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

Recently, the stock and bond markets have experienced continuous fluctuations and adjustments, causing some chill in the banking 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 decline, with many leading wealth management companies 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 News.

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 market fluctuations, the yield center of fixed income assets has moved downward overall, putting pressure on the net value of wealth management products primarily based on fixed income assets.

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

“In this context, fixed income products find it difficult to support their previous performance benchmarks,” said Tian Lihui, a finance professor at Nankai University, in an interview with Shanghai Securities News. The “Banking and Insurance Institution Asset Management Product Information Disclosure Management Measures,” effective September 1, require that performance benchmarks remain consistent and generally not be adjusted, pushing institutions to “re-anchor” early. This has shifted the setting of benchmarks from fixed values to market interest rates or index-linked types.

According to further information from reporters, recent regulatory crackdowns on the chaos of “performance ranking” in the wealth management market have begun to show results. The space for some institutions to rely on small-scale funds to “star” products for high returns has been thoroughly squeezed, and the yields of wealth management products are rapidly returning to real investment levels, gradually shifting from virtual to real.

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%, a nearly 50% reduction.

Industry insiders believe that 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 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. 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 announce these changes in advance legally, 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. Data from Choice shows that the total bank wealth management scale in January 2026 shrank by 114.2 billion yuan. In February, funds gradually flowed back, with Guotai Huitong research reports indicating 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 Sign of a “Redemption Wave”

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

Zhou Yiqin, 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 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.

Faced with normalized net value fluctuations and deeper regulatory rectification, investors’ original wealth management plans are under new tests and adjustments.

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

He states that, from a bottom-position allocation, 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 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-like 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.