陈兵："十四五"期间，公司的核心战略定位是坚守信托本源，服务实体经济与民生福祉，向高质量发展 全面转型。战略重心发生了根本性变化，从过去以房地产、政信等融资类业务为主，转向全力发展财富 管理、资产管理及服务社会治理等信托本源业务，发展目标也从追求规模扩张转变为追求有质量、可持 续的增长。 以业务数据作为对比，到"十四五"末期，在公司1.3万亿元业务规模中，代表转型方向的业务，比如， 证券专户类信托突破7000亿元，主动管理资管信托达2000亿元，资产证券化及普惠金融业务规模近1200 亿元，财富管理账户规模近1000亿元，财富管理信托存续单数超过1.3万单，服务客户超2万名，净资产 从2015年的67亿元增长至250亿元。 《金融时报》记者：面对"三分类"新规带来的信托行业格局变化，上海信托在业务布局调整上有何经 验？ 陈兵：我们应对"三分类"新规的经验在于前瞻布局与主动重塑，坚持做难而正确的事，以真正的专业能 力去适应监管导向。 从相关实践来说，我们在2014年便布局家族信托，并于2021年行业首创家庭服务信托，目前该业务市占 率全国第一，形成了从30万元安养信托到1000万元家族信托的完整账户体系。另外， ...

Core Viewpoint - The financial industry is facing a significant challenge of "involution," characterized by price wars and homogeneous competition, necessitating a shift towards quality and innovation to escape the current predicament [1][2][3]. Group 1: Involution and Competition - Involution in the financial sector is defined as irrational price competition that sacrifices product quality and service to gain market share, leading to a low-level repetitive competition and a lack of high-quality supply [2][3][5]. - Regulatory bodies are increasingly addressing involution through negative lists and self-regulatory agreements to curb unfair competition practices [2][10]. - The competition is marked by severe price wars, with institutions frequently undercutting each other on loan rates and insurance premiums, which compresses profit margins and accumulates industry risks [2][4][6]. Group 2: Structural Issues - Many financial institutions are overly focused on scale and rankings, neglecting risk management and long-term value creation, resulting in a "land grab" mentality [3][6]. - The lack of innovation and differentiation in products has led to a homogenization of offerings, where most banks and insurance companies provide similar products with minimal differentiation [6][7]. - The performance evaluation metrics within institutions often emphasize short-term growth, leading to a focus on quantity over quality, which hinders strategic transformation [6][9]. Group 3: Regulatory and Industry Responses - Experts suggest that regulatory authorities should enhance negative lists and establish clear regulatory boundaries to combat malicious price wars and false advertising [9][10]. - Financial institutions are encouraged to focus on technological and business model innovations, aiming for differentiated services in areas like inclusive finance, green finance, and digital finance [9][10]. - The industry is urged to adjust performance evaluation structures to prioritize long-term value creation, risk management, and customer satisfaction over short-term scale expansion [9][10]. Group 4: Future Directions - To break the cycle of involution, financial institutions must create value through differentiated positioning and innovative supply, transitioning from price competition to value competition [8][9]. - There is a call for a multi-dimensional supply system and enhanced service frameworks to address the challenges of homogenization and improve overall industry health [8][9]. - The recent regulatory actions, such as setting a 3% interest rate floor for consumer loans, aim to eliminate previous practices that masked true investment capabilities, promoting genuine competition based on actual performance [11].

Core Insights - The trust industry in China has seen significant growth in asset scale, reaching 29.56 trillion yuan by the end of 2024, a 23.58% increase from the end of 2023 [1][2] - Despite the growth in asset scale, the industry's profit has sharply declined by 45.52% to 230.87 billion yuan, indicating a pressing need for new revenue and profit drivers [5][6] Asset Scale and Revenue - The trust asset scale increased by 5.64 trillion yuan from the end of 2023, marking a substantial annual growth [1] - Operating income for the trust industry reached 94.036 billion yuan in 2024, up 8.89% from 86.361 billion yuan in 2023 [1][5] - The average trust business income for 57 companies was 7.81 million yuan, a decrease of 6.99% from the previous year [5] Business Transformation - The growth in asset scale is attributed to the implementation of the "Three Classification New Regulations," which has led to a shift from traditional non-standard financing to diversified asset service trusts and asset management trusts [2][3] - Asset service trusts accounted for 70% of new products and 50% of the scale of newly established products in 2024, despite their low fee structure impacting overall profitability [1][4] Specific Trust Categories - By the end of 2024, family trust balances reached 643.58 billion yuan, while insurance trust balances were 270.40 billion yuan, contributing to a total of 1.0289 trillion yuan in personal wealth trusts [2] - The administrative management service trust business had a scale of 1.8177 trillion yuan, indicating a deepening of service scenarios and the social value of trusts [3] - Asset management trusts totaled 11.39 trillion yuan, with fixed income trusts primarily invested in bond assets amounting to 9.15 trillion yuan [3] Profitability Challenges - The overall profitability of the trust industry has weakened, with a significant drop in profits due to the low fee structure of asset service trusts [5][6] - The average fair value loss for 57 companies was 94 million yuan, indicating increased pressure on revenue and profit margins [6] - The industry is urged to balance traditional and new business growth to enhance profit performance and adapt to regulatory changes [7]