The insurance sector has entered its mid-year review season over the past two weeks.

From large insurance groups to smaller players, and from head offices down to local branches, a series of intensive half-year operational and business review meetings have been convened to assess the first six months, analyze the new landscape, plan for the second half, and push to meet annual targets.

We have observed numerous achievements: premium growth, profit attainment, improvements in new business value, and which operations have outperformed the market.

While these solid results may allow most industry professionals a momentary sigh of relief, a different set of figures is causing widespread concern.

How far are we from achieving the full-year targets? Can the growth momentum from the first half be sustained?

Following the implementation of Document No. 65 and the downward adjustment of dividend insurance illustration rates, how will the sales front tackle the second half?

With the new accounting standards overlapping with the formal phase of Solvency II, how many small and medium-sized insurers can withstand the pressure?

Furthermore, why have insurance stocks become significant underperformers even as listed insurers report record-high half-year profits? Commercial health insurance expectations are once again elevated, seemingly pushed to the forefront of medical payment reforms. And what about the growth rate of new energy vehicle insurance?

Perhaps everyone has many thoughts, some expressed freely, others held back.

Reviewing news articles and past reports won't change the existing reality or produce new outcomes.

However, it can yield new insights. Let's attempt to convene a mid-year forum for the insurance industry to examine the key topics of greatest concern.

First Key Discussion Point

The foremost external factor for any insurer's mid-year review is the regulatory environment.

For the first half of 2026, a significant change drawing intense focus comes from the regulatory level.

On May 29th, Ding Xiangqun was appointed as the Party Committee Secretary of the National Financial Regulatory Administration (NFRA), and in June, she was confirmed as its head.

Previously serving as Chairman of PICC Group, her career spans state-owned commercial banks, policy banks, local government, and major insurance groups, including a role as Deputy General Manager of China Taiping.

On June 17th, at the Lujiazui Forum, Ding stated the administration would accelerate the revision and issuance of the Banking Supervision Law and the Insurance Law, improve early financial risk correction mechanisms, and promote early identification, warning, exposure, and resolution of risks.

Two aspects warrant particular attention from the industry.

First is the revision of the Insurance Law. Profound changes have occurred in corporate governance, fund utilization, sales channels, internet marketing, risk resolution, and consumer protection. How the current law addresses these new issues will directly impact insurers' future operational boundaries.

Second is the early risk correction mechanism, signifying a further forward shift in risk intervention. Measures will no longer wait until solvency is severely inadequate, liquidity issues are apparent, or consumer interests are substantially harmed. Instead, intervention will occur earlier when operational metrics, governance, asset-liability management, or business structures show anomalies.

In the first half, the industry received approximately 910 to over 1,000 penalty notices under various statistical methods, with fines totaling about 1.6 to 1.75 billion yuan. Nearly a thousand individuals faced accountability, with around 40 banned from the industry.

Simultaneously, multiple key documents reflect increased constraints on insurer management, making the responsibility chain highly transparent, with 'look-through' supervision applied even to expense approvals.

This clarification of the responsibility chain, more than the fines themselves, is noteworthy. Board members, general managers, chief actuaries, financial heads, and business executives are being integrated into product, expense, channel, and compliance management accountability systems.

This regulatory approach is likely to persist, becoming a crucial environmental variable for insurers. More important than predicting a specific regulatory style is understanding how the Insurance Law revision, early risk correction, and management accountability will be concretely implemented.

Second Key Discussion Point

The Ministry of Finance revised and issued the "Accounting Standards for Business Enterprises No. 25 – Insurance Contracts" in December 2020. Listed insurers adopted it from January 1st, 2023, while other companies were required to adopt it from January 1st, 2026, though many have already transitioned early.

This three-year period has resulted in non-uniform financial metrics like industry profits, making aggregated industry data less reflective of current operational fundamentals. Moreover, even for a single company, financial statements under the new standards can be difficult to interpret for operational performance.

Thus, insurer financial statements, already challenging to understand, have become even more perplexing. Some industry experts even suggest that the financial reporting of insurers, especially life insurers, has reached an almost 'fantastical' level. With actuaries and finance professionals now often in leadership roles, significant room for operational maneuvering exists.

It's also noted that if short-term operational metrics are the sole evaluation criteria, neglecting long-term development, executives could indeed achieve impressive results during their tenure through phased strategies.

Setting aside these deeper concerns, many small and medium-sized insurers face challenges from the transition itself.

Under the new standards, more financial assets are classified as Fair Value Through Profit or Loss (FVTPL), meaning equity and interest rate fluctuations directly impact the income statement, amplifying profit volatility. Simultaneously, using spot rates for reserve discounting and the widespread adoption of the OCI option means more reserves are booked to Other Comprehensive Income during rate declines, depressing net assets.

Q1 2026 solvency report summaries show that among 72 life insurers, 24 saw net asset declines, with 2 falling below zero.

While the number of declining companies appears to be only one-third, it's important to note that at least 37 companies had already transitioned before 2026.

Off-balance-sheet challenges are also significant. According to Willis Towers Watson research, the average planned cost for implementing IFRS 17 for the world's 24 largest multinational insurers in 2021 was about $175-200 million, and about $20 million for 288 others. A Hong Kong insurance group invested approximately $150 million, with implementation cycles typically exceeding 30 months.

Even for domestic listed companies, system transformation investments are in the hundreds of millions of RMB. For many small and medium-sized insurers already facing operational challenges, this无疑是 adds strain.

The new standards address accounting口径, but how do we evaluate insurer operations? The industry needs to establish a long-term operational evaluation system not swayed by short-term profits. Evaluating an insurer requires examining the income statement, balance sheet, solvency, value metrics, cash flow, and business quality simultaneously.

Third Key Discussion Point

For some small and medium-sized insurers, the most pressing issue may no longer be sourcing premiums, but the pressure from the end of the Solvency II (C-ROSS Phase II) transition period in the first half of 2026. Institutions that previously enjoyed 'one-company-one-policy'缓冲 no longer have that cushion.

Reviewing the "Insurance Company Solvency Supervision Rules (II)" issued by the former CBIRC in December 2021, key points include stricter recognition of actual capital, tiered core capital, look-through measurement, and adjustments to minimum capital requirements.

The 'one-company-one-policy' approach allowed companies to proactively apply to the regulator for a暂缓执行 of risk factors significantly affected by the rule switch, to be phased in from 2022, originally ending by late 2024.

However, on December 20th, 2024, the NFRA issued a notice extending the transition period by one year to the end of 2025.

With the transition ending in 2026, non-listed insurers' Q1 2026 solvency reports generally fully apply the formal Phase II rules.

During this period, the industry witnessed a wave of bond issuances and capital increases.

Incomplete statistics show capital supplement bonds and perpetual bonds issued by insurers exceeded 100 billion yuan in both 2023 and 2024. In 2025, 19 insurers issued bonds totaling approximately 741.7 billion yuan, mostly 'redeeming old to issue new,' indicating a decline from previous years but remaining at historically high levels. Perpetual bonds accounted for about 500 billion yuan across 10 issuances, nearly 70% of the total.

Small and medium-sized insurers, constrained by high perpetual bond thresholds (e.g., balance not exceeding 30% of core capital), often resort to capital supplement bonds, which do little to alleviate core capital pressure.

The alternative, capital increase through equity, is also extremely difficult for small companies. News reports indicate some small insurers' equity listings attract no interest even at 90% discounts.

Meanwhile, well-performing medium-sized companies and leading insurers have not lagged in capital increases. Incomplete stats show 21 insurers approved for capital increases totaling about 41.272 billion yuan in 2025. Small insurers whose shareholders cannot inject capital face a lack of capital工具 options, widening the gap with leaders.

Compounded by the interest rate environment, the持续下行 of the 750-day moving average government bond yield curve forces increased reserve provisions, higher liabilities, compressed net assets, and a drag on actual capital. The new accounting standard transition also negatively叠加 with the stricter formal Phase II rules.

This means, for some small and medium-sized insurers, the biggest challenge is no longer where business comes from, but who is willing to continue providing capital. When bond issuance is limited and capital increases are difficult, what can these insurers rely on to修复 capital?

Fourth Key Discussion Point

The assumed interest rate for traditional life insurance products saw its decline暂缓. In January, the research value微降至 1.89% from 1.90%; in April, it rebounded to 1.93%, up 4 basis points—the first increase since public disclosure began.

The current maximum assumed rate for traditional products is 2.0%, only 7 basis points above the 1.93% research value, not triggering the adjustment condition of a 25+ basis point difference for two consecutive quarters.

The upper limits for traditional (2.0%), participating (1.75%), and universal (minimum guaranteed 1.0%) products remained unchanged in the first half. Following the 2025 product transition, the industry gained a relatively stable pricing window.

However, what was 'adjusted' this time was the illustration rate. Requirements mandated lowering the upper limit for participating insurance illustration rates from 3.9% to 3.5%. New products立即执行, while existing products above 3.5% needed变更备案 or discontinuation by June 30th. Before the deadline, over 20 institutions密集 adjusted or delisted上百款 products.

Of course, with a uniform 'line' for dividend illustration rates, the dividend fulfillment ratio may become the next major battleground.

While this change is beneficial for guiding insurers to focus on long-term product management in the medium to long term—as sustained high dividends are the best competitiveness for participating products—it must be acknowledged that the sales front faces significant short-term challenges.

With趋同 illustration rates and a lack of hard 'evidence' like long-term dividend levels, sales必然 will emphasize the logic that 'buying participating insurance is buying the insurance company.'

For insurers, after illustration rate convergence, how to tell a compelling 'story' may become a headache for channels and compliance departments. Insurers must provide more convincing long-term proof than a mere illustration table.

Fifth Key Discussion Point

On July 13th, New China Life Insurance预计 2026 first-half net profit attributable to shareholders would be between 20.719 billion and 23.678 billion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 40% to 60%.

The next day, China Life Insurance预计 first-half net profit between 128.933 billion and 137.119 billion yuan, surging 215% to 235%.

Combined, their profits of 149.652 billion to 160.797 billion yuan equate to 35.2% to 37.8% of the full-year 2025 profits of the five A-share listed insurers.

Furthermore, based on Q1 reports and earnings forecasts, Q2 contributed the vast majority of half-year profits: New China Life's Q2 profit was approximately 14.218-17.177 billion yuan; China Life's was about 109.428-117.614 billion yuan.

Yet, the capital market似乎 does not认可 such performance. By June 30th, the Shenwan Insurance II Index had累计下跌 28.9%, while the CSI 300 rose 7.5%. All five A-share insurance stocks closed lower.

The primary reason is market sector rotation. In the first half, the tech sector exerted a massive资金虹吸 effect on almost all other sectors.

However, insurance funds are still buying同行. At the end of Q1, China Life increased its stake in Ping An A-shares to 1.38%, entering the top ten shareholders. Ping An Life raised its stake in China Life H-shares to 15% on May 20th, further increasing to 16.02% by end-May.

That said, the earnings forecasts from New China Life and China Life prove profit elasticity but also expose its fragility: liability-side improvements determine long-term value, while equity market performance and financial asset measurement methods can drastically alter net profit within a quarter.

This leaves a question: if the equity market is no longer bullish, what will支撑 insurance company profit growth?

Sixth Key Discussion Point

Document No. 65落地, marking the entry of bancassurance into the 'Reported and Executed as One' 2.0 phase. How will the industry respond?

'Reported and Executed as One' was implemented in the bancassurance channel in the second half of 2023 with显著效果. Data shows 2024, the first full year of implementation, saw industry手续费骤降 45%, amounting to nearly 70 billion yuan.

However, as the saying goes, '上有政策, 下有...' Conversations with frontline personnel reveal that old fee competition hasn't完全消失; it has merely shifted from overt commissions to more complex areas like specialist salaries, training services, business promotion, and fixed cost allocations.

To address this, the life insurance regulatory department issued the "Notice on Further Strengthening the Management of Bank Agency Channel Expenses" (Jin Shouxian Han [2026] No. 65) in late March. The document entered a rectification period in the first half and took正式 effect on July 1st.

The most critical change in Document 65 is the further disaggregation of previously bundled bancassurance fees. When filing bancassurance products, insurers must separately report levels for commissions paid to banks, salaries/incentives for bancassurance specialists, training and customer service fees, and allocated fixed costs. Actual expenditures must comply with actuarial reports and be supported by genuine, legal, and valid documentation.

The board must hear a专题 report on 'Reported and Executed as One' at least annually. The general manager, chief actuary, financial head, and executive in charge of bancassurance bear respective responsibilities.

The document further堵住 potential loopholes for fee reallocation. Surpluses from commissions or training/customer service fees cannot be调剂 as specialist salaries. Fees like出单费, information费, or technical service费 cannot become变相支付渠道费用的出口. Business promotion activities require detailed records with time, location,机构, personnel, and evidence meticulously documented.

However, at an innovation forum in April, many executives expressed concerns: after fee breakdowns, how will cost structures adapt for different types of insurers? After责任穿透, can基层 continue using旧办法 to solve problems previously addressed with flexible methods? Maintaining bank motivation thus becomes a key part of利益机制重算.

This may require more detailed guidance. Document 65's附件 is titled "Q&A on Bank Agency Channel Expense Management (Part 1)"—naturally, Part 2 may follow.

Regardless, the bancassurance channel will likely see more pronounced K-shaped分化. Large companies can rely on brand, products, service networks, and system capabilities to secure bank shelf space. The旧办法 of relying on fees to compete for outlets is becoming increasingly difficult for small and medium-sized insurers.

Yet, bancassurance remains the生命线 for many small and medium-sized insurers for the foreseeable future.

Seventh Key Discussion Point

With the new eight-department online marketing regulations出台, who is still qualified to convert traffic into policies?

On April 24th, the People's Bank of China, NFRA, CSRC, CAC, and four other departments jointly released the "Measures for the Administration of Online Marketing of Financial Products," bringing insurance under unified online marketing rules alongside deposits, loans, securities, and asset management products. The measures take effect September 30th, 2026.

Under these measures, financial institutions can conduct online marketing themselves or legally entrust third-party internet platforms to provide marketing services.

However, organizations and individuals other than financial institutions or entrusted platforms are prohibited from conducting or变相 conducting online marketing of financial products. Third-party platforms cannot转委托, nor can they介入合同签订, fund transfer, suitability assessments, quota evaluations, or other sales环节. They cannot engage in interactive consultation with consumers regarding specific financial products. When providing purchase redirection, the page must跳转至 the financial institution's own platform.

Simultaneously, financial institutions are responsible for the legality and compliance of marketing content. Livestreams,短视频, public accounts, and algorithmic recommendations are all纳入管理, with constraints on夸大保险责任或收益, misleading language,强制搭售, and骚扰营销.

This means the previous野蛮生长 logic, where大量 online business relied on personal accounts, personal expression, and personal IPs, is很难延续.

Thus, the agent IP model based on 'free traffic' has likely run its course. Online life insurance operations are即将进入 a new stage—one based on competition in organizational capabilities.

Capabilities like corporate account matrices, content production mechanisms, compliance review, lead承接, advisor conversion, and customer management will become new门槛.

At a May innovation forum, industry insiders noted that post-regulation, platforms are tightening control over personal accounts, requiring them to be bound to institutions... If institutions can体系化建立 online operational capabilities and集中线上获客 for empowerment, this regulatory shift presents an opportunity. A new wave of IPs may emerge.

These new IPs will likely not be the solo efforts of the past. They could be institutional IPs, advisor matrices, product and scenario IPs, or even integrated content and conversion systems jointly built by insurers, intermediaries, internet platforms, and service ecosystems.

The key is who can率先建立 a truly institutionalized, compliant, and replicable online operational system.

Eighth Key Discussion Point

With basic medical insurance finally getting a 'Workbuddy,' is commercial health insurance about to take a seat at the main table?

The policy position of commercial health insurance has been明确. The 2026 Government Work Report, in the section on strengthening basic medical and health services,明确提出: "健全多层次医疗保障体系, steadily推动 basic medical insurance provincial-level统筹, optimize医药集中采购和价格治理, deepen医保支付方式改革,完善结余资金使用政策. Resolutely打击欺诈骗保. Accelerate the development of commercial health insurance,推动创新药和医疗器械高质量发展, better满足人民群众多元化就医用药需求."

This marks the first time 'commercial health insurance' has been写入 the Government Work Report's annual tasks.

Comparing previous reports: 2021-2023 focused on集采降费, public hospital reform,分级诊疗, etc. 2024首次 listed 'innovative drugs' as an emerging industry. 2025首次提 'formulate an innovative drug directory' and mentioned in the work review 'launching a commercial health insurance innovative drug directory.' 2026正式 pushes commercial health insurance to the forefront, signaling policy support for innovative drugs shifting from macro positioning to payment system落地.

Subsequently, the '15th Five-Year Plan' outline further proposed充分发挥商业医疗保险补充保障作用.

On the institutional level, the second review draft of the Medical Security Law草案, released April 27th this year, added '健全多层次医疗保障体系' and写入 encouragement for developing commercial health insurance, medical互助, and related慈善捐赠.

The groundwork for this policy has been laid over two years. In September 2024, at a State Council Information Office press conference, NHSA Director Zhang Ke outlined the multi-level medical security system as '1+3+N'.

'1' refers to the全国统一的医保信息平台 and医保大数据 as core infrastructure and service capabilities.

'3' refers to the three-tier basic medical security system: basic medical insurance, critical illness insurance, and medical assistance.

'N' refers to other保障力量 like commercial health insurance (including惠民保),慈善捐赠, medical互助, and trade union employee互助.

That same month, during调研 in Guangdong and Guizhou, Zhang Ke further emphasized the need to '改革掉不利于商业健康保险支付的各种限制'.

Later, Beijing, Shenzhen等地 began piloting data sharing, personal account purchases of惠民保, and商保清分结算. This year, long-term care insurance transitioned from pilots to system building, also重新划定了协同边界 for commercial nursing insurance.

With various players in position, what needs to be proven next is: How can commercial health insurance establish stable, sustainable, and sufficiently large-scale financing capacity?

Ninth Key Discussion Point

The first edition of the Commercial Health Insurance Innovative Drug Directory has落地, with各地政策 emerging. But where will the funding come from?

On July 1st last year, the NHSA and the National Health Commission jointly issued the "Several Measures to Support the High-Quality Development of Innovative Drugs." The first "Commercial Health Insurance Innovative Drug Directory" took effect January 1st, 2026, including 19 drugs with high innovation, significant clinical value, clear patient benefit, and exceeding basic医保保障能力. Nine are Class 1 new drugs, covering CAR-T, TCE, bispecific antibodies for肿瘤治疗, as well as罕见病 and Alzheimer's treatment.

For commercial health insurance, the biggest看点 is that this directory opens a market-based payment channel for high-value innovations.

This year, multiple regions have issued专项文件, and一批 cities have begun incorporating the directory into惠民保 products.

For example, Beijing issued two high-density policy documents. In February, the市医保局, Beijing NFRA, and others jointly issued "Several Measures of Beijing Municipality to Support the High-Quality Development of Commercial Health Insurance," explicitly对接 the national measures,推动商保与基本医保功能衔接 to助力医药产业创新—a rare provincial-level专项文件.

On April 7th, the市医保局 and nine other departments released "Several Measures of Beijing Municipality to Support the High-Quality Development of Innovative Medicine (2026)" with 32条, the third annual such release, this year突出商业健康保险与基本医保的数据联通.

Shanghai also acted. Its March 3rd health and medical security work conference明确优化升级 the 2026 "Hu Hui Bao,"推动出台示范性商业团险产品,完善个人账户购买商业健康保险政策,做好与国家商保创新药品目录衔接,加大对创新药械支持.

The 2026版沪惠保, launched May 25th, kept the premium at 129 yuan, increased domestic special drug coverage to 50 types, added脑机接口手术耗材责任 (150k yuan coverage), and延续 CAR-T and innovative gene therapy drug coverage.

Guangdong also moved. The provincial医保局 and Department of Human Resources issued a notice年初,专章部署商保衔接 while执行双目录. Drugs in the commercial insurance innovative drug directory are to be挂网 and配备原则上参照医保谈判药品,落实 '三除外' (not计入自费率指标, not纳入集采替代监测, may not be纳入按病种付费). It supports定点零售药店配备目录药品 and accessing the '医保药品云平台,' supports商保机构 designing new products and adjusting赔付方式 based on this, and encourages exploring '一站式'结算.

At the city level, Shenzhen and Shantou率先主动衔接 the directory—Shenzhen's惠民保 already includes all 19 drugs, while the 2026 "Shantou惠民保"单独提升报销比例 by 10 percentage points for目录内药品.

Entering July, Zhejiang's医保局 issued its own "Several Measures to Support the High-Quality Development of Innovative Medicine,"围绕 the province's全链条战略部署 for innovative drugs/equipment and biopharma,充分发挥医保战略性购买和支付杠杆双重作用,构建医保促进创新的工作机制,引导医药产业良性竞争与差异化创新发展.

Amid this高举高打, let's look at data. By end-May, the 19 drugs were available at 1,486定点医药机构, more than doubling since the start of the year. 114普惠型商业健康保险 products, mainly惠民保, have written the directory drugs into their coverage (though not all cover全部 19).

However, a recent NHSA公告 on drugs passing形式审查 for the 2026 National Reimbursement Drug List and the Commercial Health Insurance Innovative Drug Directory adjustments shows only 58药品通用名 passed审查 for the商保目录 in 2026, compared to 121 in 2025.

The 2026公告 states: "共收到商保创新药目录申报材料62份,涉及药品通用名62个,最终58个通过形式审查,其中目录外57个,目录内1个."

The 2025公告 stated: "商保创新药目录申报信息141份,涉及药品通用名141个,121个通过形式审查,其中同时申报基本医保目录和商保创新药目录的有79个."

Clearly, pharmaceutical companies are still in a试探的心态 regarding the commercial insurance directory.

It's no wonder that one day after the 2026审查名单 was公布, the NHSA公众号推送 a document from July 29th last year: "Several Measures to Promote the High-Quality Development of Commercial Health Insurance and Assist Biopharmaceutical Industry Innovation" jointly issued by the NFRA Shanghai Office, Shanghai医保局, and five other departments.

Its eighteen条政策 all focus on the payment落地 of innovative drugs. For example, it mentions supporting eligible Shanghai market entities to invest in or参股商业健康保险公司 to培育健康保险市场. Supporting Pudong's comprehensive reform for innovative drugs, encouraging insurers through optimized financing to推出覆盖创新药械责任的商业医疗保险产品 and加大推广力度.

This should be the next攻坚方向. What truly determines the value of the commercial insurance innovative drug directory is not how many drugs enter it, but how much real payment it ultimately generates. Can it transition from a policy directory to a truly large-scale payment directory?

Tenth Key Discussion Point

Has new energy vehicle (NEV) insurance finally turned profitable? It may be迎接 a质变时刻 with three拐点初现: profitability, growth, and product rules.

2025 full-year industry data disclosed in April this year shows: The industry承保 43.58 million NEVs, up 40.1% year-on-year; NEV insurance premium reached 190 billion yuan, up 34.94%, accounting for 20.19% of all auto insurance premium,首次 exceeding 20%.

Looking at Q1 data: NEV insurance签单件数 were约 9.097 million, up 24.24%; corresponding commercial auto insurance签单保费 was 33.56 billion yuan, up 14.11%. The growth in policy count outpaced premium growth by 10 percentage points, implying an average premium per policy of约 3,690 yuan, down约 8% year-on-year.

Despite this, the industry整体 remains亏损. 2025 NEV insurance承保亏损 was 5.6 billion yuan, only 1 billion less than the previous year, with the combined ratio down 1.3 percentage points; 143 vehicle series had赔付率超 100%.

However, the top three players holding over 70% market share—PICC Property & Casualty, Ping An Property & Casualty, and CPIC Property & Casualty—首次集体实现承保盈利 on NEV insurance in 2025.

In 2025, Ping An achieved full-year承保盈利 with a combined ratio压至 below 100%; CPIC's passenger vehicle business entered a稳定盈利区间; PICC's承保利润 grew 53.6% year-on-year.

In Q1 2026, Ping An P&C's NEV insurance原保费 grew 16.1%, with承保盈利水平保持稳定. Leading companies' scale advantages in customer selection, pricing, repair networks, claims, and expense control are beginning to show.

Simultaneously, automaker-affiliated insurers delivered a标志性 result: BYD Auto Insurance's Q1 combined ratio dropped to 97.90%,首次实现单季承保转正.

This marks the first拐点: the profitability拐点.

Crossing this profitability拐点 is极为重要的 in the current environment because NEV sales have明显下降, and NEV insurance签单保费增速 has随之放缓.

Q1 NEV production and sales同比下降 3.7%; H1累计增速仅回升至 7.3%. Penet率 is near 60%, and commercial insurance投保率 is as high as 91%, exceeding燃油车 by 6 percentage points.

Looking at NEV commercial auto insurance签单保费增速: it was 52.93% for full-year 2024,回落至 33.88% for full-year 2025, and只剩 14.11% for Q1 2026.

This is the second拐点: the growth rate拐点 for NEV insurance.

A third拐点 is likely the product拐点. A major characteristic of NEV insurance is the归属 of intelligent driving liability. According to the "Road Traffic Safety Law (Revised Draft)," liability for L3+ autonomous driving lies primarily with the service provider. This似乎 suggests auto insurance大有向责任险发展的趋势.

In January, Lemonade partnered with Tesla to launch autonomous driving-specific insurance,直连 vehicle data, distinguishing between manual and autonomous driving states, with FSD-enabled mileage rates下调约 50%. Elon Musk stated the半价 was due to significantly improved safety.

But this might be just one aspect; coverage for the vehicle body itself remains不可或缺.

In January, a四部门 "Guiding Opinions on Deepening Reform, Strengthening Supervision, and Promoting the High-Quality Development of New Energy Vehicle Insurance" listed 'basic + variable'组合产品 and 'battery-swap' model insurance as创新方向. On June 23rd, the Ministry of Commerce and eight other departments再次提 'exploring battery-swap insurance models.'

加上不可或缺的人伤责任, does this mean future auto insurance could become a product组合而成 of intelligent driving liability, vehicle body liability, and personal injury liability? It's不失为一种可能.

Thus, we must ask: Has NEV insurance already seen a new path, especially as cars evolve from mechanical products to intelligent terminals? How does traditional auto insurance need to be拆开 and重组?

These are the ten major issues for the insurance industry in the first half of 2026.

The first half of 2026 is over. The most important task now is finding the next wave of growth.