Multiple Product Offerings Fall Short; Fixed-Income Wealth Management Faces Headwinds

When it comes to stock trading, rely on Golden Kylin Analysts’ reports—authoritative, professional, timely, comprehensive—helping you discover potential thematic opportunities!

Source: Beijing Business Daily

Financial products frequently encounter “failure” during issuance, becoming a prominent phenomenon in the 2026 financial market. Recently, Beijing Business Daily reporters found that since the beginning of the year, leading financial institutions have issued notices that their newly launched products are not established. Fixed income products, once confidently occupying the “C position” in the market, are now repeatedly “failing” during fundraising. Experts believe this is an inevitable result of intensified homogeneous competition among fixed income products in a low-interest-rate environment. Financial companies should proactively adjust their product strategies, shift from product-centered to customer-centered approaches, expand investment boundaries, and rebuild investor confidence through differentiated product design and steady performance, thereby increasing fundraising success rates.

Frequent “failures” during issuance

In March, Huaxia Wealth Management issued multiple notices of product non-establishment. Six products, including “Fixed Income Debt-Type Closed-End Wealth Management No. 1317,” “Pure Debt Fixed Income Closed-End Wealth Management No. 354,” and “HeXiang Fixed Income Wealth Management No. 37,” all failed to reach the minimum issuance scale specified in their prospectuses and were thus terminated.

According to the product prospectuses, these six products are all closed-end, net-asset-value-based fixed income wealth management products, mainly with medium-low risk levels, generally stable. In terms of target investors, many of these products are open to both individual and institutional investors. The product terms vary widely, from as short as 97 days to nearly three years, covering short-, medium-, and long-term investment needs.

In terms of investment allocation, there is some differentiation. Among them, “HeXiang Fixed Income Wealth Management No. 37” balances currency market instruments, various debt assets, and a small amount of equity assets. The other five focus solely on pure fixed income, mainly currency market tools, standardized debt assets, and other fixed income financial instruments compliant with regulations. Most products set a minimum issuance threshold of 50 million yuan, while the low-risk “Huaxia Wealth Management Fixed Income Debt-Type Closed-End Wealth Management No. 1381” has a lower limit of 5 million yuan.

Further statistics by Beijing Business Daily show that this phenomenon is not isolated. Since the beginning of the year, Huaxia Wealth Management has terminated 14 products; in February, BoYin Wealth Management announced that its fixed income series of one-year closed-end wealth management products could not be established due to not reaching the fundraising minimum; in January, GuangYin Wealth Management’s “Happiness Add Profit” closed-end fixed income public offering product No. 3059 also failed to meet the minimum scale requirement in its prospectus.

Reviewing these cases, the failed products are highly homogeneous, mainly focusing on closed-end fixed income products, with failures mostly due to not reaching the fundraising minimum. SuShang Bank researcher Wu Zewei commented that this is not an isolated incident but an inevitable result of intensified homogeneous competition among fixed income products in a low-interest-rate environment. “As market yields continue to decline, traditional closed-end fixed income products become less attractive to investors. If financial companies continue to follow past scale-driven issuance rhythms, they will face difficulties in fundraising. This also indicates a certain mismatch between product offerings and capital supply in the market.”

Shifting to a customer-centered approach

From an industry perspective, by the end of 2025, there were 159 banks and 32 wealth management companies with active wealth management products, totaling 46,300 products, up 14.89% from the beginning of the year; the total assets under management reached 33.29 trillion yuan, an increase of 11.15%. The investor base has also expanded, with over 143 million investors holding wealth management products by year-end, up 14.37% from the start of the year, including 17.69 million new individual investors and 310,000 new institutional investors.

So why are stable fixed income wealth management products, which can serve as a substitute for deposits, suddenly falling out of favor? Senior financial regulation expert Zhou Yiqin explained, “Closed-end fixed income wealth management products have fixed lock-in periods, during which they cannot be redeemed, limiting liquidity. Currently, investors generally dislike long-term capital immobilization, leading to low subscription willingness and high fundraising difficulty.” Zhou pointed out that from the customer demand side, open-ended products are more favored; however, from the supply side, the number of closed-end fixed income products exceeds that of open-ended ones, making failures more noticeable.

Regarding the phenomenon of failed fundraising, Zhou Yiqin advised a rational view, seeing it as a healthy sign of industry transformation and market-oriented competition. “Public funds tend to have higher success rates because their issuance involves significant resources in registration, marketing, and customer outreach. Wealth management products, with lower issuance costs and simpler processes, have less attachment to issuance success. If channels are insufficiently promoted or product design does not meet market needs, and the product lacks core competitiveness, low market recognition can lead to fundraising shortfalls.”

He also noted that this is related to the market-oriented transformation of distribution channels. In earlier years, bank asset management departments and parent bank channels were tightly coupled, relying on internal channels to guarantee issuance success. Now, as third-party distribution channels expand and performance assessments become more market-driven, the focus shifts to product performance, risk control, and customer fit. Only high-quality products can secure channel resources, while mediocre ones are naturally phased out.

From a regulatory perspective, wealth management products must meet clear minimum scale requirements. If the fundraising scale falls far below this standard, the fixed costs of research, operation, and risk management will sharply increase. “Some wealth management firms rationally choose to let small-scale offerings fail to avoid operational inefficiencies, which reflects their refined operational approach,” Zhou Yiqin emphasized.

Wu Zewei further pointed out that the overall growth of the wealth management market alongside the failure of new product fundraising demonstrates a structural shift of capital among institutions and products. Increased competition among top-tier institutions leads to a siphoning effect, while the rising difficulty of fixed income asset allocation makes product yields harder to meet investor expectations, further intensifying fundraising challenges for some products.

Beijing Business Daily reporters Meng Fanxia and Zhou Yili