【导读】银行代销逻辑从"卖产品"到"拼服务"，项目制合作渐成主流 中国基金报记者 曹雯璟 方丽 今年以来，银行与基金公司之间的合作模式正在悄然发生变化。相比以往以规模和销量为核心的合作逻 辑，银行端在产品准入、合作方式以及营销打法上，都呈现出更加精细化、体系化的趋势，其背后既有 公募基金行业改革的推动，也有存量时代客户经营压力加大的现实因素。 业内人士表示，整体来看，银行与基金公司的合作正在从"通道型代销"迈向"深度协同"，从"卖产品"转 向"共建客户长期价值"。在这一过程中，基金公司的投研实力、服务能力和组织协同水平，正成为能否 进入核心合作池的关键指标。 银行代销逻辑从"卖产品"到"拼服务" 项目制合作渐成主流 趋势一：合作逻辑重塑：从销量导向到综合能力评估 创金合信基金表示，随着公募基金行业改革的持续推进，银行与基金公司的合作逻辑正在发生明显变 化。相比以往更强调规模和销量，今年银行端更加聚焦客户体验与存量经营，合作模式也正从"单一产 品销售"向"综合服务与能力协同"转变。 比如合作评价维度更加多元。部分银行已引入"项目制"或"招标制"合作模式，不再仅以短期业绩作为核 心标准，而是从产品表现、投研能力、 ...

Core Insights - The conference organized by China Chengxin International Credit Rating Co., Ltd. focused on the outlook for credit risk in 2026, emphasizing the importance of optimizing economic structure and technological innovation for high-quality development during the 14th Five-Year Plan period [1][2] Group 1: Economic Outlook - The president of China Chengxin International highlighted that the ongoing optimization of economic structure and the steady transition of new and old growth drivers create favorable conditions for high-quality development [1] - The economic growth target for 2026 is likely to remain around 5%, with a relatively low difficulty in achieving this goal as the actual GDP growth rate in the fourth quarter only needs to reach 4.6% [3] Group 2: Risk Management and Technology - The integration of artificial intelligence and big data into financial services is crucial for enhancing risk management capabilities in a complex risk environment [2] - The development of index products is essential for risk identification, pricing, and diversification, providing objective benchmarks for efficient capital allocation [2] - A forward-looking, intelligent, and reliable credit risk prevention system is necessary for the healthy and stable operation of the credit market [2]

Core Insights - The public fund industry continues to show a "stronger getting stronger" trend, with significant differentiation among firms, particularly in the non-monetary fund scale rankings as of Q3 2025 [1] Industry Overview - As of Q3 2025, there are 47 companies with over 100 billion in scale, 19 with over 300 billion, and 14 firms surpassing 500 billion [1] - The competition among firms ranked 11th to 20th is intense, with notable disparities in growth and ranking dynamics [1] Company Performance - **招商基金 (China Merchants Fund)**: Q3 scale growth of 316.21 billion, ranking dropped by 1 to 11th, and is the only firm in this tier with negative growth compared to the beginning of the year [3] - **国泰基金 (Guotai Fund)**: Achieved a remarkable growth of 967.66 billion in Q3, moving up 2 ranks to 13th, indicating strong expansion in index products [3] - **鹏华基金 (Penghua Fund)**: Experienced a growth of 527.24 billion, but its position is threatened by Guotai Fund, with the gap narrowing significantly [3] - **中欧基金 (China Europe Fund)**: Maintained stable ranking with a growth of 775.19 billion, showcasing strong internal growth momentum [4] - **永赢基金 (Yongying Fund)**: Also stable in ranking, with a growth of 703.87 billion, indicating robust performance [4] - **天弘基金 (Tianhong Fund)**: Had a modest growth of 235.60 billion, resulting in a drop of 2 ranks to 16th [4] - **兴证全球基金 (Xingzheng Global Fund)**: The only firm in the top 20 to experience a slight decline of 5.30 billion in scale, indicating increased pressure to maintain its position [4]

1. Report Industry Investment Rating No relevant content provided. 2. Core Viewpoints of the Report - After the "Jiusan" consensus was fulfilled, the market entered a moderately shrinking rotation phase, with broad - based index gains narrowing. The basis showed significant two - way fluctuations, weakly correlated with daily index movements, and the divergence at the 1 - minute level increased, indicating weak and disordered risk sentiment in the futures market. The changes in neutral and CTA strategy products also reflected this. In the short term, the two - way basis fluctuations may continue, and in the long run, if the policy of reducing volatility is implemented, the central level of stock index futures discounts may narrow [5][15]. 3. Summary According to the Directory 3.1 Recent Basis Review - Market Conditions: After the "Jiusan" consensus was fulfilled, the market entered a moderately shrinking rotation phase. The ChiNext and STAR Market indices led the gains in September, while the gains of other indices narrowed, and the small - cap index declined. Domestic policies were relatively quiet, with a focus on "anti - involution" and potential future volatility - reduction policies. Overseas, the Fed cut interest rates by 25bp, and the A - share market reacted calmly to the Sino - US Madrid talks. Daily trading volume gradually decreased to around 2.2 trillion yuan [6]. - Basis Changes: At the beginning of September, the basis of each variety weakened with the index decline. Subsequently, it fluctuated up and down during the index recovery. By the end of the month, the basis of IF, IC, and IM strengthened. Overall, the basis of IH and IF decreased compared to the end of August, while that of IC and IM increased. As of September 30, the annualized basis rates of the four varieties' quarterly contracts had recovered to around the 20th percentile in the past three years. The daily - level basis changes were weakly correlated with index changes, and there was significant divergence at the 1 - minute level, indicating weak risk appetite [9]. - Product - end Performance: Index - related product scale was stable with a slight decline, and the number of newly issued public - offering index - enhanced products reached a new monthly high. The net value curve of neutral strategies flattened in the past two months, with a median annual return of around 5.5%, and both long and short positions decreased in September. The CTA strategy's leverage ratio for stock indices remained stable, but the net long position fluctuated significantly, reflecting disordered market sentiment [14]. 3.2 Performance Review of Long - Position Rollover - The annualized excess returns of the long - position rollover strategy for IF, IH, IC, and IM in the past 250 trading days were - 2.7%, 0.2%, 1.2%, and - 3.0% respectively. The benchmark portfolio was set as a weighted combination based on the previous trading day's contract positions, without considering transaction costs, and the trading price was the TWAP price in the first half - hour of trading [5][22]. 3.3 Performance Review of Short - Position Rollover - The annualized excess returns of the short - position rollover strategy for IF, IH, IC, and IM in the past 250 trading days were - 0.5%, - 0.3%, 2.2%, and 0.6% respectively [5][25].