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

Log in to Sina Finance App and search for 【Information Disclosure】 to see more evaluation levels

◎ Reporter 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 pressure of systemic decline in underlying asset yields and strengthened regulatory constraints, the yields of wealth management products have continued to decline, 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 clear-headed when choosing products to avoid “performance ranking” products.

Wealth management returns continue to decline

“Buying wealth management products used to yield around 3% to 4% annualized, but now even that is decreasing,” said Shenzhen investor Chen Wan (pseudonym) to Shanghai Securities Journal.

The “lightening” of the purse is not just psychological. Data from Puyi Standard shows that in 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 generally moved downward, putting pressure on the net value 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 to above 1.80%, and the 30-year government bonds’ yields returned to above 2.27%.

“In this context, it is 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 Journal. The “Management Measures for Asset Management Product Information Disclosure of Banking and Insurance Institutions,” effective from September 1, requires that performance benchmarks remain consistent and generally should not be adjusted, pushing institutions to “re-anchor” early. The setting of performance benchmarks is shifting 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” and chase high returns for rankings has been thoroughly squeezed. Wealth management product yields are accelerating to return to real investment levels, gradually moving away from虚虚实实.

Performance benchmarks are being collectively lowered

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. China Post Wealth Management, Agricultural Bank of China Wealth Management, Minsheng Wealth Management, and Xingye 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%, a nearly 50% reduction.

Industry insiders believe this is essentially a strategic move by wealth management institutions to clear out legacy burdens during the policy transition period.

“Currently, the adjustments by wealth management companies mainly occur around the ‘regular open days’ or ‘before the start of the next investment cycle,’ which complies with current regulatory frameworks,” said a researcher from a financial think tank in Shenzhen in an interview with Shanghai Securities Journal. Although future benchmarks are generally not to be adjusted “in principle,” institutions can reprice benchmarks for the next cycle based on the current macro interest rate decline and bond yield decrease, and publicly announce these changes 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 and exit. 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 slightly in January. According to Choice data, the total bank wealth management scale in January 2026 decreased by 114.2 billion yuan. In February, funds gradually flowed back, with Guotai Haitong Research reporting that by 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% and a slight month-on-month increase of 0.3%.

No “redemption wave” has appeared

Although the net value of wealth management products is affected by stock and bond market fluctuations, there are no signs of a redemption wave. The market has only shown slight fluctuations and remains generally stable.

Zhou Yaqin, founder of Shanghai Guantao Information Consulting, told Shanghai Securities Journal that investors have gradually adapted to the low-yield environment in recent years, leading to structural reallocation of funds. “The performance of competing public bond funds is also not ideal, reducing their attractiveness. Against this backdrop, bank wealth management products, with their stable risk-return profile, have steadily increased in scale and 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 and overall stabilization near 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 suggests that conservative investors can 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 explained 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 offer long-term value in a low-interest-rate environment. For enhancing returns, “fixed income+” products can increase resilience through multi-asset strategies involving convertible bonds, gold, and equities, 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.