The fundraising target was not met, and multiple bank wealth management products failed to be issued! Industry insiders: products need to get out of the predicament of being “the same thousand products.”

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

        Reporter｜Pan Ting  Li Yuwen    Editor｜Yang Yi              

Recently, Huaxia Wealth Management, Puyin Wealth Management, China Merchants Bank Wealth Management, and other financial companies have announced that newly issued wealth management products are not established, mainly because the total fundraising amount did not reach the lower limit. According to incomplete statistics from FaXun Wealth Management Network, since the beginning of this year (up to now), 40 wealth management products have failed to issue, all of which are fixed income products, with risk levels mostly at R2 (medium-low risk) or even R1 (low risk).

The “Daily Economic News” reporter noted that in 2025, the size of the bank wealth management market continues to expand. However, since the beginning of this year, many new bank wealth management products have failed to issue due to “insufficient fundraising scale.”

How should wealth management companies address the situation of “products not established due to insufficient fundraising”? Against this background, considering that residents’ short-term risk appetite remains relatively low, besides low-risk wealth management products, what other relatively stable “alternatives” are there?

On March 19, Huaxia Wealth Management issued a notice that Huaxia Wealth Management’s joint fixed income wealth management product No. 37 was not established because the total amount raised did not meet the lower limit specified in the product prospectus.

According to Tonghuashun statistics, in March, Huaxia Wealth Management had 6 products that were not established, namely “Huaxia Wealth Management Joint Fixed Income Wealth Management Product No. 37,” “Fixed Income Debt-Type Closed-End Wealth Management Product No. 1317,” “Pure Debt Fixed Income Closed-End Wealth Management Product No. 354,” “Yue’an Xin Fixed Income Pure Debt Closed-End Wealth Management Product No. 83,” “Fixed Income Debt-Type Closed-End Wealth Management Product No. 1381,” and “Fixed Income Debt-Type Closed-End Wealth Management Product No. 1002.”

According to the “Daily Economic News” reporter’s understanding, these six products are all closed-end net value fixed income wealth management products, mainly with medium-low risk levels, generally more stable. In terms of issuance scale, many products set the threshold for establishment at 50 million yuan, with “Huaxia Wealth Management Fixed Income Debt-Type Closed-End Wealth Management Product No. 1381” having a lower limit of 5 million yuan.

Moreover, according to incomplete statistics from FaXun Wealth Management Network, since the beginning of this year, 40 wealth management products have failed to issue, all of which are fixed income products.

In fact, besides Huaxia Wealth Management, Puyin Wealth Management, China Merchants Bank Wealth Management, and others have also had products fail to issue. For example, Puyin Wealth Management announced that on March 4, 2026, it issued Puyin Wealth Management Qi’an Yue Company-specific Wealth Management Product No. 2603. As of the subscription deadline on March 10, 2026, the total subscription amount did not reach the issuance scale specified in the product prospectus, so the product was not established; in mid-February, China Merchants Bank Wealth Management announced that its “Zhaorui Jiayue (Technology Growth) Daily 370-Day Holding Period No. 1 Fixed Income Enhancement Plan” had a planned fundraising period from February 6 to February 10, 2026. Based on actual fundraising, the final scale did not meet the issuance threshold, and according to relevant agreements, the plan was not established.

The “2025 Annual Report on the Bank Wealth Management Market” (hereinafter referred to as the “Report”) shows that by the end of 2025, the outstanding size of the bank wealth management market was 33.29 trillion yuan, an increase of 11.15% from the beginning of the year. The total new wealth management products issued during the year reached 33.4k, with a fundraising amount of 76.33 trillion yuan; the number of investors holding wealth management products reached 143 million, a year-on-year increase of 14.37%; and the annual return generated for investors was 730.3 billion yuan.

However, in February 2026, the number of newly issued wealth management products across the market decreased month-on-month. According to Puyi Standard data, in February this year, a total of 2,018 new wealth management products were issued, a decrease of 522 from the previous month. Among them, 397 were open-ended products with an average benchmark return of 1.85%; 1,621 were closed-end products with an average benchmark return of 2.35%. During the same period, wealth management companies issued 1,518 products, a decrease of 376 from the previous month, accounting for 75.22% of the total market issuance.

Zeng Gang, Chief Expert and Director of the Shanghai Financial and Development Laboratory, told the reporter that product issuance failure may still occur. Under the environment of low interest rates, products lacking clear positioning and differentiation will continue to face liquidation pressure, which is a normal market phenomenon of survival of the fittest.

Zeng Gang further explained that there are three main reasons for the failure of wealth management product fundraising. First, the yield has been continuously declining, greatly reducing product attractiveness, and investor subscription willingness naturally declines; second, wealth management products are highly homogeneous, making it difficult to form effective demand. Most failed products are closed-end fixed income, with underlying assets uniformly bonds and interbank certificates of deposit, so investors face not differentiated choices but simple yield comparisons, making market diversion inevitable; third, there is a mismatch in supply and demand structure, and the contradiction has long remained unresolved.

Senior researcher Su Xiaorui from Suxi Zhiyan believes that products that fail to issue due to not reaching the lower limit of fundraising scale share some common features. She told the reporter that these common features include being fixed income, medium-low risk level, and closed-end net value type.

“Such failed wealth management products mainly target risk-averse, stable investors, whose core demands are capital preservation and stable returns, rather than high returns. The failure to raise funds results from multiple factors on the supply side, demand side, channel side, and external environment. On the supply side, the degree of homogeneity is high, while on the demand side, liquidity preferences are rising, but the performance benchmarks of such products are not attractive enough to the market,” Su Xiaorui added. She further suggested that the phenomenon of future wealth management product failures may become normal.

So, how can wealth management companies break the “products not established due to insufficient fundraising” dilemma? Zeng Gang believes efforts should be made in three areas: product restructuring, operational logic, and investor trust.

“On the product level, to break out of the ‘same product’ dilemma, it is necessary to meet investors’ liquidity preferences by increasing the supply of open-ended and short-hold products,” Zeng Gang told the “Daily Economic News” reporter. He suggested appropriately introducing multi-asset strategies such as equities, gold, and REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts) to enrich the ‘Fixed Income +’ strategy, making products truly competitive through differentiation. The scale of ‘Fixed Income +’ strategy products grew by over 70% year-on-year in 2026, confirming market recognition of this direction.

“Secondly, there should be a shift in operational logic—wealth management products should move away from scale-driven to value-creating,” Zeng Gang said. If it is judged before issuance that fundraising is unlikely to meet the target, it should be proactively terminated rather than blindly pushed forward. Focusing resources on creating fewer but high-quality benchmark products is more strategically valuable than maintaining a poorly performing product.

The final step is to rebuild investor trust. “In the era of net value, professional risk communication and transparent information disclosure are key to retaining clients,” Zeng Gang emphasized. Helping investors truly understand that “low risk does not mean capital preservation,” and establishing a long-term accompaniment mechanism amid market fluctuations, are essential to maintaining scale and reputation in a competitive environment.

Su Xiaorui also offered her views on asset allocation and channel expansion: wealth management companies can strengthen asset allocation, shifting from “mainly fixed income” to “diversified and balanced,” increasing holdings of equities, and also expanding channels and the full lifecycle wealth management services, leveraging professional research capabilities and reliable client service to promote fund retention and enhance client stickiness.

Considering that residents’ short-term risk appetite remains low, what other relatively stable “alternatives” are there besides low-risk wealth management products? The reporter found that currently, products such as savings bonds and dividend insurance, which have their own characteristics, are favored by many investors while offering stability.

● Savings Bonds: Flexible liquidity, can be pledged or redeemed early

On March 10, the first batch of savings bonds (certificate type) for 2026 was issued. On that day, many bank branches experienced “sold out” of quotas within seconds. The maximum issuance amount this year has been 15 billion yuan, with 3-year bonds offering an annual coupon rate of 1.63%, and 5-year bonds at 1.7%.

A few years ago, such yields might not have been eye-catching, but with declining interest rates, the current rates for fixed deposits at major state-owned banks are only 1.25% for 3-year and 1.3% for 5-year deposits. Compared to that, savings bonds offer a better return.

Another advantage is their flexible liquidity—investors can use savings bonds as collateral for loans at the original bank or redeem them early during the holding period, with interest paid based on actual holding time and corresponding tiered rates.

● Dividend Insurance: “Guaranteed + floating” dual return advantage, suitable for long-term holding

Recently, banks have been promoting dividend insurance with a preset interest rate of 1.75%, mainly including dividend-type annuity insurance and dividend-type whole life insurance.

Dividend insurance guarantees a minimum interest rate, and on this basis, the insurance company distributes distributable surplus based on actual operating results, forming a floating dividend. With the dual advantage of “guaranteed + floating” returns, dividend insurance is quite attractive in the current low-interest-rate environment.

According to the financial team of Guoxin Securities Research Institute, dividend insurance shows three key attractions in the current market: first, its guaranteed interest rate provides a safety cushion similar to deposits, aligning with residents’ deep-seated demand for capital safety; second, the floating dividend part is linked to the insurance company’s investment performance, allowing long-term allocation to potentially yield better returns than bank deposits during a declining interest rate cycle, satisfying residents’ desire for moderate income growth; third, dividend insurance usually has a long insurance period, which helps guide long-term financial planning and alleviates market volatility caused by short-term capital inflows and outflows. Some products also offer policy loans, which help meet liquidity needs to some extent.

Currently, the guaranteed interest rate for dividend insurance is mostly 1.75%, and the projected rate after including dividends can reach over 3%.

● Brokerage channels: Flexible reverse repurchase periods

Besides bank-distributed wealth management products, brokerage channels also offer some stable options, such as government bond reverse repurchase agreements.

Reverse repurchase of government bonds is essentially a short-term loan—investors lend funds through the stock exchange and earn fixed interest, with the borrower using government bonds as collateral, repaying principal and interest at maturity.

Its advantages include being collateralized by government bonds, under the supervision of the stock exchange, and generally offering yields much higher than bank deposits for similar periods, with durations ranging from 1 day to 182 days. Investors can choose lending periods based on their idle funds.

Typically, at month-end, quarter-end, year-end, or before holidays, liquidity demand surges, and yields tend to spike, making these periods ideal for participating in reverse repos. Note that early redemption is not allowed; at maturity, principal and interest are automatically returned to the investor’s account.

Cover image source: Zhu Yu