With the continuous transformation of securities companies’ asset management into public offerings and the completion of the disclosure of the first quarterly report of public funds, the process of securities companies’ asset management public offering business has also appeared in front of investors.
Choice data shows that at the end of the first quarter of 2022, the asset management scale of 42 securities firms’ asset management public offering business was less than one trillion yuan, or 816.602 billion yuan.
The “Daily Economic News” reporter noticed that since 2022, the two major types of assets, equity and fixed income, have lost their money-making effect. However, Choice data also shows that among the 28 comparable brokerages’ asset management businesses, over 70% have achieved scale growth, but there are still brokerages’ asset management businesses that shrank by 40% in the first quarter of this year.
3 100 billion legions are still leading
Choice data shows that as of the end of the first quarter of 2022, among the 28 brokerages in the asset management business, only three asset management companies, namely Orient Securities Asset Management, Caitong Asset Management and Bank of China Securities, ranked in the 100 billion yuan level.
A closer look shows that the top three rankings of securities companies’ asset management public offering business management scale have changed. Orient Securities Asset Management still ranks first with a management scale of over 230 billion yuan. The asset management scale of Caitong Asset Management increased by more than 12 billion yuan to 124.742 billion yuan, surpassing Bank of China Securities and ranking second. Relevant data shows that the asset management scale of Caitong Asset Management has also exceeded 100 billion, reaching 115.3 billion.
With the successive issuance and implementation of public offering and transformation of large collection products, the overall scale of asset management of securities companies has shown an overall upward trend. Choice data shows that at the end of the first quarter of 2022, the asset management scale of 42 securities firms’ asset management public offering business was 816.602 billion yuan, which was less than one trillion yuan.
According to Choice data, during the first quarter of this year, among the 28 comparable brokerage firms’ asset management businesses, a total of 17 brokerage firms’ asset management businesses achieved a year-on-year increase in management scale, accounting for 70% of the total.
Specifically, Everbright Asset Management, Caitong Asset Management and Guojun Asset Management have increased their public offering business management scale by more than 10 billion yuan. In addition, the scale of Zhongtai Asset Management also increased by more than 9 billion yuan during the same period, a year-on-year increase of more than 50%. From the perspective of growth rate, the public offering business scale of Founder Securities and Pacific Securities also increased by more than 50% year-on-year.
It is worth noting that in January this year, Founder Securities added a currency-based fund, Founder Securities Cash Hong Kong currency. As of March 31, 2022, the fund’s assets were about 9.16 billion yuan. At present, there are two large collections under Pacific Securities that have completed the public offering transformation. Among them, Pacific Securities’ 30-day rolling holding bonds was established on April 1 this year. The increase in its asset management scale is mainly due to Pacific Securities’ six-month rolling holding bond collection. Asset management plans to increase both share and net worth during the first quarter of this year.
GF Asset Management’s public offering shrunk by more than 40% month-on-month
Compared with the overall increase in the asset management scale of most securities companies, the publicly offered asset management scale of GF Asset Management has declined by more than 40% month-on-month.
Choice data shows that as of March 31, 2022, GF Asset Management had 8 funds in its public offering business, with a share of 8.582 billion public offerings and a total asset management scale of 6.6394 billion yuan, which was less than 10 billion yuan. Compared with the end of last year, the share of GF Asset Management’s publicly offered assets has shrunk by more than 30%, and the size of its assets has shrunk by more than 42%.
From the product point of view, during the first quarter of this year, GF Asset Management did not have any newly transformed public offering products. However, in mid-March this year, GF Asset Management announced that GF Asset Management’s 3-year regular open bond-type collective asset management plan, which had been transformed for less than half a year, terminated the contract early for liquidation.
In October 2021, GF Asset Management Ruili’s 3-year fixed-opening bond officially completed the public offering transformation. This product is a bond-type collective asset management plan (large collective product), with a 3-year operation cycle, and each operation cycle is closed It operates in an alternating manner between periods and restricted open periods. The 2021 quarterly report of the collective asset management plan shows that at the end of the reporting period, the total share was 2.628 billion, and the net asset value was 2.575 billion yuan. At the same time, the fund manager also stated in the report of the same period that some real estate bonds in the portfolio holdings have been greatly affected by the industry, and the valuation has been dragged down, resulting in large fluctuations in the net value.
At the same time, with the debut of the first quarterly reports of many public offering products of GF Asset Management, many products of GF Asset Management have also experienced major redemptions. Choice data shows that GF Asset Management’s share of Zhaoli’s short- and medium-term bonds shrank by more than 40% during the first quarter, and GF Asset Management’s one-year share of mixed collective asset management plans has dropped from 1,590.07 million shares at the end of the first quarter to 1,083.3 million shares. Shrinked by more than 30%. The share of GF Asset Management Qianli’s one-year holding period bond Class C has also dropped significantly.
Reposition the asset management business according to different resource endowments
While transforming its large collection products, securities firm asset management is also actively preparing to apply for a public offering license to prepare for the public offering fund business.
In the process of transforming the asset management of securities companies to active management business and applying for public fund licenses, how to identify their own positioning and how to issue them out of alignment with the group’s existing public fund companies has always been the focus of outside attention.
“Whether it is retail or institutional, we have to do it. The business of public funds is also a step by step.” An asset manager of a securities firm told reporters on WeChat.
Previously, CITIC Securities stated at the 2021 performance presentation meeting that compared with the original asset management business, the main change of the newly established asset management company is that after the implementation of relevant regulatory policies, it will actively apply for the management qualification of public funds, which will help improve pension funds. The product system, the further development of the large collection product in the future, and the establishment of the third pillar product are all very beneficial. In the future, the asset management business will also give play to the advantages of institutional entrustment, and at the same time, there will be relatively large development opportunities in public fund products, pensions, and the third pillar.
Compared with the transformation of the asset management department of CITIC Securities into an asset management company, the development of China AMC also has its own characteristics. China AMC currently serves more than 150 million individual clients and has advantages in retail business. CITIC Securities Asset Management mainly focuses on institutional clients and high-net-worth clients, with more than 500,000 accounts. CITIC Asset Management is very advantageous in terms of institutional business and high-net-worth.
GF Securities pointed out at the 2021 performance briefing that the asset management business is the high-quality business of GF Securities. Judging from the development results of E Fund and GF Fund, GF Securities has good experience in developing asset management business, and the future development of asset management companies is misplaced with GF Fund in terms of the internal positioning of the group. For public offering qualification applications, the company will also actively apply for public offering qualifications.
At the 2021 performance briefing meeting of Industrial Securities, the future positioning of Industrial Securities Asset Management was clearly given: In the past two years, the company has increased the development and transformation of Industrial Securities Asset Management. First, the positioning of Industrial Securities Asset Management has been clarified. As the main direction of future development, Hexingquan Fund is different from the equity+-based direction, so that it has a product chain from fixed income + to equity + at the level of the entire group, and provides customers with complete products and services according to different needs of customers. From the perspective of the development path, we currently target wealthy class and institutional customers, and at the same time actively do a good job in the transformation of public offerings of large-scale collection products, and seize this opportunity to expand on a large scale.
An asset management person from a securities firm in Shanghai who was interviewed by telephone pointed out: “The resource endowments behind the asset management of various securities firms may be different in the final positioning. Some securities firms have done better at the retail end of asset management, but most of them are still possible. It’s more of an institutional business.”
