In the first three quarters of 2026, the five major A-share listed insurers collectively reported net profit attributable to shareholders of 276.577 billion yuan, a year-on-year decline of approximately 35.1%.
The third-quarter reports from listed insurers still delivered a shock to the industry. News of the sharp profit drop even spread beyond industry circles.
Those involved are clearly quite cautious and worried. From a market perspective, the massive net profit fluctuations caused by investments are not good news for life insurers preparing for a fierce battle in the upcoming "good start" sales season.
Over the past two years, life insurers have faced the challenge of low interest rates and have shifted toward floating-income products, with participating insurance as the representative. However, because sales teams have long sold "fixed-income" products and lack experience selling floating-income products, combined with increasingly simplified and direct sales logic, frontline teams often use "investment" as the sole selling point when facing participating products. When the market fluctuates sharply and deals a significant blow to life insurers' income statements, it can trigger doubts across the industry and among consumers.
Such concerns are not limited to listed companies. Data from 72 companies that disclosed third-quarter solvency report summaries shows that in the first three quarters of 2026, they collectively achieved net profit of 294.379 billion yuan, down 36.33% from 462.360 billion yuan in the same period of 2025.
The Coldest Autumn
In the third quarter alone, profits fell by 58.3 billion yuan, a year-on-year plunge of 330.8 billion yuan and a quarter-on-quarter drop of 342.7 billion yuan.
The net profit of 294.379 billion yuan is actually not bad. This figure ranks among the top three annual profits in the past decade, second only to 488.241 billion yuan in 2025 and 319.697 billion yuan in 2024.
However, the year-on-year picture is completely different. The hardest-hit segment was local insurers, whose net profit plunged 70.04% year-on-year. The "old seven" major insurers saw a negative growth of 39.65%, bank-affiliated companies declined 25.07%, and other small and medium-sized companies fell 21.64%. Only joint-venture and foreign-funded companies remained roughly flat compared to the same period last year, with a slight decline of 0.39%.
In short, 39 companies recorded negative year-on-year net profit growth in the first three quarters. Among them, China Life Insurance Co Ltd (ASX: none) saw a year-on-year decrease of 76.788 billion yuan, Ping An Insurance (Group) Co of China Ltd dropped 47.965 billion yuan, and New China Life Insurance Co Ltd fell 10.005 billion yuan — all in the tens of billions. Taiping Life, CPIC Life, PICC Health, Taikang Life, PICC Life, and China Post Life also saw year-on-year declines exceeding 3 billion yuan.
The reason lies in the excessive volatility of third-quarter performance. Looking at Q3 standalone data, the market as a whole posted a loss of approximately 58.313 billion yuan, 330.8 billion yuan less than the same period in 2025 and a quarter-on-quarter negative growth of 342.7 billion yuan from Q2 2026.
The "old seven" collectively lost 47.849 billion yuan, with net profit falling 286.280 billion yuan year-on-year and 279.015 billion yuan quarter-on-quarter. Bank-affiliated companies collectively lost 5.682 billion yuan, with net profit declining 17.845 billion yuan year-on-year and 24.230 billion yuan quarter-on-quarter. Local insurers collectively lost 3.360 billion yuan, with net profit dropping 5.158 billion yuan year-on-year and 6.961 billion yuan quarter-on-quarter. Ordinary small and medium-sized companies collectively lost 2.575 billion yuan, with net profit declining 12.796 billion yuan year-on-year and 18.559 billion yuan quarter-on-quarter. Joint-venture and foreign-funded companies collectively earned 1.154 billion yuan, with net profit falling 8.721 billion yuan year-on-year and 13.936 billion yuan quarter-on-quarter.
Among them, 40 companies posted losses in Q3 totaling 78.904 billion yuan, and 12 companies lost more than 1 billion yuan in Q3. The remaining 32 companies earned 20.590 billion yuan.
By company, the top-tier players were the main contributors to Q3 losses. The top three were CPIC Life, Taikang Life, and Sunshine Life, with quarterly net profits of 5.397 billion yuan, 4.674 billion yuan, and 4.599 billion yuan respectively. The bottom three were China Life, Ping An Life, and Taiping Life, with quarterly net profits of -44.072 billion yuan, -5.617 billion yuan, and -4.983 billion yuan respectively. PICC Life, Xingfu Life, and ICBC-AXA Life also posted single-quarter losses exceeding 2 billion yuan.
Perhaps fortunately, thanks to solid profits in the first and second quarters, there was no jaw-dropping massive loss this year. Only 12 insurers reported negative net profit in the first three quarters, with the largest loss barely exceeding 1 billion yuan. Data shows that 56 companies were profitable in Q1, with total net profit of 71.445 billion yuan. In Q2, 64 companies were profitable, with total net profit of 285.534 billion yuan.
Investment Giveth and Investment Taketh Away
About 30% of companies posted negative investment returns in Q3; one-quarter had negative comprehensive investment returns.
Insurer performance is closely tied to the capital markets. Almost every bull market becomes a mini-peak for insurer performance. This was true in 2006 and 2007, in 2014 and 2015, and again in 2024 and 2025. However, bear markets also deal a certain blow to insurers' income statements. The dismal third quarter this time is precisely due to this.
This year's capital markets have shown distinct characteristics in almost every quarter. Taking the CSI 300 as an example, it fell 3.89% in Q1, surged 11.90% in Q2, and plunged 12.49% in Q3. This corresponds to the ups and downs of insurers' quarterly investment returns.
In Q1, the median investment return rate for life insurers was approximately 0.66%, rising to about 1.17% in Q2, then falling to approximately 0.56% in Q3. The same applies to comprehensive investment returns: the median was approximately 0.34% in Q1, about 2.13% in Q2, and approximately 0.81% in Q3.
Looking at individual company data may be more telling. In Q3, 21 companies recorded negative investment returns, such as Dongwu Life at -2.58%, Hengqin Life at -2.47%, Xingfu Life at -2.14%, and Beijing Life at -2.08%. By comparison, only 4 companies had negative investment returns in Q1 and 2 in Q2.
By category, the median investment return rate in Q3 was 0.70% for bank-affiliated companies, 0.69% for the "old seven," 0.58% for joint-venture and foreign-funded companies, and 0.50% for ordinary small and medium-sized companies. The worst was local insurers, at just 0.17%.
This also dragged down the overall investment returns for the first three quarters. Data shows that the median investment return rate for the market in the first three quarters of 2026 was approximately 2.57%, compared to about 3.56% in the same period last year and 2.76% in 2024, which benefited from a late-September rally. The highest investment return rate, from New China Life, was only 4.45%. Compared with figures like 12.21% from companies such as Junlong Life in the same period last year, this is quite ordinary.
It appears that the October market rumor that insurers were "stuck" in tech stocks may indeed have some truth. It is understood that some small and medium-sized insurers cleared their tech stock holdings as early as June, entering a sage-like state and escaping the carnage. Others went all-in on tech stocks and took a major tumble in the third quarter.
Even More Alarming: Massive Fluctuations in Net Assets
About 40 companies saw net asset declines in Q3, with some dropping over 70%.
Comparing the Q2 solvency report summaries with the Q3 solvency report summaries, during the third quarter, 40 out of 72 companies saw their net assets decline, totaling 36.056 billion yuan. Among them, China Life's net assets decreased by 11.967 billion yuan, though the change was only 1.83%. However, the situation for small and medium-sized companies was not so favorable.
For example, Hengqin Life's net assets fell 1.922 billion yuan in a single quarter, a quarter-on-quarter drop of -73.44%. Xinmei Mutual declined 651 million yuan, down -65.57% quarter-on-quarter. BOC Samsung Life fell 218 million yuan, down -55.88% quarter-on-quarter. Xingfu Life dropped 3.537 billion yuan, down -38.62% quarter-on-quarter.
The last time life insurers saw such sharp declines in net assets over a short period was in 2024, when a large number of companies switched accounting standards, and bank-affiliated companies generally experienced significant drops in net assets.
The reasons involve investment returns, core business operations, revaluation of assets and liabilities due to changes in market interest rates, capital operations such as shareholder capital injections, and profit distribution.
Specifically, this wave of sharp net asset declines is due partly to the continuous decline of the 10-year government bond 750-day moving average curve, and partly to the impact of investments. The 750-day curve may not be the main cause. Some industry insiders say the 750-day curve is expected to basically flatten out by the end of 2026, and its negative impact on insurers will gradually diminish. Consider a few public data points: the 10-year government bond 750-day curve has fallen nearly 20BP this year, but compared with the beginning of the year, the weekly decline has narrowed from 0.7BP to 0.54BP.
So the problem still lies with investments. Not only did the decline or even negative turn in investment returns affect current profits and thus net assets, but the negative investment returns also dragged down comprehensive returns, further impacting net assets. Solvency report summary data shows that 18 companies had negative comprehensive investment returns in Q3, compared to 16 in Q1 and 5 in Q2.
The erosion of net assets will significantly increase the solvency pressure on life insurers. Data shows that compared with Q2, 46 out of 72 companies saw their core solvency adequacy ratios decline. Many companies whose core solvency adequacy ratios were already precarious found things even tougher this time. Three companies failed to meet solvency requirements, and there are still 19 companies that did not disclose solvency report summaries — their situations may be even more complex.
30 Companies Saw Premium Negative Growth in First Three Quarters; Non-Disclosing Companies May Have Declined 7.47%
In fact, the liability side is even more difficult — premiums depend entirely on the companies themselves.
This "bloodbath" triggered by A-shares originated on the investment side. As long-term capital, insurance funds should not be so panicked during short-term market fluctuations. What factors made life insurers so aggressive? The reason, as mentioned at the outset, is that in the current industry environment, achieving profitability and further consolidating their operating foundation remains an urgent practical demand for many insurers. At the starting point of the transition to floating-income products, both large companies and small and medium-sized insurers urgently need a real victory to prove themselves.
Such anxiety is also reflected in liability-side growth. From the third-quarter solvency report summaries, excluding China Life Pension and PICC Pension, 70 companies achieved premium income of 3,184.022 billion yuan in the first three quarters, up 2.38% year-on-year. Among them, the "old seven" achieved premium income of 2,056.749 billion yuan, up 1.94% year-on-year. Bank-affiliated companies recorded 411.234 billion yuan, up 5.08% year-on-year; joint-venture and foreign-funded companies 334.662 billion yuan, up 7.13% year-on-year; ordinary small and medium-sized companies 305.256 billion yuan, down 3.05% year-on-year; and local insurers 76.121 billion yuan, up 3.01% year-on-year.
One important reason for such weak growth is that more and more companies are seeing negative premium growth. In the first three quarters of 2023, 9 companies had negative premium growth. In the same period of 2024, 18 companies did. In the same period of 2025, 20 companies did. Now, that number has reached 30. Even some joint-venture and foreign-funded companies with solid liability-side operations saw premium income decline to varying degrees.
The reason may be related to these companies' push into the bancassurance channel over the past year or two. For example, Zhonghong Life, based on channel signed premiums disclosed in its third-quarter solvency report summary, has seen bancassurance become its largest channel, accounting for 54.78%. Meanwhile, peer exchange data shows that growth in the bancassurance channel for such companies mostly comes from single-premium payments. Clearly, after rapid growth, channel business structure must be appropriately adjusted — this is one reason for the premium pullback.
But for more small and medium-sized insurers, as the "Integrated Reporting and Conduct 2.0" initiative in the bancassurance channel continues to advance, and head insurers like China Life and Ping An increase their bancassurance business布局, channel competition has further intensified. How to stabilize business scale and defend market share may have become a real test of survival. After all, for these companies, bancassurance is their only channel. Among the 54 companies that disclosed channel signed premiums in their third-quarter solvency report summaries, only 12 had individual agent channel premium income exceeding one-third of the total. Clearly, the remaining 42 companies basically cannot do without bancassurance.
This is already the case for companies that disclosed solvency report summaries in Q3. From the overall third-quarter data disclosed by the National Financial Regulatory Administration, original premium income for personal insurance companies was 3,863.1 billion yuan, up 0.5% year-on-year. Combined with the premium income and growth rates of companies that have disclosed data, does this mean that companies that did not disclose solvency report summaries had premium income of only 679.078 billion yuan in the first three quarters, a year-on-year decline of 7.47%?
This may be what worries the industry most. Short-term investments may still recover with market fluctuations, or one can hope for a fourth-quarter rebound — at least there is the "national team" as external support. For example, the ChiNext board, which severely impacted the third quarter, staged another dramatic reversal yesterday. But premium capacity and this year's situation are what they are — far more urgent in reality. What exists exists, and what doesn't doesn't. Moreover, the long-term capital on the investment side of life insurance is based on long-term liabilities on the liability side. Without high-quality long-term liabilities, it is naturally difficult to speak of high-quality long-term capital.
Comments