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

Reporter Yang Jie

According to a March 16 announcement by the National Financial Regulatory Administration, to improve the regulatory framework for wealth management companies and to promote the establishment of differentiated development and regulatory models that match capabilities, the National Financial Regulatory Administration has recently issued the Interim Measures for the Regulatory Rating of Wealth Management Companies (hereinafter referred to as the “Measures”), which shall take effect from the date of issuance.

A relevant official in charge at the National Financial Regulatory Administration said in response to reporters that it is necessary to develop and issue the Measures to further clarify the direction of development in the wealth management industry, improve the regulatory制度体系 for wealth management companies, and promote their continued enhancement of capability levels. First, it is conducive to strengthening the regulatory orientation. By giving full play to the rating as a “compass,” it urges wealth management companies to establish prudent and steady business concepts and to earnestly perform their entrusted-asset management responsibilities. Second, it is conducive to accelerating transformation and development. It promotes wealth management companies to benchmark advanced practices in the industry, identify gaps and shortcomings, continuously strengthen their own capability-building, and enhance endogenous development momentum. Third, it is conducive to rationally allocating regulatory resources. Through regulatory ratings, it better reflects the risk status and operating characteristics of wealth management companies, clarifies key institutions and key areas for regulation, and improves the precision, as well as the scientific nature, of regulation.

In the view of industry insiders, the formal 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,” thereby achieving high-quality development.

Set six major rating elements

“Acting on behalf of others to manage their wealth” is the origin of the asset management industry, including the wealth management industry. According to data disclosed by the National Financial Regulatory Administration, as of the end of December 2025, 32 wealth management companies nationwide had outstanding wealth management product scales of 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 seen that some institutions still have issues such as needing further clarification of their development positioning, investment expertise that still needs improvement, the net-value-based transformation still requiring deeper implementation, and risk control that is not sufficiently完善,” said a relevant official in charge at the National Financial Regulatory Administration in a Q&A with reporters.

The Measures issued this time set out provisions on the overall requirements for regulatory ratings of wealth management companies, rating elements, basic procedures, and categorized regulation. First, it clarifies rating elements and methods. The Measures set up six rating modules: corporate governance, asset management capabilities, risk management, information disclosure, investor rights protection, and information technology. They assign point-weightings of 10%, 25%, 25%, 15%, 15%, and 10% respectively, and, in a targeted manner, set up score add-ons, score deductions, and level adjustment factors to conduct a comprehensive assessment of wealth management companies’ business management and risk conditions. Second, it clarifies the basic procedures for regulatory ratings. Regulatory ratings include links such as the institution’s self-assessment, preliminary review, review, and feedback on results. After the rating ends, if the regulatory department discovers major circumstances that were not掌握 during the rating period, or if there are major changes in the risk or management conditions of the wealth management company, it may make dynamic adjustments to the regulatory rating results. Third, it clarifies the principles of categorized regulation. The regulatory rating results are an important basis for regulatory departments to allocate regulatory resources, carry out market entry, and adopt differentiated regulatory measures.

In the Measures, the two items—asset management capability and risk management—have the highest point weightings (each 25%, totaling 50%). Dong Jimiao, Chief Economist of Zhaolian and Deputy Director of the Shanghai Finance and Development Laboratory, told reporters from the Securities Daily that asset management capability is the foundation of a wealth management company. Giving it a 25% highest weight is to measure a company’s most core capabilities in investment research and product design, and its ability to create value for clients. This directly relates to whether it can preserve and increase the value of residents’ wealth, and it is the “gold standard” for judging whether it is qualified. A high weight means that regulators will closely examine whether wealth management companies can effectively identify, measure, and manage various risks, and protect the safety of investors’ assets.

“By promoting wealth management companies to further optimize corporate governance, enhance asset management capabilities, improve risk management systems, and prudently advance digitization, the Measures will play an irreplaceable leading role in the industry’s high-quality development, indirectly driving stronger investor protection,” said Yang Haiping, a researcher at the Shanghai Academy of Finance and Law, to reporters from the Securities Daily.

Adopt differentiated categorized measures

The Measures provide that the regulatory rating results are divided into levels 1–6 and level S, and that they respectively clarify the risk characteristics and categorized regulatory measures for wealth management companies at different levels. The larger the numerical value, the greater the institution’s risk, and the higher the level of regulatory attention required.

Among them, wealth management companies at levels 1 and 2 have sound operations and relatively good risk conditions. Regulatory supervision mainly relies on off-site and regular supervision, and will prioritize support for innovation pilot businesses such as retirement wealth management. Wealth management companies at levels 3 and 4 have certain or more risk issues. Regulatory supervision needs to strengthen oversight of key areas, adopt necessary corrective measures, control incremental risks, reduce existing risks, and prevent the spread of risks. Wealth management companies at levels 5 and 6 have serious risk issues. Regulatory supervision needs to track risk changes in real time, strictly limit and resolve high-risk businesses, and carry out risk disposal or orderly market exit in an orderly manner. Wealth management companies at level S are those in situations such as restructuring, being taken over, or implementing market exit, and they do not participate in the regulatory rating for that year.

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

“This set of results will affect and determine a wealth management company’s future survival and development space,” said Dong Jimiao. In the future, those wealth management companies with weak investment research and risk control, and chaotic corporate governance, will find it hard to move forward, 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 publicly disclosed, the regulatory constraints behind them will prompt wealth management companies to operate more steadily, which is conducive to safeguarding investors’ rights and interests.

(Editor: Qian Xiaorui)

Keywords: