Some banks have adjusted the "performance comparison benchmark" display method
Our reporter Peng Yan
New rules on wealth management sales have been implemented.
The "Interim Measures for the Administration of the Sales of Wealth Management Products by Wealth Management Companies" (hereinafter referred to as the "Measures") officially came into effect on June 27 this year. For ordinary investors, the most important change in the new rules for wealth management sales is the addition of " The calculation basis of "performance comparison benchmark" more intuitively explained to investors that the "performance comparison benchmark" is not the expected return.
"Securities Daily" reporters recently visited a number of bank outlets and found that the current products of many bank wealth management subsidiaries have added the "performance comparison benchmark" calculation basis in accordance with the relevant new regulations.
At the same time, bank staff are obviously more rigorous in their publicity of "performance comparison benchmarks", are more proactive in prompting product risks, and emphasize to investors that "performance benchmarks are not equal to the actual returns of wealth management products."
The way of displaying the performance of wealth management products has changed from the expected rate of return to the “performance comparison benchmark”, and then to the mandatory interpretation of the “performance comparison benchmark”. In the eyes of many industry insiders, the ultimate goal of this progressive regulatory requirement is For the smooth progress of the net worth transformation.
The deputy director of the CITIC Securities Research Institute and the chief FICC analyst clearly stated in an interview with a reporter from the Securities Daily that the current mandatory interpretation of the "performance comparison benchmark" is to further standardize wealth management products and avoid products that reproduce capital-guaranteed income.
Information disclosure under the new standard will be more complete, and investors will have more reference basis when purchasing bank wealth management products.
Diversified display methods
In simple terms, the performance comparison benchmark is the estimated income that the bank may obtain based on the past performance of the product or the historical performance of the same type of product.
However, in order to attract investors, the market has always had the problem of vague performance comparison benchmarks and misleading investors' behavior.
Therefore, the "Measures" clarify that financial product sales institutions must not use performance comparison benchmarks that do not specify the reasons for selection, calculation basis or calculation method, and use absolute values and interval values to display performance comparison benchmarks alone or prominently.
In response to the above requirements, many bank wealth management subsidiaries have recently adjusted and improved their performance comparison benchmark display methods.
"Securities Daily" reporters have seen in many bank mobile apps that most of the bank wealth management subsidiary products currently on sale have added the calculation description of "performance comparison benchmark" on the product display page, which is more detailed and specific than before. ,complete.
However, each bank has different ways of explaining the "performance comparison benchmark".
Some banks add a "!" sign next to the "performance comparison benchmark" on the wealth management product display page; some banks directly change the "performance comparison benchmark" to "annualized income since its establishment", and use the interval value below Show the "performance comparison benchmark" to explain in more detail the basis for the calculation of the rate of return.
In terms of presentation, the performance comparison benchmarks of various banks’ wealth management products are more diversified.
But the same thing is that they all clearly stated that "the benchmark for performance comparison does not represent a promise of revenue."
In addition, for wealth management companies, this prohibitive provision makes the bank staff's intention to break the "just redemption" in the publicity of the "performance comparison benchmark" more obvious.
During the visit by a reporter from the Securities Daily, employees of many bank branches told reporters, “The performance comparison benchmark is not equal to the actual income of wealth management products, but many customers mistakenly believe that the performance comparison benchmark is the expected return. Introduce the product to customers in a complete and comprehensive way."
Need to adjust from both sales and demand
The new wealth management sales regulations have also pushed the topic of how to determine and display the "performance comparison benchmark" of bank wealth management products.
At present, the net value of bank wealth management products is a foregone conclusion.
Banks and wealth management subsidiaries no longer use the expected rate of return, but promote wealth management products by displaying "performance comparison benchmarks".
However, due to factors such as risk appetite and investment habits, most investors are mostly middle-aged and elderly. They hope that when investing in financial products, they can understand the possible benefits of financial products in an intuitive and clear way.
However, if the "performance comparison benchmark" is not comprehensive and accurate, investors will still mistake the "performance comparison benchmark" as expected returns, which is not conducive to changing investment concepts and realizing the net value transformation of wealth management products.
Therefore, the reform of the performance comparison benchmark format is not simply a modification of the expression method. Investor education and the re-regulation of the sales process of wealth management products have become problems that need to be solved urgently.
Insiders in the banking industry also pointed out that the fundamental point of net worth transformation is to cultivate a preference for net worth products from the demand side, that is, investors.
Regulatory authorities clarify this provision, which helps to cultivate investors' investment philosophy for net worth products.
How to improve investors' awareness of investment risks and change the previous habitual concept of rigid redemption also tests the marketing capabilities of banks.
Obviously told the "Securities Daily" reporter that first of all, when selling wealth management products, bank sales staff should explain the characteristics of net worth wealth management products to investors, and compare and distinguish the past expected return products with today's net worth products. This relies on the professional training of bank sales staff by banks; secondly, banks should warn investors with real cases of breaking the net of wealth management products.
“In addition, banks should also use an intelligent system to identify investors’ risk tolerance levels and monitor their investment behavior. On the one hand, they should remind investors to invest within their own risk tolerance; on the other hand, they should carry out targeted marketing and classification. Related Services".
The new regulations also lay the foundation for the net value of products from the sales side, and product sales need to do a good job of publicity and education.
Puyi Standards researcher Li Zixin said bluntly that the implementation of the "Measures" will add a certain amount of work to the sales of wealth management products, but it is very important for institutions and investors. A good benchmark will help the investment of wealth management products to be more clear and reasonable. It is also conducive to creating a healthy and sound institutional environment for the sales of wealth management products.
At present, there is no unified statement on the formulation of "performance comparison benchmarks". It is clearly suggested that the market is changing at any time, and there are often certain deviations in performance estimates.
For bank wealth management products, retracement control is very important.
Therefore, when setting performance comparison benchmarks, it is necessary to refer to macroeconomic conditions and take market factors into consideration to let investors know the possible return rates under different market conditions, especially when the market performance is not good, the product may lose money.
The new regulations prohibit the "single or prominent use of absolute values and interval values to display performance comparison benchmarks", and it is more reasonable to show the expected performance from the perspective of sensitivity analysis.
(Securities Daily)