Hong Kong-listed companies cluster around "Returning to A" to strengthen industrial collaboration and improve financing efficiency

Securities Times reporter Wang Jun Zhuoyong

Recently, Aimee Biotechnology, a Hong Kong-listed vaccine heavyweight, released an announcement stating that it plans to apply to list on the Beijing Stock Exchange (BSE) for an A-share listing. Under the relevant rules, the company’s domestic shares must first be listed on the National Equities Exchange and Quotations (NEEQ). If this “return to A-shares” plan proceeds smoothly, Aimee Biotechnology will become the first Hong Kong stock to be listed on the BSE after returning to A-shares.

Since last June, when the General Offices of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council issued documents clearly supporting eligible Hong Kong companies in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area to list on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, together with the continuing improvement in the inclusiveness of the STAR Market and ChiNext toward unprofitable bio-medicine and hard-tech companies, Hong Kong-listed companies are now launching “return to A-shares” processes in a concentrated manner.

From BaiO to, which has already been listed on the STAR Market, to Ying’en Bio, Everbright Environment, Paradigm Intelligent, and Yuejiang Technology, among others, which have recently issued announcements to advance “return to A-shares,” “H to A” could add more new demonstration cases, and “A+H” is playing out a “mutual pursuit.”

Hong Kong sub-sector leaders

A crowded start for A-share listings

While a large number of A-share companies are “going south” to list in Hong Kong, more and more Hong Kong companies are choosing to “go north,” kicking off an “A+H” dual-capital-platform layout.

Aimee Biotechnology—announced as planning to apply for an A-share listing—is precisely a vaccine-sector leader. According to the Hong Kong IPO prospectus and financial reports over the years, the company is China’s second-largest and the private sector’s first-largest full-chain vaccine group. At the same time, it ranks first globally in hepatitis B vaccines and second in rabies vaccines, and it is also among the domestic first-tier players in mRNA vaccine R&D.

This kind of leader “return to A-shares” is not an isolated case. Paradigm Intelligent, an AI leader in Hong Kong, recently disclosed that it has already obtained a tutoring/mentoring filing with the Beijing Financial Regulatory Bureau, and plans to list on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Yuejiang Technology, a cooperative robotics leader, announced in March that it plans to list on the ChiNext of the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, raising about 1.2 billion yuan to invest in core projects such as multi-legged robots and humanoid robots. Earlier this year, Zhilü, which listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and is dubbed the “world’s first global model stock,” is also simultaneously advancing A-share listing guidance, moving toward an “A+H” framework.

According to incomplete statistics by a Securities Times reporter, the number of Hong Kong companies that have explicitly submitted A-share IPO applications or initiated listing guidance is already up to 10, including Liqin Resources, Everbright Environment, Ying’en Bio, Xinjiang Xinxin Mining, Jingxin Communications, China Biopharmaceutical, Beijing Automotive, and Xunzhong Communications, among others. They cover multiple areas such as bio-medicine, high-end manufacturing, environmental protection, resources, and communications.

In addition to direct IPOs, mergers and acquisitions and restructuring have also become an important path for Hong Kong assets to “return to A-shares.” In January this year, Hong Kong-listed China Hongqiao achieved a strategic “return to A-shares” by injecting its core aluminum assets into A-share Hongchuang Holdings, providing a replicable “curve back to A-shares” sample for the industry.

Three major drivers

Driving the “return to A-shares” boom

Last June, the General Offices of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council issued documents clearly supporting eligible Hong Kong companies in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area to list on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. In addition, with the inclusiveness of the STAR Market and ChiNext being strengthened, “return to A-shares” channels for unprofitable bio-medicine and hard-tech enterprises have opened up. The combined effect of institutional reforms and policy dividends undoubtedly provides more solid policy support and broader development space for Hong Kong companies’ “return to A-shares.”

Beyond policy and institutional dividends, Liu Youhua, general manager of research at Paipaiwang Wealth, told Securities Times reporters that there are two other important drivers behind this round of “return to A-shares” enthusiasm in Hong Kong stocks: first, A-share liquidity and valuations are more attractive, with clear premium in sectors such as hard tech and bio-medicine, local investors have higher awareness, and financing efficiency is better; second, “return to A-shares” helps strengthen domestic industrial coordination, making it easier for companies to connect with mainland supply chains, market and policy resources, and enhancing brand influence. “ ‘Hong Kong listing, A-share amplification’ is becoming an increasingly smooth capital route,” Liu Youhua said.

Among them, the most direct driver is still the valuation gap. He Jinlong, general manager of Umeili Investments, told Securities Times reporters candidly: “A-shares are driven by a combination of institutions and retail investors, and overall trading activity and liquidity premium are significantly higher than those in Hong Kong stocks. In local tracks such as technology, pharmaceuticals, and new energy, A-share valuations are typically 30%—60% higher than Hong Kong’s.”

This gap is especially evident among companies that have already “returned to A.” BaiO to, which listed on the STAR Market in December 2025, saw its A-share share price rise more than double versus its offering price, and the premium versus Hong Kong stocks exceeded 90%. Wind data shows that, as of March 31, for multiple “A+H” shares such as Guolian Minsheng, Semiconductor Manufacturing International (SMIC), and CICC, the A-share-to-H-share premium rate is not less than 100%.

Yuan Mei, research and investment director at Sullivan Jierli (Shenzhen) Cloud Technology Co., Ltd., also believes that Hong Kong-listed companies have already passed listing reviews by the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and operate in continuous compliance with higher market trust. After meeting the conditions, the “return to A-shares” process is relatively faster. In addition, domestic shareholding investors can choose to trade and circulate flexibly across the two markets, which is more conducive to realizing equity value.

However, some private fund practitioners told Securities Times reporters that some “return to A-shares” companies’ shares are still subject to lock-up periods. The real share-price and liquidity performance may only be reflected more objectively after the lock-ups are lifted, and the final valuation of the company still needs to match the market environment and the degree of fulfillment of fundamentals.

Performance and valuation

are the biggest risk points

Although the “return to A-shares” dividend is significant, this path is not without bumps. Securities Times reporters noted that companies such as Jingxin Communications, China Biopharmaceutical, Beijing Automotive, and Xunzhong Communications have all issued announcements to terminate “return to A-shares” listing guidance. The reasons given are mostly changes in market conditions, adjustments to capital-market rules, and adjustments to corporate development strategies. In He Jinlong’s view, such termination of guidance is not a failure, but a rational “brake” by the company—an prudent choice when the market environment, performance, valuation, and strategy do not match. There may still be a possibility of restarting in the future.

So, in this round of “return to A-shares” tide, what is the biggest risk point that companies face? Wen Tiannan, general manager of international administration at Hong Kong Boda Capital, told Securities Times reporters directly: first, performance falling short of expectations; second, a valuation pullback. He further analyzed that most “return to A-shares” companies are in expansion or transformation phases, with high R&D spending and large capital expenditures. Once macro conditions fluctuate, clinical progress fails to meet expectations, technology commercialization is delayed, or demand along the industrial chain weakens, the difficulty of realizing profitability will increase significantly, directly impacting valuation and the ability to raise additional financing. This is especially crucial for unprofitable bio-medicine and robotics companies. As for valuation pullback risk, it more often comes from pressure on the supply side. If “return to A-shares” companies concentrate their listings in the short term, it could cause liquidity dilution in certain local segments, and overvalued targets are more likely to be affected by market sentiment.

Liu Youhua also said that “return to A-shares” means companies need to bear higher compliance costs. Faced with stricter performance expectations and more intense market competition, companies must make prudent decisions based on their own development stage.

Amid the dense “return to A-shares” activity, one of the questions the market is most concerned about is: does A-shares have enough capacity to absorb them, and will it trigger overall valuation convergence? Based on the viewpoints of multiple interviewees, A-shares overall has sufficient capacity to absorb, and it is likely to show a pattern where structural opportunities outweigh systematic pressures.

On the one hand, A-share funds have a large scale, and in this round the “return to A-shares” companies are mostly industry leaders or sector targets supported by policies, making it easier to attract long-term allocation capital. On the other hand, historical experience shows that high-quality companies that “return to A-shares” often lead to a re-rating of sector valuations, rather than a full-scale suppression.

Wen Tiannan analyzed that the A-share to H-share premium index is currently at a relatively low level, and the valuation gap is moving toward rational convergence. The main factors that may face valuation pressure are targets whose fundamentals are not solid enough and high-valued unprofitable companies. Meanwhile, for leading companies aligned with policy and with clear sector positioning, they still have strong valuation resilience.

Regarding the future “A+H” dual-listing layout, interviewees generally believe that markets in both places will move toward deeper integration while maintaining differentiated positioning, forming a complementary, win-win ecosystem. Deep integration is reflected in sustained policy efforts to promote interconnection between the two markets and make listing filings more convenient. Companies can leverage Hong Kong’s internationalization window and A-shares’ domestic capital and policy resources to achieve dual-platform coordinated financing. The A-share to H-share premium will also gradually move toward being reasonable.

Meanwhile, differentiated positioning will persist long term. “Hong Kong will continue to maintain the characteristics of international capital, flexible listing tools, and global pricing; A-shares will focus on the structure of domestic investors, support for hard tech, policy orientation, and long-term value investing.” Wen Tiannan said. For companies, “returning to A-shares” is not the final goal. How to leverage the two platforms to achieve coordinated upgrades in technology, industry, and capital is where the long-term value lies.

A massive amount of information and precise analysis—available in the Sina Finance app