolio. In addition, 3 - year AA(2) and AA urban investment bonds have both coupon income and liquidity and can be used as defensive investment products. [29][30][33] 1.2. Bank capital bonds are waiting for the start of the trading market - In May, institutions valued the coupon cost - performance when allocating bank capital bonds. Medium - and small - bank capital bonds and AA - perpetual bonds with coupon advantages performed better, while the performance of 1 - year large - bank capital bonds and 4 - 5 - year AAA - bank capital bonds was poor. [36] - The cost - performance of long - term large - bank capital bonds for insurance institutions is still low, and the allocation demand is difficult to recover in the short term. The performance of long - term large - bank capital bonds may depend more on the start of the interest - rate bond trading market. In the process of waiting, coupon assets can still be pursued, and there is cost - performance in sinking the credit of medium - and short - term bonds. [38][45] 2. Urban Investment Bonds: The Issuance Interest Rates Have Declined across the Board, and the Buying Interest Remains High - In May, the issuance scale of urban investment bonds continued to decline year - on - year, and the net financing was negative, but the overall issuance sentiment was good. The proportion of 3 - 5 - year issuance continued to rise slightly, and the issuance interest rates of all terms declined, with relatively large declines in the medium - and short - term. [48][49] - The secondary - market buying interest in urban investment bonds was high in May, but the trading sentiment declined in the last week. The trading volume was gradually extended in terms of duration, and the low - grade varieties had a high proportion of trading volume. [58] - The yields of public urban investment bonds in each province declined in May, with the 2 - 3 - year medium - and low - grade bonds performing better. [60] 3. Industrial Bonds: Both Issuance and Net Financing Increased Year - on - Year, and the Yields Declined across the Board - In May, the issuance and net financing of industrial bonds increased year - on - year. The industries with large net financing scales include comprehensive, building decoration, chemical, and transportation industries. The proportion of issuance within 1 year increased significantly, and the issuance interest rates within 3 years declined significantly, while the 3 - 5 - year issuance interest rates increased slightly. [62][64] - The yields of industrial bonds declined across the board in May. Low - grade bonds with coupon advantages and 7 - year medium - and high - grade bonds performed better. The yields of public bonds in each industry declined by 7 - 21bp, with 1 - year AA, 1 - 3 - year AA + and AA performing better. [65][69] 4. Bank Capital Bonds: Low - Grade Bonds Performed Better, and the Trading Sentiment Was Weak - In May 2025, the issuance scale of bank capital bonds increased year - on - year, but due to the large amount of maturity redemptions, the net financing scale decreased year - on - year. [72] - The yields of bank capital bonds generally declined in May, and most of the credit spreads narrowed. Low - grade perpetual bonds performed better, while large - bank capital bonds performed weakly. [76]

Core Insights - The panda bond market, once considered niche, has seen a significant increase in issuance, becoming an important window for China's capital market opening [1] - Panda bonds are RMB-denominated bonds issued by foreign entities in China's bond market, with issuance from various types of foreign issuers [1] - The issuance scale of panda bonds reached historical highs of 150 billion and 190 billion RMB in 2023 and 2024 respectively, with total issuance surpassing 1 trillion RMB [1][2] Expansion Drivers - The panda bond market has evolved from a small-scale market with only 113 million RMB in issuance over its first decade to a rapidly expanding market due to several factors [2] - Key drivers include the continuous high-level opening of China's capital market, significant cost advantages of RMB bond financing, and the acceleration of RMB internationalization [2][4] - The 2015 currency reform marked a turning point, leading to a surge in panda bond issuance as offshore financing costs rose [2][3] Market Diversification - The panda bond market has diversified in terms of issuers, issuance methods, investors, and the use of raised funds [6] - The proportion of foreign issuers has increased significantly, with foreign entities accounting for approximately 39.17% and 44.64% of issuances in 2024 and 2025 respectively [6] - New issuers from various regions, including South America, have entered the market, expanding the geographical diversity of panda bond issuers [6] Investor Base and Product Innovation - The market has attracted a broader range of international investors, including foreign central banks, enhancing the investor base [7] - There has been a notable increase in the issuance of specialized panda bond products, such as sustainable bonds, reflecting innovation in the market [7] - The proportion of medium to long-term bonds has also increased, indicating a shift in market dynamics [7] Fund Utilization - The use of funds raised through panda bonds has become more flexible, with a growing proportion of funds being used for overseas purposes [8][9] - Domestic enterprises primarily use raised funds for debt repayment, while foreign enterprises tend to allocate funds for operational activities [9][10] Regulatory and Structural Improvements - Continuous improvements in regulatory frameworks and market rules have facilitated the growth of the panda bond market [11] - Innovative mechanisms in the issuance process have enhanced the efficiency and attractiveness of panda bonds for both issuers and investors [11][12] - Future expectations include further innovations and optimizations in regulatory arrangements to enhance the market's structure and internationalization [12][13]

债市的长期方向和短期过渡策略 20250602 从历史数据来看，票息策略是否能够长期有效？ 摘要 当前债市利差分化，部分品种利差收窄，而如 20 年期票息、不同期限 国开债与非国开债、长久期地方债等利差则出现分化。投资者应提前布 局兼顾票息和流动性的品种，而非过度追求高票息。 历史数据显示，自 2020 年以来，单纯的票息策略难以长期有效，尤其 是在 2022 年至 2023 年期间。未来市场中，票息策略更多是过渡性策 略，需结合市场整体利率走势进行调整。 宏观政策转向可能导致流动性收紧，各类利率及信用风险溢价上升；石 油价格快速上涨可能突破国债收益率下限，扩大信用风险溢价。高信用 风险溢价或低流动性品种难以跑赢其他资产。 政策降息空间有限，但广谱贷款降幅尚未完全定价，后续仍有调整空间。 今年三季度资本收益预期较高，7 至 8 月或存在资本收益机会，值得关 注。 6 月是关键过渡期，资金利率不确定性降低，银行提前发存单补充流动 性。策略应从票息转向兼顾流动性，关注 10 年和 30 年非活跃券、10 年非国开债、10 年地方债、五年以上高评级信用债及新一代 ETF。 Q&A 当前市场利差压缩的主要特征是什么？ ...