Amid record-high A-share market turnover and a steadily rising bond market in the first half of 2026, the industry's overall revenue climbed 32% year-on-year while net profit grew 23%, according to parent-company data. Listed brokers outperformed the sector, with 44 pure securities firms generating combined operating revenue of RMB 375.215 billion, up 44.39%, and aggregate attributable net profit of RMB 163.434 billion, a 48.86% surge.

Among the 44 peers, CITIC Securities led in both revenue and net profit, while Pacific Securities lagged at the bottom. China Merchants Securities posted the fastest revenue growth at 108.19%, and Hongta Securities saw the steepest revenue decline of 14%. Notably, Tianfeng Securities Co.,Ltd. recorded the highest net profit growth at 549.03%, while Hongta Securities suffered the largest profit drop of 23.93%. Only Great Wall Securities and Hongta Securities reported negative revenue growth, and just Hongta Securities and Hualin Securities saw net profit declines.

Where the risk metrics stand

Examining liquidity risk indicators, Guotai Haitong held the highest net capital at RMB 225.987 billion as of mid-2026, while Hualin Securities had the lowest at just RMB 5.702 billion. In terms of absolute changes, Guotai Haitong added the most net capital, increasing by RMB 40.9 billion, whereas China Merchants Securities reduced it the most by RMB 2.461 billion. On a percentage basis, Guotai Haitong led with a 22.10% increase, and Northeast Securities recorded the largest drop at -6.96%.

Among the 43 listed brokers, Nanjing Securities boasted the highest risk coverage ratio at 673.4%, while Tianfeng Securities had the lowest at 153.06%. Similarly, Nanjing Securities topped the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) at 295.46%, but Tianfeng Securities ranked last at just 105.98%, a level that not only breaches the 120% early-warning threshold but also sits dangerously close to the mandatory 100% regulatory floor. Nanjing Securities also led in liquidity coverage ratio at 799.84%, with Shanxi Securities trailing at 135.59%. For capital leverage, Pacific Securities was highest at 72.23%, while CICC came in lowest at 10.42%.

Tianfeng Securities thus stands out as having both the lowest risk coverage ratio and an NSFR that has touched the warning line while nearing the regulatory limit. This makes liquidity risk a pressing concern. The NSFR, calculated as available stable funding divided by required stable funding, is its most severe compliance issue, as the current 105.98% reading is merely 5.98 percentage points above the 100% floor. The numerator reflects long-term stable funding sources accessible under persistent operational stress, while the denominator corresponds to funding needs tied to asset scale, business mix, and maturity profiles.

The risk coverage ratio for Tianfeng Securities also slipped to 153.06% by end-June, down 8.36 percentage points from 161.42% at the close of 2025. While the gap to the 120% warning line provides a cushion of roughly 33 percentage points, the downward trend warrants close monitoring. This ratio, which equals net capital divided by total risk capital reserves, fell because risk capital reserves expanded by 4.6% to RMB 12.42 billion, while net capital inched down from RMB 19.167 billion to RMB 19.011 billion. Business growth drove up reserve requirements, but net capital failed to keep pace, weakening overall coverage.

Additionally, the liquidity coverage ratio for Tianfeng Securities deserves attention due to its sharp contraction, plummeting from 771.59% at end-2025 to 203.69% by mid-2026, a drop of 567.90 percentage points.

Profit surge still leaves it second from bottom

In the first half of 2026, Tianfeng Securities reported operating revenue of RMB 1.588 billion, up 29.94% year-on-year, and net profit attributable to shareholders of RMB 204 million, a 549.03% jump. Although this growth rate was the highest among the 44 listed brokers, it largely stemmed from a low base in the prior-year period. Compared with Changjiang Securities, also based in Hubei Province, the performance gap is striking: Changjiang Securities posted revenue of RMB 7.426 billion and attributable net profit of RMB 3.192 billion, which are 4.68 times and 15.67 times higher, respectively, than Tianfeng Securities.

Notably, Tianfeng Securities underperformed even smaller rivals. Huayuan Securities generated RMB 249 million in attributable net profit for H1 2026, edging out Tianfeng Securities. Consequently, among the 44 pure securities brokers, Tianfeng Securities ranked second from the bottom in net profit, only ahead of Pacific Securities. Brokerage operations remained its largest revenue driver, with net fee income from broking reaching RMB 682 million, up 60.6% year-on-year, buoyed by surging market activity. In H1 2026, total A-share turnover hit RMB 317.7 trillion, up 95% annually, with average daily turnover climbing 97% to RMB 2.74 trillion.

Profitability metrics hit the floor

Despite the headline-grabbing 549% profit growth, Tianfeng Securities relies heavily on market beta from its brokerage business. Its bottom-ranked ROE and net margin, coupled with the weakest risk coverage and NSFR readings, suggest an unstable earnings foundation while it simultaneously grapples with clearing legacy burdens and repairing risk-control metrics.

In H1 2026, East Money recorded the highest net margin and weighted ROE among the 44 brokers, whereas Tianfeng Securities ranked last in both categories. Its net margin stood at 11.88%, based on net profit of RMB 204 million and revenue of RMB 1.588 billion, markedly below the peer average of 39.43%. Even Pacific Securities, a similarly small-cap broker, achieved a net margin of 20.95%. Weighted ROE for Tianfeng Securities was just 0.75%, against a peer average of 4.7%.

One key reason for these lagging metrics is that legacy issues continue to erode profits. In H1, the company recorded asset impairment provisions of RMB 52.493 million and accrued liabilities of RMB 34.011 million, together reducing book profits by RMB 64.879 million. While these historical problems are gradually being cleared, they will persist as a drag on profitability and capital returns until fully resolved.

A particularly revealing detail in the interim report is the discrepancy between consolidated and parent-company figures. On a consolidated basis, attributable net profit was RMB 204 million, but the parent company alone posted a loss of RMB 123 million. The over RMB 300 million gap between the two implies that subsidiary earnings largely drove the consolidated profit. This raises a critical question: since the parent entity holds the core brokerage license, does its standalone loss signal that the primary business is actually unprofitable after deducting expenses?