Bank Wealth Management Market Yields Under Pressure as Some Products Lower Performance Benchmarks

Source: Shanghai Securities News Author: Xu Xiaoxiao

Recently, the stock and bond markets have experienced continuous fluctuations and adjustments, causing some coldness in the bank wealth management market. Under the dual pressures of systemic decline in underlying asset yields and strengthened regulatory constraints, the yields of wealth management products have continued to fall, with many leading wealth management companies intensively lowering their performance benchmarks.

Despite the downward pressure on returns, the overall market operation remains stable, and there has been no rush to redeem. Funds are gradually flowing back from deposits into the wealth management market in a structured manner. Industry insiders suggest that investors can appropriately adjust their wealth management plans and stay alert when choosing products to avoid “performance ranking” products.

Wealth Management Returns Continue to Decline

“In the past, buying wealth management products wasn’t highly profitable, but there was still a 3% to 4% annualized return. Now, even that is decreasing,” said Shenzhen investor Chen Wan (pseudonym) to Shanghai Securities News.

The “lightening” of the wallet is not just psychological. According to data from PuYi Standard, over the past two weeks, the overall yield of the wealth management product market has been declining. As of March 15, the average annualized yield of all market wealth management products over the past year was 2.32%, down 7.9 basis points year-on-year, with cash management and fixed income products decreasing by 0.33 and 3.35 basis points respectively.

As the risk-free rate in the market declines, deposit rates and bond yields are also falling in tandem. Coupled with bond market fluctuations, the yield center of fixed income assets has moved downward overall, putting pressure on the net asset values of wealth management products primarily based on fixed income assets.

Last week, the A-share market experienced divergence; the bond market generally declined, with the yield curve remaining steep. The yield on active 10-year government bonds returned above 1.80%, and the 30-year government bond yield returned above 2.27%.

“In this context, it’s difficult for fixed income products to support the previous performance benchmarks,” said Tian Lihui, a finance professor at Nankai University, in an interview with Shanghai Securities News. The “Management Measures for Information Disclosure of Bank and Insurance Asset Management Products,” which takes effect on September 1, requires that performance benchmarks remain consistent and generally not be adjusted, pushing institutions to “re-anchor” early. This shifts the setting of benchmarks from fixed values to market interest rates or index-linked types.

According to the reporter, recent regulatory crackdowns on the chaos of “performance ranking” in the wealth management market have already shown initial results. The space for some institutions relying on small-scale funds to “star” products for high returns has been thoroughly squeezed. Wealth management product yields are accelerating their return to real investment levels, gradually moving away from虚虚实实 (虚虚实实:虚虚实实).

Concentrated Downward Adjustment of Performance Benchmarks

As the overall yields of related fixed income assets continue to decline, many wealth management companies have recently adjusted the performance benchmarks of some products. Companies such as China Post Wealth Management, Agricultural Bank of China Wealth Management, Minsheng Wealth Management, and Xingyin Wealth Management have issued announcements to lower the benchmarks of multiple products.

For example, Minsheng Wealth Management significantly lowered the benchmark of the “Gui Zhu Fixed Income Enhancement Two-Year Open-Ended 2” product from 4%-6% to 2.6%-3.1%, nearly halving the previous rate.

Industry insiders believe that this is essentially a strategic move by wealth management institutions to clear out legacy burdens during the policy transition period before the new regulations fully take effect.

“A lot of the recent adjustments by wealth management firms are aligned with the ‘regular open days’ or ‘before the start of the next investment cycle,’ consistent with current regulatory frameworks,” said a researcher from a financial think tank in Shenzhen, in an interview with Shanghai Securities News. Although future benchmarks are “principally not to be adjusted,” institutions can reprice benchmarks based on the current macro interest rate decline and bond yield decrease, and publicly announce these adjustments in advance, giving investors full “redemption rights.”

The researcher explained that if investors do not accept the new benchmarks, they still have sufficient time during the open period to redeem their funds. This cross-cycle dynamic adjustment is essentially a “re-contracting” between investors and providers before a new operational cycle, aligning with the market-oriented and rule-of-law regulatory approach of “seller’s duty, buyer’s responsibility.”

Due to the downward trend in yields combined with seasonal factors, the wealth management market shrank by 114.2 billion yuan in January. However, in February, funds gradually flowed back. According to Guotai Haitong Research, as of the end of February 2026, the outstanding scale of bank wealth management products reached 31.66 trillion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 5.6%, with a slight month-on-month increase of 0.3%.

No “Redemption Wave” Appears

Despite fluctuations in net values influenced by stock and bond market volatility, there are no signs of a redemption wave. The market has only experienced slight fluctuations and remains generally stable.

Zhou Yaqin, founder of Shanghai Guantao Information Consulting, told Shanghai Securities News that investors have gradually adapted to the low-yield environment in recent years, leading to structural reallocation of funds. “The yields of competing public bond funds are also not ideal and have decreased in attractiveness. Under this background, bank wealth management products, with their stable risk-return profile, have seen steady growth in scale and have become the main channel for funds.”

He predicts that in the second quarter, the yields of wealth management products are unlikely to trend downward significantly, likely fluctuating between 2.2% and 2.4%, with a slowdown in the pace of benchmark adjustments, stabilizing around current levels.

In the face of normalized net value fluctuations and ongoing regulatory rectification, investors’ original wealth management plans are facing new tests and adjustments.

Tian Lihui recommends that conservative investors adopt a “core-satellite” strategy: using high-dividend assets as the “ballast,” supplemented by a small amount of “fixed income+” products to boost returns, rather than waiting for turning points or switching entirely.

He stated that, from a bottom-position allocation perspective, dividend assets are becoming a consensus choice among wealth management institutions, as their high dividends and low volatility have long-term value in a low-interest-rate environment. For enhancing returns, “fixed income+” products can incorporate convertible bonds, gold, equities, and multi-asset strategies to increase return elasticity, but equity positions should be strictly controlled within 10% to 20%. Regarding liquidity management, cash-type wealth management remains an essential tool, but investors should lower expectations for its yield contribution.

A senior analyst from a leading securities firm warned against being tempted by short-term high-yield products and recommended choosing products with high achievement rates and smooth net value curves.