The First Brokerage Loss of 2025: Why Zhongshan Securities Defied Industry Gains

1 min read

A Rocky Start Amidst Industry Optimism

The securities industry entered 2025 buoyed by China’s rebounding markets, with major brokerages forecasting powerful growth. Yet July brought an unexpected twist: Zhongshan Securities reported the sector’s first net loss for the first half at CN¥28.11 million ($3.9 million). This brokerage firm’s loss presents a complex counter-narrative to prevailing market optimism, revealing how specialization leaves certain players vulnerable to abrupt market shifts.

Anatomy of the Deficit

The Core Numbers

Zhongshan Securities saw revenue tumble 52% year-on-year to CN¥231 million ($32 million), anchored by four pillars of financial erosion:- Self-operation business revenue collapse (94% plunge)- Investment banking fees disintegration (63% decline)- Asset management income erosion (84% contraction)- Fixed overhead lagging restructuring efforts

Self-Operation Implosion

With trading income plunging 94% to CN¥17.71 million ($2.4 million), this historic profit engine abruptly stalled. Unlike larger competitors with diversified investment portfolios, Zhongshan’s concentrated strategy amplified market volatility impact. This brokerage firm’s loss stemmed significantly from over-reliance on volatile proprietary trading instead of stable fee-based services.

Fee-Based Vulnerabilities

Investment Banking Declines

Investment banking net fees plunged to CN¥5.78 million ($800k) during China’s IPO resurgence – revealing outdated underwriting technology and regulatory weakness following license suspensions in 2023.

Asset Management Struggles

Despite China’s wealth management boom, Zhongshan’s asset fees shriveled to CN¥231,930 ($32k) amid fierce competition and subscale capabilities.

The Brokerage Paradox

Surprisingly, retail brokerage proved resilient:- Commission revenue surged 58% to CN¥123 million ($17 million)- Interest income grew 38% to CN¥61.53 million ($8.5 million)- Cost-efficiency improved through branch consolidation (5 branches closed)

The Parent Company Paradox

Defying its subsidiary’s brokerage firm loss, majority owner Jinlong Co. reported CN¥105-153 million ($14-21 million) net profit. This bifurcated fortune emerged from Jinlong’s strategic divestment – selling $318 million worth of Dongguan Securities shares while retaining 20%. Contrasting Zhongshan’s struggles, Dongguan Securities thrived:- Revenue soared 38% to CN¥1.41 billion ($195 million)- Broking commissions leaped 65% to CN¥746 million ($103 million)- Proprietary income accelerated 72%

Strategic Vulnerabilities Exposed

Zhongshan’s vulnerabilities reflect evolving market dynamics:- Over-specialization leaving insufficient buffers against market shocks- Fee compliance limitations from regulatory penalties- Insufficient transformation amid digitization and product innovation- Late restructuring versus rivals streamlining operationsThis brokerage firm’s loss underscores fundamental truths about securities ecosystem volatility.

The Path Beyond Loss

While the brokerage firm’s loss stings, solutions exist:- Merge branch optimization savings ($2.5 million annualized) into digital transformation- Reclaim investment banking licenses through compliance investments- Form mutual fund joint ventures to diversify income channels- Collaborate with fintech researchers for trading algorithm upgradesPost-loss transformation requires urgency and strategic discipline.

Market Lessons in Selective Prosperity

Zhongshan Securities becomes essential case study demonstrating that macro-recoveries selectively reward institutions prepared with compliance discipline, diversified income channels, and technological modernization.Brokerages must urgently:- Rebalance proprietary trading exposure- Increase electronic execution capabilities- Develop hybrid compensation models- Monitor capital adequacy pressuresFor investors, this brokerage firm’s loss reinforces imperative due diligence in securities selection – aligning with institutions proactively transforming rather than passively awaiting market tides. Early movers in restructuring will capture disproportionate gains when markets fully rebound.

Previous Story

Rising Momentum: A-Share Companies Accelerate Hong Kong Listings Amid Favorable Policies

Next Story

China’s Restaurant Associations Unite Against Destructive Price Wars in Dining Industry