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

Source: Shanghai Securities Journal
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 firms intensively lowering their performance benchmarks.

Despite the downward pressure on returns, the overall market remains stable, and there has been no rush to redeem. Funds are gradually flowing back from deposits into the wealth management sector 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 returns, but now even that is decreasing,” said Shenzhen investor Chen Wan (pseudonym) to Shanghai Securities Journal.

The shrinking “purse” is not just psychological. Data from Puyi Standard shows that over the past two weeks, the overall yield of the wealth management 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 30-year government bonds returned above 2.27%.

“In this context, it is difficult for fixed income products to support past performance benchmarks,” said Tian Lihui, a finance professor at Nankai University, in an interview with Shanghai Securities Journal. The “Management Measures for Information Disclosure of Bank and Insurance Asset Management Products,” effective September 1, requires performance benchmarks to remain consistent and generally not be adjusted, pushing institutions to “re-anchor” early. The setting method of performance benchmarks is shifting from fixed values to market interest rate-based or index-linked approaches.

According to the reporter, recent regulatory crackdowns on the “performance ranking” chaos 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, and wealth management product yields are rapidly returning to real investment levels, gradually shifting from virtual to real.

Performance Benchmarks Widely Lowered

With the overall yields of related fixed income assets continuing to decline, many wealth management firms have recently adjusted the performance benchmarks of some products. China Post Wealth Management, Agricultural Bank of China Wealth Management, Minsheng Wealth Management, and Xingyin Wealth Management have issued announcements, lowering 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 firms mainly occur around the ‘fixed open date’ or ‘before the start of the next investment cycle,’ which aligns with current regulatory frameworks,” said a researcher from a financial think tank in Shenzhen, in an interview with Shanghai Securities Journal. Although future performance benchmarks are “principally not to be adjusted,” 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 ample 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 in January. According to Choice data, the total bank wealth management scale in January 2026 decreased by 114.2 billion yuan. In February, it gradually rebounded. 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, up 5.6% year-on-year and slightly up 0.3% month-on-month.

No “Redemption Wave” Appeared

Despite fluctuations in net values influenced by stock and bond market volatility, there has been no sign 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 Journal 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 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, 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 a turning point or switching entirely.

He stated that from a bottom-position allocation, 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 yield enhancement, “Fixed Income+” products can increase return resilience through multi-asset strategies involving convertible bonds, gold, and equities, but equity exposure should be strictly controlled between 10% and 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.

(Edited by: Wen Jing)