1. China’s insurance funds are coming under scrutiny after a sharp stock-market correction, raising the consequential question of whether insurers have already assumed excessive equity risk [para. 1]. The Shanghai Composite Index fell below 3,700 points in mid-October, erasing all gains for 2026, with some investors blaming insurance companies for selling shares around the National Day holiday [para. 2]. Liang Hong of Shiva Capital noted that some insurance asset managers bought technology stocks at high prices in July and then significantly reduced holdings to cut losses in late September—a pattern he called “perplexing” [para. 3]. However, such selling does not necessarily signal a retreat from equities, as insurers must balance investment returns against policyholder obligations, portfolio limits, profit targets, and solvency requirements, making market volatility an increasingly important source of risk [para. 4].
2. Since 2024, regulators have encouraged more medium- and long-term funds into China’s stock market, viewing insurers, whose liabilities span many years, as potential stabilizers that can invest through market cycles [para. 6]. Insurers do not invest like benchmark-chasing fund managers; their objective is to generate positive returns over time while ensuring they can meet policyholder obligations [para. 7]. This can mean selling after a rally, reducing exposure when risk limits are breached, or buying more when valuations are attractive [para. 8]. An insurance investment professional told Caixin that portfolio adjustments are governed by strict limits on equities, fixed income, and alternatives, so rising prices that push equities above permitted proportions can trigger sell signals [para. 9]. Additionally, strong H1 performance left some insurers with substantial gains, prompting those that had already met annual return targets to lock in profits and limit losses in H2 [para. 10]. Solvency adds another constraint—falling share prices reduce asset values and investment returns, pressuring capital requirements, which may force sales regardless of long-term views [para. 11].
3. The debate over insurers’ trading exposes a fundamental issue: how much equity risk the industry can reasonably absorb [para. 13]. By the end of June, stocks and securities investment funds accounted for 16.2% of China’s insurance industry’s investment portfolio, up 3.5 percentage points from end-2023; life insurers’ allocation rose by the same amount to 16.1%, while property insurers’ ratio climbed 3.3 percentage points to 18.4% [para. 14].
4. A common argument has been that mainland insurers allocate less to equities than U.S., European, and Hong Kong peers, leaving room for further investment, but a CICC report challenges this comparison, arguing that life insurers’ equity allocations may already be high relative to the risks their liabilities can support [para. 15]. The crucial distinction is who bears the investment risk: in some overseas markets, participating products and U.S. separate accounts place investment risk directly on policyholders, supporting higher equity allocations [para. 16]. By contrast, China’s life insurers remain heavily weighted toward traditional products with guaranteed benefits, bearing much of the investment risk themselves, with roughly half of their policy reserves tied to traditional insurance—making comparisons with risk-sharing markets potentially misleading [para. 17].
5. CICC argues that limited supplies of attractive fixed-income assets in a low-interest-rate environment, restrictions on overseas investment, and regulatory capital requirements complicate Chinese insurers’ asset allocation [para. 18]. These constraints do not make equities unsuitable but limit how far insurers can increase exposure without creating an asset-liability mismatch. The report suggests there may be limited room for life insurers to raise equity allocations in the short term; high-dividend stocks could help balance risk and better match assets with liabilities, while a shift toward products with floating returns could gradually allow insurers to tolerate more investment volatility [para. 19].
6. China’s property insurers may have more scope to increase equity holdings, as leading companies have relatively stable underwriting profitability and more abundant capital [para. 20]. Unlike life insurers, they lack the same guaranteed-benefit obligations, and sustained underwriting profits can provide a comparatively inexpensive source of funds for long-term investment.
AI generated, for reference only
Sign in with Google
Sign in with Facebook
Sign in with 财新