As of April 15, 11 out of 12 national joint-stock commercial banks, excluding China Guangfa Bank, have disclosed their 2025 annual results. Against the backdrop of declining interest rates and narrowing net interest margins, the "Matthew effect" within the joint-stock bank sector has intensified. On one hand, the "10-trillion-yuan club" has welcomed new members: CM BANK, Industrial Bank, China CITIC Bank, and Shanghai Pudong Development Bank have all surpassed the 10 trillion yuan mark in total assets. Conversely, there is a sharp divergence in revenue and net profit performance: among the 11 banks, six reported increases in both revenue and net profit, while five experienced declines, with four banks seeing decreases in both metrics.
The "10-trillion-yuan club" has expanded. In 2025, the total assets of joint-stock banks maintained steady growth, with the number of banks in the 10-trillion-yuan tier increasing to four, making the tier distinctions clearer. However, behind the asset growth, revenue and profit tell a different story: some banks achieved simultaneous growth in scale and profit, while more banks experienced asset growth without corresponding profit increases.
In terms of total volume, all 11 joint-stock banks reported positive growth in total assets. The first tier, comprising banks with assets exceeding 10 trillion yuan, expanded to four institutions. CM BANK led with 13.07 trillion yuan, followed by Industrial Bank, China CITIC Bank, and Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, forming the leading group. The second tier, with assets between 5 trillion and 10 trillion yuan, includes China Minsheng Bank, China Everbright Bank, and Ping An Bank, all showing moderate growth and steady scale expansion. The third tier, with assets below 5 trillion yuan, comprises Hua Xia Bank, China Zheshang Bank, Bohai Bank, and Hengfeng Bank. Among these, Hua Xia Bank recorded the highest asset growth rate among joint-stock banks at 8.25%, indicating strong expansion momentum.
When examining revenue and profit against the backdrop of scale growth, divergent trends become apparent. CM BANK undoubtedly achieved dual growth in both scale and profitability. Specifically, its asset size increased by 7.56% year-on-year; revenue saw a slight increase, while net profit exceeded 150 billion yuan, growing by 1.05%, indicating that its massive asset base did not dilute profitability.
Industrial Bank and China CITIC Bank also maintained their positions in the leading group. Industrial Bank's assets grew by 5.58%, with both revenue and net profit posting slight positive growth, demonstrating operational resilience. China CITIC Bank's assets grew by 6.28%, with net profit increasing by nearly 3%. Despite a slight 0.55% decline in revenue, it achieved positive profit growth through cost reduction, efficiency improvements, and provision adjustments. Shanghai Pudong Development Bank emerged as a "dark horse" among the leading banks: while crossing the 10-trillion-yuan asset threshold, its net profit surged by 10.52% year-on-year, making it the fastest-growing bank in terms of profit among the top joint-stock banks.
In contrast to the leading group, the three banks in the second tier generally faced the dilemma of "scale growth accompanied by profit decline." China Minsheng Bank's assets increased slightly by 0.23%, and revenue grew by 4.82%, but net profit fell by 5.37%. China Everbright Bank and Ping An Bank reported asset growth of around 3%, but their revenues declined by 6.72% and 10.40% respectively, with net profit decreases ranging between 4% and 7%.
Within the third tier, divergence was also significant. Hua Xia Bank led the entire sector with 8.25% asset growth, but revenue decreased by 5.39% and net profit fell by 1.90%, indicating that scale expansion has not yet translated into profitability. China Zheshang Bank's assets grew by 4.68%, but revenue and net profit declined by 7.59% and 14.85% respectively, with the latter representing the largest drop among joint-stock banks. Conversely, Bohai Bank and Hengfeng Bank, despite their smaller asset bases, achieved positive growth in both revenue and net profit, with increases of 1.92% and 4.61%, and 5.37% and 8.31% respectively. These two banks are on a positive trajectory towards high-quality development by focusing on regional markets and reducing non-performing assets.
Significant divergence in profitability emerged among joint-stock banks in 2025. Against the backdrop of declining interest rates, traditional net interest income can no longer support growth for all banks, making the contribution of wealth management a key variable influencing profitability. Although some joint-stock banks have aggressively expanded their wealth management businesses, annual report data shows that revenue contributions remain limited, and divergence between banks has intensified.
In the main battlefield of retail wealth management, the ranking of retail Assets Under Management (AUM) changed in 2025. CM BANK maintained its leading position with retail AUM of 17.08 trillion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 14.44%, solidifying its unshakeable dominance. Industrial Bank and China CITIC Bank followed with AUM of 5.86 trillion yuan and 5.36 trillion yuan respectively, growing by 14.68% and 14.29%, demonstrating stable performance. Shanghai Pudong Development Bank's retail AUM reached 4.66 trillion yuan, surpassing Ping An Bank to rank fourth with a growth rate exceeding 20%. Ping An Bank's retail AUM was 4.24 trillion yuan, with a growth rate of only 1.10%, indicating a significant slowdown. China Minsheng Bank, China Everbright Bank, and Hua Xia Bank reported AUM growth rates between 6% and 11%, remaining in the catching-up phase. In contrast, China Zheshang Bank showed remarkable growth of 22.91%, approaching the trillion-yuan scale.
Regarding net interest margins, the declining interest rate cycle has generally pressured asset returns for joint-stock banks, but leading banks have demonstrated stronger margin resilience. CM BANK continued to lead with a net interest margin of 1.87%, followed by Ping An Bank at 1.78%. Industrial Bank and China CITIC Bank reported margins of 1.71% and 1.63% respectively, all above the average for joint-stock banks. Conversely, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, China Minsheng Bank, China Everbright Bank, and Bohai Bank saw their net interest margins decline to 1.42%, 1.40%, 1.40%, and 1.37% respectively, placing them at the lower end. This gradient in net interest margins directly affects each bank's ability to use interest income to offset weaknesses and sets the stage for competition in non-interest income.
Looking at non-interest income overall, among the 11 joint-stock banks in 2025, only China CITIC Bank and China Minsheng Bank achieved positive growth, while the other nine experienced declines to varying degrees, with some banks seeing drops close to 20%. Specifically, CM BANK's non-interest income was 121.939 billion yuan, a slight decrease of 3.39% year-on-year, but its proportion of revenue remained the highest among joint-stock banks at 36.13%, highlighting its structural advantage. China CITIC Bank's non-interest income was 68.006 billion yuan, up 1.55%, accounting for 32.01% of revenue. Industrial Bank's non-interest income was 63.989 billion yuan, remaining largely flat. Notably, China Minsheng Bank's non-interest income surged by 13.67% to 42.739 billion yuan, becoming a standout performer in non-interest income for the year. In contrast, Ping An Bank's non-interest income fell sharply by 18.48% to 43.421 billion yuan, while China Zheshang Bank and Hua Xia Bank saw declines nearing 20%, indicating significant pressure on their non-interest businesses.
In the era of low interest rates, wealth management is no longer optional but a crucial battleground for banks, and the gap within the sector is widening.
In 2025, joint-stock banks continued to strengthen risk control, increasing efforts to dispose of non-performing assets. The non-performing loan (NPL) ratio remained generally stable, and the provision coverage ratio stayed adequate. Asset quality exhibited a pattern of "leading banks being stronger, small and medium-sized banks under pressure, but overall controllable," with significant differences in risk resilience capabilities.
The NPL ratios of most of the 11 joint-stock banks decreased year-on-year, indicating overall controllable risk. Leading banks maintained significantly superior asset quality. CM BANK's NPL ratio was 0.94%, down 0.01 percentage points year-on-year, maintaining the lowest level among joint-stock banks for consecutive years and leading the industry in asset quality. Ping An Bank and Industrial Bank had ratios of 1.05% and 1.08% respectively, both below 1.1%, demonstrating strong risk control capabilities.
Most joint-stock banks' NPL ratios clustered between 1.1% and 1.5%. China CITIC Bank reported 1.15%, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank 1.26%, China Everbright Bank 1.27%, China Minsheng Bank 1.49%, Hua Xia Bank 1.55%, Hengfeng Bank 1.35%, and China Zheshang Bank 1.37%. The majority saw their NPL ratios remain flat or decline year-on-year, indicating a clear trend of risk convergence. Bohai Bank had the highest NPL ratio at 1.66%, though this represented a decrease of 0.10 percentage points year-on-year; while still relatively high in the industry, the improving trend is clear. In terms of NPL formation, joint-stock banks intensified risk disposal in key areas such as real estate, local government financing vehicles, and credit cards. The NPL formation rate remained stable, effectively alleviating downward pressure on asset quality and demonstrating significant achievements in risk control.
Regarding the provision coverage ratio, all joint-stock banks met the regulatory requirement of not less than 120%, indicating generally sufficient risk absorption capacity. However, a clear gap persists, with leading banks having far greater provision buffers than small and medium-sized banks. In terms of trends, the provision coverage ratios of the 11 banks showed 4 increases and 7 decreases, indicating overall pressure.
CM BANK's provision coverage ratio stood at 391.79%, firmly ranking first in the industry with ample risk buffer space. Ping An Bank, Industrial Bank, China CITIC Bank, and Shanghai Pudong Development Bank had ratios of 220.88%, 228.41%, 203.61%, and 200.72% respectively, all exceeding 200%, indicating strong risk resilience. Among small and medium-sized joint-stock banks, provision coverage ratios clustered between 140% and 170%. China Minsheng Bank reported 145.06%, China Everbright Bank 172.45%, Hua Xia Bank 156.67%, Hengfeng Bank 154.40%, Bohai Bank 162.16%, and China Zheshang Bank 169.78. These banks saw year-on-year improvements in their provision coverage ratios, indicating continuously enhanced risk resilience capabilities.
A horizontal comparison shows a difference of over 240 percentage points between the highest and lowest provision coverage ratios among joint-stock banks. Leading banks, leveraging their substantial profit accumulation, enjoy a significant lead in provision adequacy, granting them stronger capacity to handle potential risks. Smaller banks, meanwhile, balance profitability and risk control through appropriate provision accruals. Overall, the asset quality foundation of joint-stock banks remained solid in 2025, but internal gradient divergence intensified. In future economic fluctuations, the "safety cushion" advantage of banks with high provision coverage will become increasingly prominent.