As insurers disclose their second-quarter solvency reports for 2026, the operating performance of unlisted life insurance companies has come into focus. To date, 58 unlisted life insurers have released their solvency reports. According to statistics, excluding China Life Pension Company, 57 institutions generated a total of 796.173 billion yuan in insurance premium income during the first half of the year. Including China Life Pension Company, the 58 institutions collectively achieved a net profit of 61.688 billion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 110.22%.
Among them, Taikang Life Insurance and China Post Life Insurance each exceeded 100 billion yuan in premiums, with 20 insurers surpassing the 10 billion yuan mark. In terms of net profit, 7 insurers recorded losses: Xiaokang Life Insurance, Dajia Pension, Haibao Life Insurance, Great Wall Life Insurance (长生人寿), Three Gorges Life Insurance, Huahui Life Insurance, and Heng'an Standard Pension. The remaining 51 insurers were profitable. Meanwhile, the comprehensive risk ratings of Huahui Life Insurance and Great Wall Life Insurance failed to meet standards, due to incomplete rectification of corporate governance issues and a decline in solvency, respectively.
Taikang Life and China Post Life Lead Premiums, Over 80% of Insurers Profitable
In the first half of the year, 57 unlisted life insurance companies (excluding China Life Pension Company) collectively generated 796.173 billion yuan in premiums. Taikang Life Insurance and China Post Life Insurance led the industry as the only two institutions with premium scales exceeding 100 billion yuan, achieving 144.505 billion yuan and 129.138 billion yuan, respectively. The top 10 premium insurers also included CCB Life Insurance (37.049 billion yuan), Generali China Life Insurance (36.763 billion yuan), ICBC-AXA Life Insurance (32.425 billion yuan), Cigna & CMB Life Insurance (31.157 billion yuan), ABC Life Insurance (31.145 billion yuan), CITIC-Prudential Life Insurance (24.400 billion yuan), Lian Life Insurance (19.585 billion yuan), and MetLife Sino-US United (19.561 billion yuan), with "bank-affiliated" insurers dominating the list. The top 10 insurers accounted for 505.729 billion yuan in total premiums, representing 63.52% of the total premiums of all 57 institutions, illustrating a significant Matthew effect.
Focusing on net profit, the 58 insurers collectively achieved 61.688 billion yuan, up 110.22% year-on-year, indicating a substantial recovery in industry profitability. Among them, 51 insurers were profitable, with an overall profitability rate of nearly 90%. Taikang Life Insurance was the only unlisted life insurer to join the "100 billion club" in net profit, achieving 15.821 billion yuan. China Post Life Insurance followed closely with 7.068 billion yuan. ICBC-AXA Life Insurance, ABC Life Insurance, CCB Life Insurance, CITIC-Prudential Life Insurance, Happy Life Insurance, Zhonghong Life Insurance, Taikang Pension, and Cigna & CMB Life Insurance posted net profits of 4.317 billion yuan, 3.312 billion yuan, 3.201 billion yuan, 2.300 billion yuan, 2.050 billion yuan, 1.827 billion yuan, 1.827 billion yuan, and 1.624 billion yuan, respectively. These ten insurers collectively achieved 43.347 billion yuan in net profit, accounting for 70.27% of the total net profit of the 58 insurers. Zhu Junsheng, a postdoctoral researcher and professor at Peking University's School of Economics, noted that the sharp increase in net profit for unlisted life insurers in the first half was primarily driven by improvements on the investment side rather than a significant boost in underwriting profits. He pointed to the recovery of the equity market, which lifted investment income for some insurers, coupled with ongoing efforts to reduce liability costs and an increase in the value of new business, as key factors. He believes the structural trend shows that the top 10 companies contribute over 60% of premiums and 70% of net profit, indicating that industry resources, clients, and operational advantages are increasingly concentrated in leading institutions, with the head effect strengthening.
Seven Insurers Including Xiaokang Life Suffer Losses; Great Wall Life and Huahui Life Insurance Risk Ratings Flagged
However, despite the significant recovery in the industry's profitability, some insurers still face pressure. In the first half, seven insurers recorded losses: Xiaokang Life Insurance (508 million yuan), Dajia Pension (109 million yuan), Haibao Life Insurance (65 million yuan), Great Wall Life Insurance (63 million yuan), Three Gorges Life Insurance (49 million yuan), Huahui Life Insurance (19 million yuan), and Heng'an Standard Pension (18 million yuan). Notably, the comprehensive risk ratings of Great Wall Life Insurance and Huahui Life Insurance failed to meet standards. Huahui Life Insurance disclosed in its latest solvency report that due to incomplete rectification of corporate governance issues, its comprehensive risk rating was downgraded from Class B to Class C in the first quarter of 2022. The company stated that for risks related to the stagnation of business operations and inability to achieve operational goals, it plans to implement regulatory requirements, complete corporate governance rectification tasks, and restore normal operations of the "board, supervisory board, and management." Great Wall Life Insurance was affected by a decline in solvency, with its comprehensive risk rating falling to Class D in the fourth quarter of 2025. In the second quarter, the Shanghai Financial Regulatory Bureau imposed three measures: requiring the company to increase capital within one year to ensure adequate solvency, capping the compensation of all directors and senior management at the previous year's level until solvency is restored, and restricting dividend distributions to shareholders. Great Wall Life Insurance stated that its shareholders are accelerating capital replenishment to resolve solvency issues while expediting the disposal of risky assets to improve solvency in the short term. Zhu Junsheng believes the core of industry differentiation is no longer just scale differences but differences in comprehensive operational capabilities. Leading institutions have clear advantages in brand, channels, capital strength, and investment capabilities, enabling a virtuous cycle between assets and liabilities. Some small and medium-sized institutions face challenges such as insufficient scale effects, weaker channel capabilities, high volatility in investment returns, and capital replenishment pressures, making profit improvement more difficult. Industry observers consider that the current performance improvement is largely a result of investment-side recovery and optimization of liability costs. The trend of "the strong getting stronger" continues, and future competition will depend more on asset management capabilities, channel operations, product structure optimization, and capital strength. For some small and medium-sized insurers, enhancing professional operational capabilities and differentiated competitive advantages may be more important than simply pursuing scale growth.
Guofu Life Insurance Tops Investment Returns; Last Year's Standout Xiaokang Life Ranks Last
In the first half of this year, the significant recovery in net profit for unlisted life insurers was primarily driven by improvements on the investment side. Statistics show that the average investment return rate for the 58 insurers was 1.92%, with a median of 2.01%. Only Haibao Life Insurance recorded a negative return of -0.35%. By institution, Guofu Life Insurance led with a 4.66% investment return rate, followed by Beijing Life Insurance at 4.47%. The top 10 insurers in investment returns also included Xinhua Pension (3.77%), Fosun United Health Insurance (3.56%), Fosun-保德信 Life Insurance (3.40%), Happy Life Insurance (3.25%), Bank of Communications Life Insurance (3.13%), Lujiazui Guotai Life Insurance (3.08%), Hengqin Life Insurance (2.91%), and Caixin Jixiang Life Insurance (2.90%). In terms of comprehensive investment return rates, the average for the 58 insurers was 2.46%, with a median of 2.22%. Guofu Life Insurance topped the list with a 4.76% comprehensive return rate, followed by Zhonghong Life Insurance (4.34%), Peking University Founder Life Insurance (4.21%), Happy Life Insurance (3.88%), Beijing Life Insurance (3.84%), Fosun-保德信 Life Insurance (3.77%), Caixin Jixiang Life Insurance (3.75%), Fosun United Health Insurance (3.60%), Hengqin Life Insurance (3.38%), and Allianz Life Insurance (3.37%). Additionally, Guomin Pension Insurance, Haibao Life Insurance, and Xiaokang Life Insurance recorded negative comprehensive returns of -0.31%, -0.87%, and -5.24%, respectively. Notably, Xiaokang Life Insurance, which ranked last, had a comprehensive investment return rate of 11.64% last year, leading all unlisted life insurers. Now, its returns have sharply declined, directly dragging down its performance, resulting in a net loss of 508 million yuan in the first half. Zhu Junsheng pointed out that the better investment returns of some insurers are mainly due to the recovery of the equity market, reasonable asset allocation, and effective investment strategies. He added that differences in equity positions, asset allocation structures, accounting methods, and risk exposure levels among companies have led to significant divergence in investment and comprehensive investment returns. He cautioned that some of the improved investment returns in the first half may reflect market factors and may not fully represent long-term changes in investment capabilities. The improvement in investment returns has provided important support for industry profitability, but whether this trend can continue remains to be seen. With equity market valuations having already recovered and bond yields still at low levels, the potential for further significant improvement in investment returns in the second half may be more limited, and the industry's profit growth rate is expected to gradually return to normal. In the long term, the profitability of life insurers will be determined more by asset-liability matching capabilities, investment management skills, and liability cost control than by short-term market fluctuations.
Comments