Core Viewpoint - The impending deadline for the transformation of "publicly offered large collective" products is leading to significant changes in the asset management landscape for securities firms, with many products being transferred to public funds or facing liquidation [1][2]. Group 1: Transformation of Large Collective Products - The 2018 asset management regulations require securities firms to complete the public offering transformation of "publicly offered large collective" products by the end of 2025, leaving limited time for existing products [2]. - Many securities firms are transferring their large collective products to affiliated public funds, such as Everbright Fund taking over products from Everbright Securities Asset Management [2]. - Some firms are also transferring products to public funds without direct equity relationships, as seen with Wanlian Securities transferring its money market fund to Ping An Fund [2]. Group 2: Liquidation and Private Fund Transition - For products that do not meet the public offering transformation criteria or are smaller in scale, securities firms often opt to convert them into private fund plans or liquidate them, with liquidation being the more common outcome [3]. - Several securities firms, including Everbright Securities and Huatai Securities, have announced the liquidation of some of their products in the fourth quarter [3]. Group 3: Public Fund Opportunities - Public funds view the acquisition of large collective products as an opportunity to enhance their management scale and diversify their product offerings, particularly favoring money market and large equity products [4]. - For instance, Shenyin Wanguo Securities' two money market funds, with a combined scale of approximately 29 billion yuan, are set to be transferred to Shenwan Hongyuan Fund, potentially bringing significant new capital [4]. Group 4: Challenges for Smaller Products - Smaller products, especially those in the bond category, are often not considered by public funds due to low management fees that do not cover operational costs, leading to a higher likelihood of liquidation [5]. - The recent phase of securities firms transitioning to public offerings appears to be concluding, as evidenced by the removal of the last securities firm from the approval list for public fund management [6]. Group 5: Future Strategies for Securities Firms - Securities firms are now focusing on developing smaller collective products, which often have self-operated or customized attributes, but face stability challenges [7]. - Many firms are working to establish multi-strategy investment departments and are exploring overseas investment products to attract more capital [7].

Core Viewpoint - The withdrawal of public fund license applications by Guojin Securities Asset Management marks the end of the "application boom" for broker asset management public licenses that began in 2023, indicating a shift towards deep adjustment and differentiated development in the industry [1][2]. Group 1: License Application Trends - The surge in applications for public licenses began in May 2022 when the CSRC relaxed restrictions on the number of public licenses, allowing broker asset management subsidiaries to apply [2]. - In 2023, six institutions, including China Merchants Asset Management and Xingye Asset Management, submitted applications, but only two received licenses that year [2]. - By 2024, there were no new public licenses granted, and by late 2025, several broker asset management firms began withdrawing their applications [2][4]. Group 2: Regulatory Context and Industry Response - The timing of the withdrawal coincides with the approaching deadline for the Asset Management New Regulations, which require brokers to complete the public transformation of their products by the end of 2025 [4]. - Many broker asset management firms are transferring their public products to affiliated fund companies as a common strategy to comply with the regulations [4]. Group 3: Market Dynamics and Future Directions - The withdrawal of public license applications has led to a clear differentiation in the development paths of broker asset management firms, with only 14 out of 30 firms obtaining public qualifications [5]. - Firms with public licenses are encouraged to seek differentiated advantages in a competitive market, while those without may focus on traditional strengths in private asset management [5]. - The private asset management sector is experiencing a resurgence, with the scale of private products reaching 5.73 trillion yuan by September 2025, an increase of approximately 270 billion yuan from the end of 2024 [5].

Core Viewpoint - The withdrawal of public fund license applications by Guojin Asset Management marks the end of the queue for securities asset management subsidiaries, indicating a significant shift in the industry landscape [1][5]. Group 1: License Application Trends - In 2023, there was a surge in applications for public fund licenses from securities asset management subsidiaries, driven by regulatory changes that eased restrictions [4]. - By the end of 2024, there were no approvals for public fund licenses, leading to a complete withdrawal of applications by various firms in 2025 [5]. Group 2: Industry Response to Regulatory Changes - The withdrawal of applications is linked to the 2018 asset management regulations, which require securities firms to complete the public offering transformation of their products by the end of 2025 [6]. - Many firms are transferring their public fund products to affiliated fund management companies as a common strategy to comply with the new regulations [6]. Group 3: Differentiation in the Market - The withdrawal of public fund license applications has led to a clear differentiation in the development paths of securities asset management firms, with only 14 out of 30 firms obtaining public fund qualifications [7]. - Firms with public fund licenses are encouraged to seek differentiation in a competitive market, while those without may focus on traditional strengths in private asset management [7]. - As of September 2025, the scale of private asset management products from securities firms reached 5.73 trillion yuan, reflecting a growth of approximately 270 billion yuan from the end of 2024 [7].

Core Viewpoint - The withdrawal of public fund license applications by brokerage asset management subsidiaries indicates a significant shift in the industry, with all applications now retracted, leading to a "clean slate" in the approval queue [2][3][7]. Group 1: License Application Trends - In 2023, a surge in applications for public fund licenses occurred, driven by regulatory changes that eased restrictions on the number of licenses [6]. - By the end of 2024, there was a complete halt in the approval of new public fund licenses, with several brokerage asset management firms withdrawing their applications in 2025 [7]. Group 2: Industry Response to Regulatory Changes - The withdrawal of applications is closely linked to the 2018 asset management regulations, which require brokerages to complete the public offering transformation of their products by the end of 2025 [9]. - As the deadline approaches, many brokerage asset management firms are transferring their public fund products to affiliated fund management companies, a common strategy observed in the industry [9]. Group 3: Differentiation in Business Strategies - The withdrawal of public fund license applications has led to a clear divergence in the development paths of brokerage asset management firms, with only 14 out of 30 firms obtaining public fund qualifications [11]. - Firms with public fund licenses are encouraged to seek differentiation in a competitive market, while those without may focus on traditional strengths in private asset management [11]. - The private asset management sector is experiencing a revival, with the scale of private asset management products reaching 5.73 trillion yuan by September 2025, an increase of approximately 270 billion yuan from the end of 2024 [11].

Core Viewpoint - The approval process for public fund management licenses for securities asset management subsidiaries has effectively come to a halt, with no firms currently in the queue for applications, indicating a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for the industry [1][2][3]. Group 1: License Application Status - As of November 28, no securities asset management firms are listed as pending for public fund management licenses, marking a complete withdrawal of applications from the previous week [2][3]. - The initial wave of applications for public licenses was driven by policy relaxations, particularly the "one participation, one control" policy introduced in May 2022, which allowed for a limited increase in the number of public licenses [2][3]. - In 2023, six securities asset management firms submitted applications for public licenses, but only two, China Merchants Asset Management and Everbright Securities Asset Management, were granted licenses [2][3]. Group 2: Regulatory Changes and Industry Impact - The 2018 asset management regulations mandated that securities asset management products transition to public fund management by the end of 2025, leading to a rush among firms to comply [4][5]. - With the deadline approaching, firms that have not obtained public licenses are exploring alternative paths, including changing management to public fund institutions, liquidating products, or transitioning to private fund management [4][5]. - Notably, some firms are transferring their public fund products to affiliated fund companies, while others are engaging in cross-industry management arrangements, which is becoming increasingly rare [5].

Core Viewpoint - The application for public fund management licenses by several brokerage asset management subsidiaries has completely ceased, indicating a significant shift in the industry as the deadline for compliance with new regulations approaches [2][3][6]. Group 1: License Application Status - As of November 28, no brokerage asset management companies are in line to apply for public fund licenses, marking a complete withdrawal of applications [3][6]. - Initially, four companies, including Guotai Junan Asset Management, were in the queue for public licenses, but all have now withdrawn their applications [2][6]. - The regulatory environment has shifted, with indications that no new public fund licenses will be granted to brokerage asset management firms [6][8]. Group 2: Regulatory Background - The asset management industry is under pressure to complete the transformation of "public collective" products to comply with regulations by the end of 2025 [7][9]. - The 2018 regulations required brokerage asset management products to align with public fund management standards, leading to a rush for licenses following the easing of restrictions in 2022 [5][7]. Group 3: Industry Response and Future Directions - With the deadline approaching, brokerage asset management firms are exploring various paths, including changing management, liquidation, or transitioning to private fund management [9][10]. - Some firms are transferring their collective products to affiliated public fund companies, while others are opting for private asset management plans [10][11]. - Notably, there are instances of cross-industry management changes, where firms without affiliated fund companies are engaging unrelated fund management firms [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the complete withdrawal of several brokerage asset management subsidiaries from the public fund license application process, indicating a significant shift in the industry as the deadline for compliance with new regulations approaches [2][3][6]. Group 1: License Application Status - As of November 28, no brokerage asset management companies are currently in line to apply for public fund licenses, marking a total withdrawal from the application process [3]. - Initially, four companies, including Guotai Junan Asset Management, were in the queue for public fund licenses, but all have now withdrawn their applications [2][6]. - The withdrawal of applications is seen as a response to regulatory signals indicating that no new public fund licenses would be granted to brokerage asset management firms [6]. Group 2: Regulatory Background - The asset management industry is undergoing a transformation due to the 2018 regulations requiring brokerage firms to convert their "public collective" products to comply with public fund standards by the end of 2025 [8]. - The transition has led to various strategies, including changing management to public fund institutions, converting products to private funds, or liquidation [9]. Group 3: Industry Trends - The article notes that only 14 out of 30 brokerage asset management subsidiaries have successfully obtained public fund licenses, with the majority of applications failing to progress [7]. - The trend of transferring management of collective products to affiliated public fund companies is becoming common among brokerage firms, as seen with companies like CITIC Asset Management and GF Asset Management [10]. - Some firms are also exploring partnerships with unrelated fund companies for managing their products, indicating a diversification of management strategies [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The once-booming competition among brokerage asset management firms for public fund licenses is clearly retreating, with several firms withdrawing their applications, indicating a shift in strategy and market conditions [1][2][5]. Group 1: Withdrawal of Applications - The recent trend shows a significant number of brokerage asset management firms, including Guotai Junan Asset Management, Guangfa Asset Management, and Guosen Asset Management, have suspended their applications for public fund licenses, leaving only Guojin Asset Management in the queue [1][2]. - Guosen Asset Management submitted its application in October 2023 but has not received any feedback, highlighting the uncertainty in the approval process [3]. Group 2: Market Environment and Strategic Choices - The collective withdrawal from public fund license applications reflects a more cautious strategic choice by brokerage asset management firms in the current market environment, rather than a fundamental devaluation of public fund licenses [5]. - The tightening of regulations and intense competition in the public fund industry has led some asset management firms to reassess their cost-benefit ratios, opting to withdraw if they lack sufficient resources or competitive advantages [5][6]. Group 3: Regulatory Context and Future Implications - The approval process for public fund licenses has slowed significantly since the initial surge in applications in 2023, with only a few firms receiving approvals, indicating a potential "zero release" situation in 2024 [3][4]. - The impending deadline for brokerage firms to complete the transformation of their collective asset management products by the end of 2025 adds pressure, prompting some firms to seek alternative solutions to alleviate transformation stress [6][7].

Group 1 - The trend of brokerage asset management firms withdrawing applications for public fund licenses is evident, with several firms like Guotai Junan Asset Management and Guangfa Asset Management halting their applications, leaving only Guojin Asset Management in the queue [1][2][4] - The approval process for public fund licenses has significantly slowed down after a surge in applications in 2023, with only a few firms receiving approvals, indicating a stark contrast to the previous year's enthusiasm [4][5] - The collective withdrawal from public fund license applications reflects a more cautious strategic choice by brokerage asset management firms in the current market environment, rather than a fundamental devaluation of public fund licenses [6][7] Group 2 - The tightening of regulations and intense competition in the public fund industry have led some asset management firms to reassess their cost-benefit ratios, resulting in a more rational decision to withdraw from applications [6][7] - The impending deadline for the transformation of brokerage collective asset management products into public offerings by the end of 2025 adds pressure on firms, prompting them to seek alternative solutions to alleviate transformation stress [7][8] - Some firms have begun transferring their collective asset management products to affiliated fund management companies as a strategy to comply with regulatory requirements while awaiting public fund license approvals [8]

Core Insights - The securities industry reported strong growth in the first three quarters of 2025, with 42 listed brokerages achieving a revenue increase of over 42% year-on-year and a net profit growth of over 62% [1][2] - However, the asset management (AM) sector lagged significantly, with a mere growth rate of 2.43%, indicating deeper industry concerns and challenges [1][2] Revenue Performance - Total revenue for the 42 listed brokerages reached 419.56 billion yuan, marking a year-on-year increase of 42.55% [2] - The self-operated business accounted for 44.54% of total revenue, while brokerage services contributed 26.64%, together making up over 70% of the revenue [2] - The AM business's growth was starkly contrasted by other sectors, with brokerage services leading at a 74.64% growth rate, followed by interest and self-operated businesses at 54.52% and 43.83%, respectively [2] Institutional Performance - The top three firms in AM revenue were CITIC Securities, GF Securities, and Guotai Junan, with revenues of 8.703 billion yuan, 5.661 billion yuan, and 4.273 billion yuan, respectively [3] - Only 14 out of the 42 listed brokerages reported positive growth in their AM business, indicating a significant divide within the industry [3] Challenges in Asset Management - The AM sector faces dual pressures from scale and profitability, with existing large collective products undergoing a standardization transformation, impacting management scale and revenue [4] - Intense competition from public funds and bank wealth management subsidiaries further constrains the AM sector, which is still developing its active management capabilities [4] - The decline in interest rates and frequent credit risks have limited the supply of high-yield assets, challenging previous investment strategies reliant on high returns [4] Strategic Shifts - A notable trend has emerged where brokerages are withdrawing their applications for public fund licenses, contrasting sharply with the previous rush to apply [5][6] - This withdrawal is seen as a rational choice based on a deep assessment of resources, market conditions, and profit models, signaling a shift from a "license-driven" to a "capability-driven" model [6] - The consensus is forming that public fund licenses are not a panacea, with private fund operations emphasizing professional services and customized solutions becoming more appealing for certain brokerages [6] Recovery in Private Asset Management - Despite the withdrawal from public fund applications, the private asset management sector is experiencing a resurgence, with the scale of private fund products reaching 5.73 trillion yuan, an increase of approximately 270 billion yuan from the end of 2024 [7] - The growth in private fund product registrations indicates the necessity for differentiated strategies, focusing on multi-asset allocation and innovative strategies [7] Future Growth Drivers - Future growth in the AM sector is expected to be driven by two main factors: the completion of public fund transformations leading to secondary growth, and the stabilization and differentiation of private asset management offerings [8] - The focus will likely shift towards low-volatility, high-liquidity products, as well as alternative investments and cross-border allocations [8] Competitive Dynamics - Successful firms like Changcheng Securities and Guojin Securities have achieved over 30% growth by upgrading their "fixed income plus" strategies and integrating financial technology into their operations [9] - The emphasis is on a diversified product matrix and precise timing in investment strategies to capture macro opportunities [9][10] - The integration of AI technology into research and decision-making processes is becoming a core competitive advantage for asset management firms [10]