（上接1版） 在压实信息披露责任方面，披露办法明确压实私募基金管理人的信息披露第一责任，进一步明确私募基 金托管人的信息披露责任，并明确私募基金销售机构信息披露职责及相关关联方配合信息披露义务。 此次发布的披露办法共七章四十四条，主要涉及六个方面的内容： 针对私募证券及股权基金的不同运作特征，披露办法设置了差异化信息披露安排。在披露内容上，私募 证券基金要求披露净值收益费用等财务信息、投资资产、流动性受限资产、跨境投资、托管人复核意见 等信息，私募股权基金要求披露净资产收益费用等财务信息、投资标的、新增及退出投资情况等信息。 在披露频率上，针对私募证券基金、私募股权基金、创业投资基金不同特征设置了差异化安排。 披露办法还强化托管人的职责要求，要求其对私募证券基金财务情况等信息及时进行复核审查，履职过 程中如发现私募基金管理人、私募基金存在已经或者可能对投资者权益产生重大负面影响情形的，应当 提示管理人依法履行信息披露义务，发现基金管理人涉嫌侵占、挪用私募基金财产或者失联等情形的， 应当及时向监管部门报告。 为进一步加大信息披露违法违规行为处罚力度，披露办法明确私募基金管理人、私募基金托管人、私募 基金销售机构 ...

Core Viewpoint - The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has announced the implementation of the "Private Investment Fund Information Disclosure Supervision and Management Measures," effective from September 1, 2026, aimed at enhancing transparency and protecting investors' rights in the private fund sector [1][2]. Group 1: Overview of the Regulation - The "Private Fund Information Disclosure Measures" consists of seven chapters and forty-four articles, focusing on five main areas [2]. - It establishes the principles for information disclosure by private fund managers, custodians, and sales institutions [2]. Group 2: Basic Disclosure Requirements - Private fund managers are required to disclose information according to the fund contract, including content, channels, methods, and frequency [2]. - The regulation outlines the responsibilities of custodians regarding information disclosure and the review of financial information [2]. - It prohibits certain disclosure practices, such as promising investors against losses or guaranteeing minimum returns [2]. Group 3: Reporting Requirements - The regulation specifies the types and content of regular reports for private securities and equity investment funds [3]. - Fund managers must prepare and disclose interim reports promptly in the event of significant occurrences [3]. - Clear guidelines are provided for the disclosure of liquidation announcements and related significant information [3]. Group 4: Management of Disclosure Affairs - Fund managers and custodians are required to establish robust information disclosure management systems [3]. - There are obligations for shareholders, partners, and actual controllers to cooperate in information disclosure [3]. Group 5: Supervision and Legal Responsibilities - The CSRC will supervise the information disclosure activities of private fund managers, custodians, and sales institutions, with the authority to impose administrative penalties for violations [3]. - The regulation will be enforced starting September 1, 2026, with new private funds needing to comply with the new rules upon submission [3]. Group 6: Future Actions - The CSRC plans to enhance the enforcement of the new disclosure measures and promote the healthy development of the private fund industry [4]. - Ongoing efforts will be made to implement the "Private Fund Supervision Regulations" and improve the regulatory framework for private fund operations [4].

私募基金信息披露，是投资者掌握私募基金投资运作情况、保障自身合法权益的基础性制度，也是提高私募基金投资运作 透明度、促进私募基金规范运作的重要保障。 本报记者 吴晓璐 2月27日，证监会发布《私募投资基金信息披露监督管理办法》（以下简称《私募基金信息披露办法》），自2026年9月1 日起施行。 《私募基金信息披露办法》是首部落实《私募投资基金监督管理条例》（以下简称《私募条例》）的行政规章，建立健全 了私募基金信息披露制度体系，包括：压实各市场主体的信息披露责任；全面明确细化披露要求，强化穿透披露；强化风险揭 示，更好保护投资者权益；实施差异化信息披露安排；发挥托管、审计的外部监督作用；加大信息披露违法违规行为处罚力 度。 目前，证监会正在指导中国证券投资基金业协会（以下简称"基金业协会"）同步制定配套实施细则，进一步细化信息披露 具体操作要求，将尽快公开征求意见并发布。 记者了解到，后续，证监会将贯彻落实《私募条例》，按照契合行业特点、提升规则层级的原则，加快推进监管规则制 定，推进形成覆盖机构主体、投资运作、监督约束等各环节的层级清晰、内容完备的行政监管规则体系，夯实私募基金行业规 范运作的制度基础。 提 ...

"'组团'可以让单个项目失败的风险损失减小，同时可投资金总量也更大，容错空间更强，整体长期投 资收益率也可以更高一些。"上述业内人士对记者表示，单个中小公司可以投在私募基金这个领域的资 金量太小了，合作能实现多方共赢。 在中长期资金加速入市的背景下，保险公司通过私募基金布局动作不断。 天眼查信息显示，天津兰沁股权投资合伙企业（有限合伙）（以下简称天津兰沁）于近日成立，泰康人 寿等多家险企现身其合伙人行列。《每日经济新闻》记者注意到，2025年以来，险资参与出资私募股权 基金动作频频，中国人保等头部险企均有新项目面世。 有业内人士表示，在政策持续鼓励"长钱长投"的背景下，险资正加速通过布局私募股权基金等方式，深 度参与国家战略性新兴产业以及与保险主业协同的产业。据悉，私募基金的投资方向主要是投前期股权 和一级市场，可以发挥保险资金特别是寿险资金的长期资本和耐心资本优势。 合伙人队伍十分"豪华" 天眼查公开信息显示，天津兰沁的注册资本为86.01亿元，注册地在天津，执行事务合伙人为高和明德 （北京）企业管理服务有限公司。从经营范围看，天津兰沁的经营范围为以私募基金从事股权投资、投 资管理、资产管理等活动，但须在中 ...

| 自 | 缔造有远见的蔓业传奇 全国企业信用查询系统 | 成都交子科产并购股权投资基金合伙企业(有限合伙) | (x) 查一下 | - | 企业中心 | | 1 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 基本信息 7 | 法律诉讼 | 经营风险 | 经营信息 | 企业发展 1 | 知识产权 | | | | 历史工商信息 工商信息 | | | | 冒 文字介绍 | G 工商官网快照 ▶ | | | | 统一社会信用代码 | 91510104MAK64R0M46 | 企业名称 | 成都交子科产并购股权投资基金合伙企业(有限合伙) | | | | | | 执行事务合伙人 | 成都会控金融发展股权投资基金有限 | 登记状态 | 存续(在营、开业、在册) | 成立日期 | 2026-02-13 | | | | | 公司 | 出资额 | 200000万元 | 实缴资本 | | | | | 组织机构代码 | MAK64R0M-4 | 工商注册号 | 510104202069753 | 纳税人识别号 | 91510104MAK64 | | | | 小学型 | ...

1. Report Industry Investment Rating No relevant content provided. 2. Core Views of the Report - Non - standard risk events have significantly eased in 2025, hitting a new low since 2019, mainly due to the implementation of debt - resolution policies, increased attention and initiative of urban investment platforms in non - standard product payments, and bank replacement of non - standard debts [2][6][26][65]. - However, the risk mitigation is structurally differentiated. Some regions and industries still face risks, and the resolution and clearance of non - standard credit risks remain a long - term task. The potential for non - standard risks to spread to priority debts such as bonds still needs attention [3][26][65]. - The debt security of the real estate industry depends on sales revenue. Without improvement in sales, risks are difficult to eliminate unless there is strong support from the actual controller. Tail risks in industries such as industrial holding, diversified finance, and construction also need to be vigilant [3][26][66]. 3. Summary by Directory 3.1 Non - standard Default Overall Situation - From 2018 - 2025, there were 7,219 non - standard risk events in total. The number of "default events" reached a peak of 978 in 2023, then decreased significantly in 2024 and 2025, with 165 events in 2025, a decrease of 544 from the previous year [6]. - For different financing methods, the number of trust plan risk events increased from 319 in 2019 to 570 in 2023, then decreased to 210 in 2025. The number of directional financing risk events increased significantly in 2023 - 2024 and decreased to 23 in 2025. The number of non - standard events in financing methods such as financial leasing, private funds, collective wealth management, and fund special accounts decreased year by year [6]. - For bond - issuing entities, the number of non - standard risk events in 2025 was 76, a significant decrease from 218 in 2024. The number of non - standard default events decreased by 86 in 2025 compared with the previous year, and the number of non - standard risk warning events decreased by 56 [8][10]. 3.2 Analysis of Urban Investment Non - standard Risk Events 3.2.1 By Province - Guizhou and Shandong had the most non - standard risk events among urban investment bond - issuing entities since 2018. Guizhou's non - standard default events decreased to 4 in 2025 from a peak of 55 in 2023. Shandong's non - standard default events decreased to 9 in 2025 after a sharp increase in 2023 - 2024. Henan, Yunnan, and Shaanxi also saw a significant decrease in non - standard default events in 2025, and Inner Mongolia had no new non - standard risk events in 2025 [28]. 3.2.2 By Urban Investment Hierarchy - Non - standard defaults of urban investment enterprises mainly occurred at the district - county and prefecture - level city levels. The number of non - standard default events of district - county - level urban investment platforms decreased to 12 in 2025 from 110 in 2023. The number of non - standard default events of prefecture - level city urban investment platforms also decreased in 2025. In 2025, there were no new non - standard default events at the provincial level [34]. 3.2.3 By Prefecture - level City (including Development Zones within Prefecture - level Cities) - The top five prefecture - level cities with the most non - standard default events were Zunyi, Weifang, Xi'an, Kunming, and Qiannan Buyi and Miao Autonomous Prefecture. In 2025, Weifang and Kunming had new non - standard default events, and Honghe Hani and Yi Autonomous Prefecture had its first non - standard default event at the prefecture - level city level [34]. 3.2.4 By District - county - The top five district - county regions with the most non - standard default events were Hanting District of Weifang, Licang District of Qingdao, Boshan District of Zibo, Dushan County of Qiannan Buyi and Miao Autonomous Prefecture, and Huichuan District of Zunyi. In 2025, the non - standard default events in most districts and counties decreased, and 50 districts and counties had no new non - standard risk events [39]. 3.2.5 Bond - issuing Urban Investment Entities with Multiple Non - standard Defaults - In 2025, Shaanxi, Shandong, and Yunnan were still areas with serious non - standard defaults of urban investment. Urban investment entities in Kunming of Yunnan, Licang District of Qingdao, Hanting District of Weifang, Mengzi City of Honghe Hani and Yi Autonomous Prefecture, and Weifang Binhai Economic and Technological Development Zone had 2 or more non - standard default events [44]. 3.2.6 Bond - issuing Urban Investment Entities with First Non - standard Defaults - In 2025, 5 bond - issuing urban investment entities had their first non - standard default, located in Shaanxi, Shandong, Sichuan, Fujian, and Yunnan. Rizhao Donggang District, Mianyang Jiangyou City, Putian Hanjiang District, and Honghe Hani and Yi Autonomous Prefecture were new areas with non - standard defaults [46]. 3.3 Analysis of Characteristics of Non - standard Risk Events in 2025 - In 2025, there were 82 non - standard risk events and 69 repayment events. Trust plans had the most non - standard risk events (44 times), including 30 default events. The industries with non - standard risk events were mainly urban investment and real estate development, accounting for 48% and 30% respectively [49][55]. - For bond - issuing entities, there were 23 non - standard risk events, including 19 default events and 4 extension events; 12 repayment events and 9 partial repayment events. In terms of regions, Shandong had the most non - standard risk events (6 times), followed by Shaanxi and Fujian (4 times each) [49][55]. - For urban investment bond - issuing entities, there were 9 default events and 2 extension events, involving 8 entities. The default events were mainly in Shandong, Shaanxi, and Guizhou. In terms of hierarchy, non - standard risk events occurred at the district - county and national new - area levels [58]. - There were 16 non - standard repayment events of urban investment bond - issuing entities in 2025, including 10 full - repayment events and 6 partial - repayment events. Other industries had 12 non - standard risk events, mainly in the real estate industry [59][63]. 3.4 Summary - Non - standard risk events have improved significantly in 2025, but the risk mitigation is structural. The non - standard debt is still in an inferior position in the repayment order, and the debt continuation in weak regions is still difficult. The potential spread of non - standard risks to priority debts needs attention [65][66]. - In the real estate industry, debt security depends on sales revenue. Tail risks in industries such as industrial holding, diversified finance, and construction also need to be vigilant [66].

天眼查信息显示，天津兰沁股权投资合伙企业（有限合伙）（以下简称"天津兰沁"）于近日成立，泰康 人寿等多家险企现身其合伙人行列。《每日经济新闻》记者注意到，2025年以来，险资参与出资私募股 权基金动作频频，中国人保等头部险企均有新项目面世。 有业内人士表示，在政策持续鼓励"长钱长投"的背景下，险资正加速通过布局私募股权基金等方式，深 度参与国家战略性新兴产业以及与保险主业相协同的产业。据悉，私募基金的投资方向主要是投前期股 权和一级市场，可以发挥保险资金特别是寿险资金的长期资本和耐心资本的特色。 在中长期资金入市的背景下，保险公司通过私募基金布局的动作不断。 记者注意到，这已不是险资首次组团"干大事"。2025年5月，人保资本、中意资产、中诚资本共同出资 设立北京保实诚源股权投资合伙企业（有限合伙），出资额达到130.01亿元。 "'组团'可以让单个项目失败的风险损失减小，同时可投资金总量也更大，容错空间更强，整体长期投 资收益率也可以更高一些。"上述业内人士对记者表示，中小公司可投在私募基金这个领域的资金量太 小了，合作能实现多方共赢。 业内：险资参与私募股权基金策略有望迭代优化 而险资加大私募股权基金布局 ...

每经记者｜袁园 每经编辑｜黄博文 在中长期资金入市的背景下，保险公司通过私募基金布局的动作不断。 天眼查信息显示，天津兰沁股权投资合伙企业（有限合伙）（以下简称"天津兰沁"）于近日成立，泰康 人寿等多家险企现身其合伙人行列。《每日经济新闻》记者注意到，2025年以来，险资参与出资私募股 权基金动作频频，中国人保等头部险企均有新项目面世。 有业内人士表示，在政策持续鼓励"长钱长投"的背景下，险资正加速通过布局私募股权基金等方式，深 度参与国家战略性新兴产业以及与保险主业相协同的产业。据悉，私募基金的投资方向主要是投前期股 权和一级市场，可以发挥保险资金特别是寿险资金的长期资本和耐心资本的特色。 天眼查公开信息显示，天津兰沁的注册资本为86.01亿元，注册地在天津，执行事务合伙人为高和明德 （北京）企业管理服务有限公司。从经营范围看，天津兰沁的经营范围为以私募基金从事股权投资、投 资管理、资产管理等活动，但须在中国证券投资基金业协会完成登记备案后方可从事经营活动，而且不 得投资《外商投资准入负面清单》中禁止外商投资的领域。 需要指出的是，天津兰沁背后的合伙人队伍十分"豪华"，除了高和明德（北京）企业管理服务有限公 ...

"马"上发力 招商引资迎来"开门红" 我市30个重大招商项目签约 总投资超600亿元 马年新春启新程，招商签约谱新篇。在2026年泉州市民营经济发展大会上，30个重大招商项目现场集中签约，总投资超600亿元，涵盖数字经济、新材 料、高端制造、新能源、海洋经济、文商旅产业等多个领域。 "数智"引领高端制造提速增效。总投资32亿元的全新智能化卫生用品生产基地项目选址惠安，拟建设生产车间、智慧仓库等，全面引入AI视觉检测系统、 5G物联网数字孪生等前沿装备，项目建成达产后预计年产能达50亿片，创造1000余个就业岗位；总投资20亿元的美的小家电智能基地项目拟选址德化， 建设数字智能自动化组装基地，引进数控中心和智能自动生产线，助力现代化小家电智能制造产业发展；位于泉州台商投资区的高速悬浮电动机及高速磁 悬浮离心机智能装备项目，总投资21亿元，项目投产后预计年生产5000台以上设备，产值超40亿元。 新能源与新材料聚势赋能。总投资26.8亿元中科睿升新能源材料项目，将在泉港建设高性能橡胶生产和相关配套设施；闽华新能源电池材料一体化供应链 基地选址安溪，将建设电池材料智慧仓储与配送中心以及综合配套等；中核绿色能源产业项 ...

Core Viewpoint - Public funds are accessible to the general public with low entry thresholds, while private funds target specific qualified investors with higher entry requirements [1][2] Group 1: Fund Characteristics - Public funds require a minimum subscription amount of only 1 or 10 yuan, while private funds require qualified investors to have financial assets of at least 3 million yuan or an average annual income of 500,000 yuan over the last three years [1] - Public funds are subject to stricter regulations regarding investment scope, holding ratios, and information disclosure, requiring regular reports to ensure transparency [1][2] - Private funds have more flexible regulatory requirements and primarily disclose information to specific investors rather than the public [1] Group 2: Investment Scope and Strategies - Public funds typically invest in standardized assets such as listed stocks, bonds, and money market instruments, while private funds can invest in a broader range of non-standardized assets, including equity in unlisted companies, private bonds, derivatives, and alternative investments [1][2] - Investment strategies for private funds are more diverse, including hedging, leverage, and value investing, compared to the more limited strategies of public funds [1][2] Group 3: Operational Models and Fees - Public funds generally operate on an open-ended basis, allowing investors to buy or redeem shares at any time, whereas private funds often use closed or semi-closed models with lock-up periods [2] - The fee structure for public funds is more transparent, mainly consisting of management and custody fees, while private funds typically charge performance fees based on profit-sharing in addition to fixed fees [2] Group 4: Risk and Return Profiles - Public funds have lower overall risk due to strict regulations, limited investment scope, and diversified investments, resulting in more stable returns [2] - Private funds, with their broader investment scope and flexible strategies, carry higher risk but also have the potential for greater returns [2]