SPG Ratings China /insights/articles/2020-8-20-bank-quarterly-2020q2_en content esgSubNav
评级报告

Chinese Banks’ Q2 Performance Remained Stable but COVID-19 Credit Cost Continues to be a Concern

债项跟踪评级报告:北京国有资本运营管理有限公司相关债项跟踪评级报告,2025年6月26日

“稳楼市”政策料加码:货币化安置与收储成看点

城投非标化解进入深水区:违约整体趋缓,高成本区域融资困局待解

煤价走低,煤企是否重回2015?


Chinese Banks’ Q2 Performance Remained Stable but COVID-19 Credit Cost Continues to be a Concern

Although China’s commercial banking sector delivered stable asset quality performance in the second quarter of 2020, we continue to expect higher pressure on credit cost and profitability going ahead because of COVID-19. Our overall outlook for the sector remains stable as the Chinese economy is recovering, and government support remains strong.
Asset quality metrics in the second quarter remained stable. The industry’s non-performing loan (“NPL”) ratio increased from 1.91% as of the end of Q1 to 1.94% as of the end of Q2, while the special mention loan (“SML”) ratio dropped from 2.97% to 2.75%. As of the end of Q2, the total amount of SML + NPL was RMB 6.6 trillion, down by 0.7% when compared to the end of Q1.
Despite the apparently stable asset quality performance in the first half of the year, we expect the credit cost caused by COVID-19 to increase in the latter half of 2020 and into 2021. The lagging effect of NPL classification and forbearance measures given to small business borrowers have contributed to the stability of asset quality metrics in the first half of 2020. Other reasons include the recovering economy, high growth of new loans, and the writing-off of bad debt.
The final impact of COVID-19 on asset quality is far from certain, and highly dependent on the progress of economic recovery. We believe the government is vigilant and responsive to the potential risks that lie ahead for the banking sector and are taking measures to ensure the stability of the sector. Three major measures being taken include government-led capital injection, improvement of corporate governance and a clean-up of legacy bad debt.
There was a significant increase in loans to micro and small enterprises (“MSE”) in the second quarter. MSE loans grew by 9.4% compared to the end ofQ1. Mega banks led MSE loan growth, delivering an increase of 13.6%. We believe this is in line with the government policy of stabilizing employment. However, it is still too early to determine the potential impact of MSE lending on asset quality.
Downward pressure on net interest margins (“NIM”) was only marginal in the second quarter. The banking sector’s average NIM dropped only 1 basis point to 2.09% in Q2 from Q1. We believe that lower funding costs in the interbank market have mitigated the NIM pressure. Nevertheless, further NIM pressure would continue as the government pushes for lower interest rates for the real economy.
We have noted downward pressure on banks’ profitability in the second quarter, and we expect the pressure to continue into 2021 as it may take years for the credit cost caused by the pandemic to be fully absorbed. In the second quarter of 2020, the annualized return on assets of the banking sector was 0.83%, 15 basis points lower than Q1.
Steady asset growth and weakened profitability in the second quarter have resulted in lower regulatory capital ratios. The banking sector’s total assets grew by 10.8% YoY in the second quarter. As of the end of Q2, the banking sector had an average reported capital adequacy ratio of 14.21%, 0.32 percentage points lower than the end of Q1.
In the second quarter, the central bank continued to ensure ample systemwide liquidity while keeping interest rates from falling too low. According to the People’s Bank of China, it is fully aware of the danger of an extremely low interest rate environment and has moderated the extent of the interest rate drop in the second quarter. Nevertheless, we continue to expect the funding and liquidity profile of the banking sector to remain stable.
Despite lingering uncertainty related to COVID-19, China’s economy is progressing steadily on a U-shaped economic recovery trajectory, an assumption which is fundamental to our overall stable outlook of the industry. After GDP growth dropped by 6.8% YoY in Q1, the growth rate bounced back to a positive 3.2% in Q2.


债项跟踪评级报告:北京国有资本运营管理有限公司相关债项跟踪评级报告,2025年6月26日

2025年6月26日,标普信评发布北京国有资本运营管理有限公司相关债项的跟踪评级报告,维持相关债项的信用等级为AAAspc。以下链接为相关债项信用等级报告全文。

<%@ Register TagPrefix="uc" TagName="GatedContent" Src="~/UserControls/Ratings/GatedContent.ascx" %>


“稳楼市”政策料加码:货币化安置与收储成看点

5月房地产市场整体表现疲软,销售、投资及融资数据均呈现边际走弱态势,尤其是一二线城市新房价格环比转跌、一线城市二手房价格环比跌幅扩大,表明行业企稳仍面临压力。具体来看,1-5月全国商品房销售额累计同比下降3.8%,销售面积累计同比下降2.9%,降幅分别较1-4月扩大0.6和0.1个百分点。房价数据显示,5月70个大中城市新房价格指数环比下跌0.22%,跌幅较4月扩大0.1个百分点,一二线城市在经历5-6个月的价格企稳后首次出现环比下跌;同期二手房市场调整更为明显,一线城市二手房价格指数环比下跌0.7%,跌幅较上月扩大0.5个百分点。5月新房和二手房价格环比上涨城市数量持续收缩,其中新房价格上涨城市降至13个(较上月减少9个),二手房价格上涨城市仅剩3个(较上月减少2个)。

我们认为,6月13日的国常会提出“以更大力度推动房地产市场止跌回稳”,或为下阶段推出宽松政策释放了明确信号。目前各地因城施策放松限制性政策已充分落地,仅少数一线城市核心区域仍实施限购,首付比例及房贷利率也已处于历史低位。下阶段政策能否见效的关键在于城中村改造货币化安置及存量房收储等政策的落地力度。

点击下方按钮获取完整版报告。

<%@ Register TagPrefix="uc" TagName="GatedContent" Src="~/UserControls/Ratings/GatedContent.ascx" %>


城投非标化解进入深水区:违约整体趋缓,高成本区域融资困局待解

  • “一揽子化债”政策已初见成效,城投非标债务的整体风险趋于收敛。2024年下半年至2025年1-5月期间,城投非标风险事件有所减少。天津、广西柳州、宁夏银川等地通过债务结构调整,降低高息非标占比,取得阶段性成果;然而在山东、陕西、贵州、云南和河南等地,部分非标项目风险仍在。 
  • 非标债务化解面临成本与规模压降难题。中西部及河南、山东省内经济欠发达地区非标成本仍处于高位,与债券发行利率差异显著。城投非标债务化解难度大,主要体现在财政压力与融资约束、置换债额度缺口大、银行贷款置换进展缓慢等。如西安市非标债务化解面临区域财政可持续性弱、债务规模庞大等挑战。 
  • 非标风险事件爆发峰值已过,但局部压力犹存。尽管非标债务规模逐步压降,但其作为区域融资体系的重要补充,仍在维系地方资金链条中发挥着现实作用。从风险视角看,非标违约的集中爆发期已过,但部分财政薄弱、债务结构失衡地区仍面临较大压力,考虑到非标的劣后属性,风险事件仍难以完全消除。 

点击下方按钮获取完整版报告。

<%@ Register TagPrefix="uc" TagName="GatedContent" Src="~/UserControls/Ratings/GatedContent.ascx" %>


煤价走低,煤企是否重回2015?

  • 我们预计,随着绿色低碳政策的深入推进、新能源发电替代效应的持续显现,叠加部分传统工业领域需求疲软等因素,我国煤炭需求增速将呈现放缓态势。未来1-2年内,煤炭需求或将进入峰值平台期,在此期间及之后一段时间虽可能面临阶段性波动,但整体仍然具有支撑。
  • 中国的能源结构将继续经历转型调整,但煤炭对于全国能源保供依然具有很高重要性。虽然煤炭供需紧张格局已得到明显缓解,但未来一段时间政策端仍将建立在“保供”基础之上,短期较难见到转向,2025年国内煤炭产量小幅增长,行业供给保持相对宽松。地缘政治摩擦或对煤价存在扰动,但仍以煤炭行业供需格局为主导。
  • 我们认为,由于债务规模的积累,随着煤价的回落,发债样本煤企整体财务杠杆水平将面临明显回升。高负债煤企在面临利润和现金流收缩时财务杠杆或显著承压。
  • 样本煤企债务的变化对重要长期生利资产增长的贡献效率存在较明显差异。焦煤集团、平煤神马、中煤集团等,过去五年长期生利资产增速大于债务增速,资产债务结构有所改善;而华阳集团、晋能电力、阳泰集团、冀中能源等债务增速明显高于长期生利资产增速。
  • 由于经历了较长的行业景气周期,多数煤炭企业在手货币资金较为充足,现阶段流动性风险可控,但随着周期下行,流动性状况或面临弱化。
<%@ Register TagPrefix="uc" TagName="GatedContent" Src="~/UserControls/Ratings/GatedContent.ascx" %>