The ongoing public scrutiny of Ren Zeping has once again highlighted the widespread issue of financial influencers engaging in disguised stock recommendations. From a regulatory perspective, securities authorities are intensifying their crackdown on various forms of covert stock touting, particularly those that use the guise of knowledge payment, presenting analyses of sectors or companies.
A finance influencer with millions of followers, Ren Zeping built a community of nearly 500 paying members and generated over 20 million yuan in revenue through course sales. His venture into the knowledge payment sector has now been engulfed by allegations of indirect stock promotion, following a claim that a member lost 10 million yuan after following his advice.
During a live stream on his WeChat video account "Zeping Macro" on the evening of July 21, Ren Zeping stated, "I have been in this industry for 22 years and have some experience, I want to help more people." He also reiterated advice to "not use leverage" and to "firmly believe in AI."
The controversy began with a widely circulated screenshot from an investment chat group. It showed a paying member claiming that, trusting Ren Zeping's view of a "tech bull market," he used leverage to heavily invest in memory chip stocks, ultimately losing over 10 million yuan due to a margin call. The member angrily accused Ren Zeping of having "no bottom line for membership fees."
As the storm grew, Ren Zeping responded with several posts and a live stream, explicitly denying that he recommends stocks and repeatedly emphasizing that he had "warned about the risks of leverage hundreds of times."
Despite Ren Zeping’s statement that he "never recommends individual stocks," public opinion remains unconvinced. Many believe that vague phrases like "firmly bullish on the long-term trend of AI technology" and "a bull market pullback is a golden opportunity" are essentially hints at investment opportunities, designed to sidestep the regulatory red line on stock recommendation. Critics argue this is a common tactic.
Can Ren Zeping's "no stock recommendation" disclaimer provide legal immunity? Wang Xueqiang, a lawyer and founding partner of Beijing Changyue Law Firm, stated that while the disclaimer may help clarify the service's positioning and strengthen risk warnings, it does not constitute a complete legal defense. Whether liability is avoided ultimately depends on examining whether the paid service involved substantive stock recommendation activities.
Caught in the Vortex of 'Stock Recommendation' Allegations Again
According to the leaked screenshot, a member of the paid group "Zeping Macro VIP Group 30" stated that, relying on Ren Zeping's market judgment of a "tech bull market," he fully invested and used margin to buy stocks like Shenzhen Techwinsemi Technology Co.,Ltd. (001309.SZ) and Shenzhen Longsys Electronics Co.,Ltd. (301308.SZ), which led to a loss of over 10 million yuan. The post described the situation as "ruining a life."
The group in question had 494 members. Starting July 16, Ren Zeping's team sought to avoid the controversy by disbanding all WeChat groups, a move that became a trending topic. Explaining the decision during his July 21 live stream, Ren Zeping said, "Someone was spreading false information in the group. To improve the member experience, we updated the class format. Members can contact an assistant for details."
Ren Zeping’s knowledge payment model has been highly profitable. Data from third-party platforms shows that in 2022, on a single platform like Douyin, his "Zeping Macro" knowledge payment courses sold between 20,000 and 100,000 copies. The top five courses were all annual memberships priced at 2,980 yuan. With cumulative sales of over 8,800 units for these top courses, conservative estimates based on the listed price suggest revenue exceeding 26.22 million yuan.
As a former chief economist for EVERGRANDE, Ren Zeping's paid membership WeChat groups primarily focused on selling courses. The content often centered on analyzing the development prospects of hot industries and key companies, which many believe is effectively a form of stock recommendation.
Following the "VIP member claims massive loss" incident, the official WeChat account "Zeping Macro" published several response articles. On July 16, it released "Nine Suggestions for Investors," seemingly a response to the circulating screenshot. The article emphasized that "markets have ups and downs, they have their own patterns, charm, and cruelty," and that "using idle money for investment is a key principle. Do not use leverage or borrow money to invest."
On July 19, the official account issued a statement explicitly denying stock recommendations and repeatedly stressing the risks of leverage. As the controversy continued, Ren Zeping's past history with stock recommendation allegations resurfaced, particularly his 2022 predictions about new energy.
In June 2022, Ren Zeping made a famous claim: "Not buying new energy now is like not buying a house 20 years ago." This statement was made at a time when the new energy sector was near its historical peak. Since then, the new energy index has fallen by over 60%. At the time, some accused him, saying, "He doesn't buy new energy himself but dares to tell others to buy, and then he raised the price of his courses." In response to the current situation, one netizen recently commented, "There are still plenty of retail investors stuck in the market who haven't been able to break even."
Also in 2022, Ren Zeping faced a "stock recommendation" controversy after publishing an article on his official account titled "LOPAL Tech: 'Hidden Champion' Nationally Famous Brand in New Energy." This immediately drew accusations of stock touting. A report from a financial outlet cited a compliance officer from a brokerage research institute who noted that writing about a listed company in a way that effectively promotes it, especially when it is cited by financial analysis software like Wind, raises questions about the author's qualifications to recommend stocks. Given that Ren Zeping is not registered with the securities industry, he is legally prohibited from publicly recommending stocks.
Can the 'No Stock Recommendation' Statement Provide Immunity?
Engaging in securities investment advisory services requires specific qualifications. According to current law, providing securities investment advisory services, including securities investment advice and stock recommendations, is a licensed business. It requires approval from the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC). Without a license, any individual or institution engaging in or disguising such activities may constitute illegal securities business operations.
What qualifications are needed for financial influencers to recommend stocks? Wang Xueqiang stated that institutions must obtain a securities investment advisory business license from the CSRC, and individuals must hold a securities investment advisory qualification and practice within a licensed institution. Charging for stock recommendations without the proper qualifications crosses a legal red line.
Columnist Qi Zhongxiang argued that Ren Zeping is clearly engaging in disguised stock recommendations, skirting the legal boundaries of illegal stock touting. He uses knowledge payment to mask what is essentially investment advisory work. If it is proven that he directed members to specific stocks and charged fees without the necessary advisory qualifications, it could be considered illegal business operations.
Industry regulation currently focuses heavily on whether an individual holds a securities industry qualification as the primary criterion for determining the legality of stock recommendations. Wang Xueqiang proposed a "substance over form" principle for identifying disguised stock recommendations. He believes that professional qualifications should not be the only measure of legality. Instead, the focus should be on the substance of the behavior. Regardless of whether it is called "training," "knowledge sharing," "consulting services," or "courses," if it essentially provides securities investment analysis, predictions, or suggestions and charges fees directly or indirectly, it can be considered disguised stock recommendation, which violates the law.
In his statement update on July 19, Ren Zeping reiterated that he never recommends individual stocks. He stated that his courses offer macroeconomic education, industrial trend analysis, and investment methodology sharing. He claimed that all product pages clearly state that the courses focus on macro analysis and do not involve individual stock recommendations or specific operational guidance.
Despite his statements, public opinion remains skeptical. Vague phrases like "firmly bullish on the long-term trend of AI technology" and "a bull market pullback is a golden opportunity" are seen as clear hints about investment opportunities, designed to avoid the regulatory red line. Some paying members told the media that Ren Zeping's courses generally do not directly recommend specific stocks but focus on sectors, effectively narrowing down the options, which is akin to indirect recommendation.
Market analysis suggests that the member's claim of losing over 10 million yuan was likely triggered by a significant market downturn in mid-July. The memory chip sector had surged in the first half of the year, with stocks like Shenzhen Techwinsemi Technology Co.,Ltd. and Shenzhen Longsys Electronics Co.,Ltd. experiencing multi-fold gains. However, the market reversed sharply in mid-July, with Shenzhen Techwinsemi Technology Co.,Ltd. hitting limit-down days in a row, falling from a high of nearly 1,000 yuan, and Shenzhen Longsys Electronics Co.,Ltd. dropping over 11% in a single day. During the six weeks from June 1 to July 15, Ren Zeping publicly expressed his bullish views on the tech sector over 15 times across various platforms, averaging once every three days.
Can Ren Zeping's "no stock recommendation" disclaimer provide legal immunity? Wang Xueqiang suggests it cannot automatically absolve him. The effectiveness of a disclaimer depends on a substantive review of the actual service content. If the content is purely macroeconomic education, industrial trend analysis, and investment methodology sharing without involving buy/sell suggestions for specific stocks or sectors, the disclaimer has some evidentiary value for compliance. However, if the membership service involves "narrowing down options" or "indirect recommendations," the disclaimer is invalid, and regulators will conduct a transparent review of the service content.
What Does a Separate Listing of Kunlun Chip Bring?
According to the latest annual report from "China Securities Depository and Clearing Corporation," the number of new investors nationwide in 2021 was 13.87 million, bringing the total number of investors to 250 million. This means that roughly one in five Chinese citizens has a securities account. With the growing demand for personal finance, a host of self-proclaimed "financial experts" and "investment gurus" have gained popularity on social media and short-video platforms. Some of these financial influencers use their influence to publish stock recommendation content and attempt to manipulate the market.
In January 2022, a financial influencer was penalized by the Zhejiang Securities Regulatory Bureau for over 83 million yuan for engaging in "scalping" market manipulation and was banned from the securities market for three years. This is not an isolated case. In recent years, there have been many cases of financial bloggers "crashing" due to illegal stock recommendations and illegal business operations. This has pushed the issue of the boundary between knowledge payment and investors' independent trading decisions into the public spotlight.
Wang Xueqiang pointed out that the core standard for defining the boundary is to determine whether the service is "providing investment analysis opinions" or "sharing knowledge and information." Specifically, knowledge sharing at the level of macroeconomic education, industry trend analysis, and investment methodology sharing does not constitute securities investment advisory. However, disguised stock recommendation can involve analyzing specific industries or sectors with clear investment directionality, combined with market hotspots and policy guidance, which leads members to trade based on that analysis. This could constitute substantive illegal stock recommendation.
Regarding responsibility, Wang Xueqiang stated that if an investor makes an independent decision and the platform has fully fulfilled its risk disclosure obligations, the investor bears the risk. However, if the platform essentially provides services with investment advice characteristics and lacks the necessary qualifications, the platform cannot be exempt from liability.
It is noteworthy that judicial relief is also strengthening for investors who suffer losses after being misled by financial influencers. According to a news report, a typical case from the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court saw an influencer fined nearly 100 million yuan for market manipulation and illegal stock recommendation. The investor who suffered losses sued the influencer, and the court ruled that the influencer's manipulation of the securities market caused the investor's loss, granting full compensation. This precedent provides a useful rule for protecting investors' legitimate rights, signaling that channels for investor redress are becoming more accessible and that violators will ultimately pay a heavy price.
Regulatory authorities are intensifying their efforts. In December 2021, the Cyberspace Administration of China issued a notice regulating the behavior of online celebrity accounts, listing activities such as engaging in stock recommendation without permission or the necessary qualifications as negative behaviors. This provides a basis for routine supervision. In May 2021, the National Internet Information Office, along with financial regulatory authorities, handled a number of accounts and websites that spread false information about the capital market, engaged in illegal stock recommendation, and hyped virtual currency trading.
Internet platforms are the foundation for financial influencers. In March 2022, WeChat Video Account released a financial industry code of conduct, comprehensively regulating financial content from three dimensions: qualifications, content, and accounts. It requires accounts claiming professional qualifications to complete professional or institutional certification and explicitly prohibits the clear or implied suggestion of specific stock trading timing in public settings. Previously, platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou have also conducted special campaigns against illegal stock recommendation.
However, some analysts point out that the platform review mechanism still relies heavily on keyword filtering and lacks effective identification of "hints" and "suggestive language." The threshold for creator certification is also low, requiring only identity verification, not financial industry qualifications. In addition to strengthening platform governance, experts suggest achieving full-chain governance through the linkage of legal liability and investor protection. Law professor Lyu Chenglong from Shenzhen University Law School expressed hope that through special representative litigation for market manipulation, investors can more easily protect their rights. By linking criminal and administrative enforcement, the criminal liability of violators can be further increased, shaping a transparent, open, standardized, and resilient Chinese capital market.
Comments