银行行业：重拾信心上调至超配-20190515-申万宏源（香港）-22页.pdf

本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。1本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。1SWS Research Co.Ltd is a subsidiary of ShenwanHongyuan Securities.99 East Nanjing Road,Shanghai|+86 21 2329 7818 Industry Research Bringing China to the World 15 May 2019 Overweight Upgrade 重拾信心重拾信心，上调至超配，上调至超配 银行行业 Analyst Vivian Xue A0230511110001 BBE746(+86)21 23297273 Related Reports The clients shall have a comprehensive understanding of the disclosure and disclaimer upon the last page.重拾信心。重拾信心。去年 12 月我们下调港股中资银行板块评级至标配时，主要有三个担忧：净息差收窄、资产质量恶化和资本压力上升。下调评级以来，板块下跌1%，跑输国企指数 7 个百分点。但是现在看来，这三个方面都出现了边际改善，因此我们上调港股中资银行至超配。(1)净息差：去年下调板块评级时，我们担忧经济下行期银行贷款结构持续恶化导致净息差收窄。但是，今年三月以来，实体经济出现了底部企稳的迹象，这也推动了企业有效信贷需求的回暖和银行风险偏好的提升。2019 年前四个月，新增企业中长期贷款占比由 2018 年 36%达到 40%，行业平均净息差由 2017 年的1.51%和 2018 年的 1.58%提升至今年一季度的 1.64%。展望未来，我们认为在经济结构转型的背景下，货币政策宽松步伐将继续放缓，同业利率和债券利率逐步提升，银行贷款议价能力改善，进而推升银行贷款收益率，净息差收窄压力得以缓解。(2)资产质量：根据我们自下而上的基于上市企业偿债能力的测算，实体企业潜在违约率由 2017 年的 3.43%提升至 2019 年一季度的 5.73%，但是仍然显著低于2015 年 11.5%的水平，行业平均不良率由 2017 年的 1.60%和 2018 年的 1.55%下降至今年一季度的 1.53%，拨备覆盖率由 2017 年的 177%和 2018 年的 202%提升至今年一季度的 208%。展望未来，我们宏观团队认为增值税和个税减税将形成对消费的持续支撑，并在未来逐步提振制造业投资增速，而融资环境改善和财政支出持续将推动基建投资仍处于稳步改善通道。在此背景下，企业违约率将逐步降低，这将降低银行资产质量的不确定性。此外，2018 年监管机构提高了银行不良贷款的仍定标准，90天以上逾期贷款全部纳入不良，而且在实行IFRS9之后，银行拨备计提要求也更为严格，因此银行风险管理变得更为审慎。(3)资本压力：2018 年，银行盈利增速提升，资本补充稳步推进，行业平均资本充足率由 2017 年的 13.89%和 2018 年的 14.44%提升至 14.53%。虽然未来全球系统性重要银行和国内系统性重要银行将面临更高的资本要求，但银行分红率仍然由 2017 年的 27%提升至 29%，这意味着可转债、永续债、优先股和二级资本债等银行资本补充渠道较为通畅，也为银行投资提供了很好的安全边际。攻守兼备攻守兼备。展望未来，可能有两种情景：第一种是，经济继续企稳改善，银行能享受基本面改善带来的绝对收益，类似 2017 年，2017 年，虽然政策转向谨慎使得估值修复放缓，但是银行基本面仍然受益于经济的企稳和利率曲线的上移，板块取得了绝对收益。第二种场景是，经济再次回落，基于板块盈利不确定性较低、估值便宜且股价表现相对落后，银行将具备相对收益，类似 2018 年，经济下行压力加大但是政策预期再次转向积极，板块取得了相对收益。我们推荐投资者在 2019 年二季度配置估值便宜且有国企背景的大中型银行，而下半年配置资产配置较为激进的中小银行。本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。2 2SWS Research Co.Ltd is a subsidiary of ShenwanHongyuan Securities.99 East Nanjing Road,Shanghai|+86 21 2329 7818 Industry Research Bringing China to the World Investment highlight:Last December,we downgraded our banking sector rating from Overweight to Equalweight due to three major concerns,namely narrowing net interest margins(NIMs),weakening asset quality,and rising capital pressure.Since then,the sector has corrected by 1%,underperforming the HSCEI by 7ppts.However,we note marginal improvement for all three factors,and thus upgrade our sector rating from Equalweight to Overweight.Easing NIM pressure.We were concerned about narrowing NIMs due to a weakening loan structure amid Chinas economic downturn and monetary easing last December.However,we note preliminary signals of economic stabilisation and a deceleration of monetary loosening since March.This resulted in improving effective loans demand and rising risk appetite from banks,which led to rising loan yields.The proportion of medium-to long-term enterprise loans reached 40%in January-April(vs 36%in 2018,46%in 2017,and 33%in 2016),while the proportion of medium-to long-term household loans reached 25%(vs 31%in 2018,38%in 2017,and 45%in 2016).The sector average NIM increased to 1.64%in 1Q19(vs 1.58%in 2018 and 1.51%in 2017).We see limited room for further monetary easing,given the policy stance implied by the politburo on 19 April,which stressed the importance of structural deleveraging.As monetary loosening slows,we expect the rising interest rate curve in the interbank market and bond market to improve the pricing power of bank loans and ease the NIM pressure in 2019.Controllable asset quality risks.We were also concerned about increasing asset quality risks due to rising economic downward pressure and loan exposure to private firms.However,thanks to continuous loan structure adjustments and non-performing loan(NPL)disposal,the sector average NPL ratio decreased to 1.53%in end-1Q19(vs 1.55%in end-2018 and 1.60%in end-2017),while the coverage ratio rose to 208%in end-1Q19(vs 202%and 177%,respectively).According to our bottom-up analysis of the solvency of listed companies,the potential default ratio increased from 3.43%in 2017 to 5.73%in 1Q19,albeit still much lower than in 2015(11.5%).Our macro team expects the VAT and income tax cuts to further support consumption growth and thus lift manufacturing investment growth in 2H19,while continuous fiscal stimulus and improving financing channels will drive infrastructure growth.This will improve the solvency of borrowing companies and the asset quality of banks.Moreover,the CBIRC raised NPL classification criteria in 2018,according to which loans overdue for more than 90 days must be classified as NPLs and banks must charge stricter provisions under IFRS9.As a result,banks have become more prudent in their risk management,indicating that asset quality risks are under control.Easing capital pressure.We were also concerned about rising capital pressure amid stricter capital requirements,which we believed would lead to decelerating asset growth and earnings momentum as well as dividend cuts.However,thanks to the recovering earnings growth and various capital replenishment tools,total CAR increased to 14.53%in end-1Q19(vs 14.44%in end-2018 and 13.89%in end-2017),and banks payout ratio rose from 27%in 2017 to 29%in 2018.This indicates banks enjoy sufficient capital replenishment channels,such as convertible bonds,perpetual securities,preferred shares,and capital bonds,thus giving them a safety margin.Absolute or relative returns.We see two scenarios under which banks could report either absolute or relative returns.In the first scenario,the economy is stabilising and the rate curve is rising;as such,banks can enjoy absolute returns from improving fundamentals and recovering valuations,like in 2017,when the sector posted absolute returns as the policy stance turned neutral but banks fundamentals still benefited from the stabilising economy and rising interest rates.In the second scenario,the economy turns weak again,but banks can report relative returns thanks to higher earnings visibility and lower valuations,like in 2018,when the sector posted relative returns due to rising stimulus expectations amid a cautious economic outlook and banks stable fundamentals.Our top picks.We favour large and medium-sized banks with inexpensive valuations,a state-owned background,and laggard share performance in 2Q19,amid a still preliminary and uncertain economic stabilisation,while investors may also consider smaller banks with aggressive asset portfolios,which would benefit from a full economic recovery and rising interest rates in 2H19.本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。3 3Please refer to the last page for important disclosures Page 1 15 May 2019 Industry Research Regaining confidence Last December,we downgraded our banking sector rating from Overweight to Equalweight due to three major concerns,namely narrowing net interest margins(NIMs),weakening asset quality,and rising capital pressure.Since then,the sector has corrected by 1%,underperforming the HSCEI by 7ppts.However,we note marginal improvement for all three factors,and thus upgrade our sector rating from Equalweight to Overweight.Fig 1:Historical share performance of HK-listed Chinese banks CCB ABC BOC PSBC BOCOM CMB CMBC CEB ZSB CRCB Banks Average Big banks Small banks HSCEI 2007 35%-15%15%85%26%26%52%2008-32%-41%-46%-54%-41%-40%-46%-51%2009 60%106%66%85%90%76%156%62%2010 12%6%-6%4%-8%-3%2%-15%-1%2011-19%-13%-27%-23%-19%3%-23%-16%-20%-10%-22%2012 21%21%29%10%13%44%11%21%20%22%15%2013 0%6%10%-1%4%1%-7%1%3%-4%-5%2014 16%10%31%41%24%46%16%37%29%23%39%11%2015-12%-14%-17%-21%-3%-24%-6%1%-13%-13%-12%-19%02016 20%7%6%10%4%14%0%3%7%9%5%-3%2017 27%21%17%-1%9%77%-1%7%17%27%21%28%11%25%2018-6%-1%-7%5%12%-4%-16%-1%5%-21%-3%-1%-6%-14%2019-2%-1%3%10%1%28%4%4%-6%2%3%5%0%6%2018.12.18-2019.5.10-2%-2%5%2%6%16%1%2%-6%-1%-1%1%-2%6%Source:Wind,SWS Research Easing NIM pressure We were concerned about narrowing NIMs due to a weakening loan structure amid Chinas economic downturn and monetary easing last December.However,we note preliminary signals of economic stabilisation and a deceleration of monetary loosening since March.This resulted in improving effective loans demand and rising risk appetite from banks,which led to rising loan yields.Average total social financing reached Rmb2.39tn in January-April compared to Rmb1.48tn in 2018,Rmb1.62tn in 2017 and Rmb1.48tn in 2016.Average incremental loans reached Rmb1.71tn in January-April compared to monthly average of Rmb1.35tn in 2018,Rmb1.13tn in 2017 and Rmb1.05tn in 2016.Average incremental corporate bonds totalled Rmb316bn in January-April compared to monthly average of Rmb207bn in 2018,Rmb37bn in 2017 and Rmb250bn in 2016.Non-standard financing witnessed a Rmb21bn decline in January-April compared to a Rmb245bn decline in 2018,a Rmb298bn increase in 2017 and a Rmb92bn increase in 2016.本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。4 4Please refer to the last page for important disclosures Page 2 15 May 2019 Industry Research Fig 2:Declining non-standard financing Source:Wind,SWS Research Average incremental mid-long term enterprise loans reached Rmb713bn in January-April as compared to monthly average of Rmb467bn in 2018,Rmb532bn in 2017 and Rmb348bn in 2016,while average incremental mid-long term household loans reached Rmb449bn as compared to monthly average of Rmb413bn in 2018,Rmb442bn in 2017 and Rmb473bn in 2016.Average short-term household loans increased to Rmb134bn as compared to monthly average of Rmb201bn in 2018,Rmb153bn in 2017 and Rmb54bn in 2016.Average bills discount increased to Rmb243bn as compared to monthly average of Rmb158bn in 2018,-Rmb132bn in 2017 and Rmb75bn in 2016.Fig 3:Declining non-standard financing Source:Wind,SWS Research -800-600-400-20002004006008001,0001,2001,40005001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000Jan-08May-08Sep-08Jan-09May-09Sep-09Jan-10May-10Sep-10Jan-11May-11Sep-11Jan-12May-12Sep-12Jan-13May-13Sep-13Jan-14May-14Sep-14Jan-15May-15Sep-15Jan-16May-16Sep-16Jan-17May-17Sep-17Jan-18May-18Sep-18Jan-19Incremental RMB loansTotal non-standardized financing(RHS)RMBbn1,0545447361753481,128153442136-1325321,348201413421584671,706135449227243713-50005001,0001,5002,000Incremental RMB loansHousehold short-term loansHousehold mid-long term loansInstitutional short-term loansDiscounted billsInstitutional mid-long term loans(RHS)2016201720184M2019RMBbn本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。5 5Please refer to the last page for important disclosures Page 3 15 May 2019 Industry Research Fig 4:Incremental medium-and long-term corporate and household loans Source:Wind,SWS Research The proportion of mid-long term enterprise loans reached 40%in January-April as compared to 36%in 2018,46%in 2017 and 33%in 2016,while the proportion of mid-long term household loans reached 25%in January-April as compared to 31%in 2018,38%in 2017 and 45%in 2016.Fig 5:Incremental loans breakdown(annual basis)Source:Wind,SWS Research -20002004006008001,0001,2001,4001,6000100200300400500600700800Jan-09Apr-09Jul-09Oct-09Jan-10Apr-10Jul-10Oct-10Jan-11Apr-11Jul-11Oct-11Jan-12Apr-12Jul-12Oct-12Jan-13Apr-13Jul-13Oct-13Jan-14Apr-14Jul-14Oct-14Jan-15Apr-15Jul-15Oct-15Jan-16Apr-16Jul-16Oct-16Jan-17Apr-17Jul-17Oct-17Jan-18Apr-18Jul-18Oct-18Jan-19Apr-19Household mid-long term loansInstitutional mid-long term loans(RHS)RMBbnRMBbn18%25%20%16%25%23%27%45%38%31%25%5%-11%0%6%-1%10%15%7%-11%12%14%52%53%28%19%26%39%31%33%46%36%40%8%11%13%15%16%11%7%5%13%15%8%-20%-10%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%20092010201120122013201420152016201720184M2019Household mid-long term loansDiscounted billsInstitutional mid-long term loansHousehold short-term loans本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。6 6Please refer to the last page for important disclosures Page 4 15 May 2019 Industry Research Fig 6:Incremental loans breakdown(quarterly basis)Source:Wind,SWS Research The movement of economic growth will determine the monetary policy stance,which will directly impact the interest rate curve.In 2017,a steady stream of tightening regulations amid economic stabilisation leads to a rising loans,bonds and interbank rate.The weighted average loans,bonds and interbank repo rate increased by 41,96 and 122bps in 2017.Since 2018,monetary policy adjustments due to rising economic downward pressure have improved liquidity in the interbank market and lead to declining interbank rates,but the loans and bonds yield kept rising due to shadow banking regulation and declining non-standard financing.The weighted average loans and bonds yield increased by 20 and 8bps in 2018,while the interbank repo rate declined by 51bps.With the preliminary signal of economic stabilization since this March,the monetary easing keeps decelerating,and this has led to rising interbank rate and bonds rate.The weighted average bonds and interbank repo rate increased by 19bps and 12bps since this March.Looking forward,the government will continue to motivate consumption and infrastructure investment to support the macro-economy,while further room for relaxation on monetary policies will be limited,given the policy stance as implied by the politburo meeting held on 19 April with highlights once more on structural deleveraging.Amid the deceleration of monetary loosening,the rising interest rate curve in the interbank market and bond market will improve the pricing power of bank loans and relieve the NIM contraction pressure in 2019.Among banks,those banks with larger asset exposure to bonds and interbank assets will benefit first in terms of NIM,while those banks with heavy reliance on interbank liability may be more negatively hurt.19%22%36%37%24%54%62%59%32%37%43%46%26%31%33%39%21%47%5%24%21%12%8%13%16%-10%-24%-14%-4%6%-1%18%20%24%16%21%41%28%23%28%44%19%23%39%59%41%40%36%50%22%30%23%44%32%6%14%6%2%3%6%8%5%9%15%18%12%10%16%18%19%0%12%-30%-20%-10%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%1Q152Q153Q154Q151Q162Q163Q164Q161Q172Q173Q174Q171Q182Q183Q184Q181Q192Q19Household mid-long term loansDiscounted billsInstitutional mid-long term loansHousehold short-term loans本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。本研究报告仅通过邮件提供给 国投瑞银 国投瑞银基金管理有限公司()使用。7 7Please refer to the last page for important disclosures Page 5 15 May 2019 Industry Research Fig 7:Historical RRR Source:Wind,SWS Research Fig 8:Historical benchmark rates Source:Wind,SWS Research 05101520252006-012006-062006-112007-042007-092008-022008-072008-122009-052009-102010-032010-082011-012011-062011-112012-042012-092013-022013-072013-122014-052014-102015-032015-082016-012016-062016-112017-042017-092018-022018-072018-12RRR for small and medium sized banksRRR for small and medium sized banks%01234567892006-012006-062006-112007-042007-092008-022008-072008-122009-052009-102010-032010-082011-012011-062011-112012-042012-092013-022013-072013-122014-052014-102015-032015-082016-012016-062016-112017-042017-092018-022018-07Bench mark demand deposit rateBench mark 1-year deposit rateBench mark 1-year lending rateBench m