The wealth management market welcomes new regulations to accelerate industry transformation and development

By Our Reporter Yang Jie

According to a notice from the National Financial Regulatory Administration on March 16, to improve the regulatory framework for wealth management companies and promote the establishment of a differentiated development and supervision model matched to their capabilities, the National Financial Regulatory Administration recently issued the Interim Measures for the Regulatory Rating of Wealth Management Companies (hereinafter referred to as the “Measures”), which took effect as of the date of promulgation.

A relevant person in charge from the National Financial Regulatory Administration said that it is necessary to formulate and issue the “Measures” in order to further clarify the direction of development for the wealth management industry, improve the regulatory制度体系 for wealth management companies, and promote these companies to continuously enhance their capability levels. First, it is conducive to strengthening the regulatory orientation. By leveraging the rating as a “commanding baton,” it will urge wealth management companies to establish prudent and sound business concepts and effectively fulfill their duties in entrusted asset management. Second, it is conducive to accelerating transformation and development. It will push wealth management companies to benchmark advanced industry practices, identify gaps and shortcomings, continuously strengthen their own capability building, and enhance endogenous development动力. Third, it is conducive to rationally allocating regulatory resources. Through regulatory ratings, better reflect wealth management companies’ risk conditions and operating characteristics, clarify key institutions and key areas for supervision, and improve the precision and scientific nature of regulation.

In the view of industry insiders, the official release of the “Measures” is an important step for the bank wealth management market to move toward standardized and mature development. It will drive wealth management companies to shift from “competing on scale” to “competing on internal capabilities,” and thereby achieve high-quality development.

Set Six Major Rating Factors

“Acting on behalf of others and managing wealth for others” is the underlying origin of the asset management industry, including the wealth management industry. The data disclosed by the National Financial Regulatory Administration show that as of the end of December 2025, the scale of existing wealth management products of 32 wealth management companies nationwide was 30.7 trillion yuan, accounting for 92% of the total 33.3 trillion yuan scale of all wealth management products in the market. After more than six years of development, wealth management companies have achieved positive results in standardized transformation and have become an important part of China’s asset management industry.

“At the same time, it should also be noted that some institutions still need to further clarify their development positioning, their professional investment capabilities need improvement, the net-value transformation still needs to be further deepened, and their risk management and control are not sufficiently完善,” the relevant person in charge from the National Financial Regulatory Administration said when answering questions from reporters.

The “Measures” issued this time make provisions on the overall requirements for the regulatory rating of wealth management companies, rating factors, basic procedures, and categorized supervision. First, clarify the regulatory rating factors and methods. The “Measures” set up six rating modules—corporate governance, asset management capabilities, risk management, information disclosure, investor rights protection, and information technology—and assign score weights of 10%, 25%, 25%, 15%, 15%, and 10% respectively. It also sets bonus items, deduction items, and level adjustment factors in a targeted manner, to conduct a comprehensive assessment of a wealth management company’s business management and risk conditions. Second, clarify the basic procedures for regulatory ratings. Regulatory rating includes steps such as institution self-assessment, preliminary assessment, review, and results feedback. After the rating is completed, if the regulatory authority discovers major circumstances not captured during the rating period, or if the company’s risk or management conditions undergo major changes, the regulatory rating results may be adjusted dynamically. Third, clarify the principles of categorized supervision. Regulatory rating results are an important basis for regulatory authorities to allocate regulatory resources, carry out market access, and adopt differentiated regulatory measures.

In the “Measures,” the two score weights with the highest values are asset management capability and risk management (each accounts for 25%, totaling 50%). Dong Haimiao, Chief Economist of Zhaolian and Deputy Director of the Shanghai Finance and Development Laboratory, said to reporters from The Securities Daily that asset management capability is the foundation on which a wealth management company builds its business. Assigning it the highest weight of 25% is to measure a company’s most core capabilities in investment research and investment decision-making, its product design level, and its ability to create value for clients. This directly relates to whether it can preserve and increase the value of residents’ wealth, and is the “gold standard” for judging whether it is qualified. A high weight means regulators will strictly examine whether wealth management companies can effectively identify, measure, and manage various types of risks, and protect investors’ asset safety.

“The ‘Measures’ will help wealth management companies further optimize corporate governance, enhance asset management capability, improve risk management systems, and prudently advance digitalization. It will play an irreplaceable leading role in the industry’s high-quality development, and indirectly promote strengthening investor protection,” Yang Haiping, a researcher at the Shanghai Academy of Finance and Law, said to reporters from The Securities Daily.

Implement Differentiated Categorized Measures

The “Measures” stipulate that regulatory rating results are divided into levels 1–6 and an S level, and that different risk characteristics and categorized supervision measures for wealth management companies at different levels are specified accordingly. The larger the numerical value, the greater the institution’s risk, and the higher the degree of regulatory attention required.

Specifically, for wealth management companies at levels 1 and 2, their operations are stable and their risk conditions are relatively good. Supervision focuses mainly on off-site and routine regulatory approaches, with priority given to supporting innovation pilot-type businesses such as pension wealth management. For wealth management companies at levels 3 and 4, they have certain or relatively many risk issues. Supervision needs to strengthen oversight of key areas, take necessary corrective measures, control incremental risks, reduce existing stock risks, and prevent risk spillover. For wealth management companies at levels 5 and 6, they have serious risk issues. Supervision needs to track risk changes in real time, strictly limit and resolve high-risk businesses, and orderly implement risk disposal or market exit. For S-level wealth management companies, which are wealth management companies in situations such as reorganization, being taken over, or implementing market exit, they do not participate in that year’s regulatory rating.

“Rating results are deeply bound to business development. The ‘positive incentives’ and ‘negative constraints’ of differentiated supervision, and the differentiated regulatory treatment faced at different levels, are the core variables that determine their survival space and development track,” a relevant person in charge from Guangyin Wealth Management said to reporters from The Securities Daily.

“This set of results will affect and determine a wealth management company’s future survival and development space,” Dong Haimiao said. In the future, wealth management companies with weak investment research and investment decision-making capabilities, lax risk controls, and chaotic corporate governance will find it difficult to move an inch, while leading and stable institutions will obtain more development resources. The rating methodology also emphasizes information disclosure and investor protection. Although the rating results are not disclosed to the public, the regulatory constraints behind them will prompt wealth management companies to operate more prudently, which is conducive to safeguarding investors’ rights and interests.

(Editor: Qian Xiaorui)

Key words: