The banking sector appears to be becoming increasingly "agile."
On June 29th, CM BANK (ASX: 03968) officially launched its dedicated rumor-refuting public account, "CMB Rumor Refutation." This follows the establishment of similar platforms by CITIC Group and China Minsheng Banking Corp., Ltd. in May, marking another financial institution joining the trend. Around the same time, both CM BANK and CITIC BANK (ASX: 00998) disclosed that they had set up market capitalization management teams under their senior management to systematically advance valuation restoration efforts.
While these two initiatives seem to belong to different operational lines, viewed together they point to the same shift: banks are moving from "keeping their heads down and working" to proactively managing external perception. A more systematic and preemptive framework for reputation governance is taking shape across both the public opinion sphere and the capital markets.
Shift in Bank Public Sentiment Management: From Reactive to Proactive and Fortified
In the past, banks typically handled rumors in a scattered manner, placing statements on official website announcements or within menu bars of their official social media accounts, issuing ad-hoc clarifications when incidents occurred—essentially reactive firefighting.
This is now changing. Following the opening of an "Online Rumor Refutation Zone for Enterprises" on China's joint online rumor-refuting platform by the Central Cyberspace Administration's Illegal and Harmful Information Reporting Center in March, enterprises have followed suit in quick succession, with financial institutions being key participants. After CITIC Group and China Minsheng Banking Corp., Ltd. launched their dedicated platforms in May, CM BANK followed in June.
Why establish separate platforms? Dong Ximiao, Chief Economist of CMB Union Consumer Finance, offered a straightforward assessment: financial rumors in the new media era impact bank brand reputation and customer trust more directly, rapidly, and severely. Financial institutions have long been in a state of "passive firefighting" against rumors, lacking systematic and normalized refutation mechanisms.
The practical need is also urgent. Data from the Ministry of Public Security shows that fraudulent online investment and wealth management scams account for about 40% of total losses from telecom fraud cases. Incidents involving impersonation of banks for unauthorized promotions and fabricating high-return information for traffic generation are frequent. Multiple banks have experienced operational fluctuations such as declining branch deposits and hindered credit business due to the spread of false rumors. On June 30th, Bank of Communications issued a statement warning of criminals impersonating the bank to falsely promote its "Huimin Loan" service.
In terms of operation, the rumor-refuting platforms of these three institutions all focus on typical financial sector rumors while also opening channels for tip-offs. Since publishing its first article on May 20th, China Minsheng Banking Corp., Ltd. has released over 50 pieces of rumor-refuting and educational content. Xue Hongyan, a special researcher at Jiangsu Suning Bank, believes this move upgrades reputation risk management from "temporary, passive firefighting" to "normalized, fortified, and proactive governance."
It is noteworthy that while previous rumor-refuting efforts by institutions primarily used sections on official websites or social media, this marks the first time dedicated, standalone platforms have been established. Currently, these are mainly implemented by joint-stock banks and central state-owned financial enterprises, with large state-owned banks and smaller banks yet to follow. Xue Hongyan suggests joint-stock banks, with shorter decision-making chains and large retail customer bases, are more sensitive to reputation risk and thus pioneers. However, he expects dedicated rumor-refuting platforms will gradually become a standard industry feature.
Market Cap Management Teams: From Rhetoric to Institutionalization
Almost in parallel with the rumor platforms, another development is unfolding.
At CM BANK's 2025 Annual General Meeting on June 25th, Vice President Peng Jiawen revealed the bank had established a market capitalization management team, which he heads, holding regular analysis meetings to channel capital market feedback and investor demands into internal operational strategy. He outlined three levels of market cap management: value creation (focusing on core operations), value discovery (ensuring the market understands the bank's performance through continuous communication and roadshows), and value operation (studying tools like dividends and share buybacks to enhance market value).
Earlier, at its 2025 results briefing, CITIC BANK disclosed it had set up a market capitalization management team under senior management to coordinate related efforts and incorporate market cap management into its performance evaluation system. Board Secretary Zhang Qing mentioned specific measures include increasing the dividend payout ratio and implementing interim dividends to enhance engagement across all levels.
These moves by the two banks are not isolated. At its AGM on June 26th, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank President Xie Wei emphasized management's high regard for market cap management and pledged enhanced communication with various investors, especially long-term ones. Industrial Bank Co., Ltd. has formulated a "Market Capitalization Management System" and continues to implement its "Valuation Enhancement Plan." China Zheshang Bank stated at its AGM it would strengthen market cap management and shareholder returns, setting reasonable dividend payout ratios.
These actions are noteworthy because they occur within a specific context. All 42 A-share listed banks are trading below their net asset value per share. Data from East Money Information shows the Banking II Index has fallen approximately 6.5% year-to-date, with 18 of the 42 banks having price-to-book ratios below 0.5 times. Currently, 9 banks offer dividend yields exceeding 5%, with 3 surpassing 6%. Against the regulatory backdrop requiring companies persistently trading below book value to disclose valuation improvement plans, "market capitalization management" has evolved from a slogan into a concrete task requiring institutional support.
The act of establishing a dedicated "team" itself carries symbolic significance. It signifies the elevation of market cap management from scattered investor relations work to an institutionalized arrangement with organizational structure, performance evaluation constraints, and regular meetings.
Two Sides of the Same Coin
The rumor-refuting platforms and market capitalization management teams, while seemingly separate initiatives, share the same underlying logic.
The past operating philosophy for banks was "just do well, no need to say much." However, the information dissemination landscape has changed. The observation from a brand and communications department head at Bank of Nanjing is representative: the rise of AI-generated content, the rapid ascent of short videos, and the emergence of social media mean many public sentiment incidents are not simply based on facts but depend on public perception and emotional reactions.
The capital markets reflect a similar dynamic. While fundamental factors like narrowing net interest margins and asset quality concerns contribute to banks trading below book value, valuation discounts due to information asymmetry cannot be ignored. When market understanding of banks is skewed, merely "performing well operationally" is insufficient. Proactive communication mechanisms and managing external expectations are also required.
It is likely no coincidence that the two banks first to establish market cap management teams—CM BANK and CITIC BANK—are also among the first to launch rumor-refuting platforms (CITIC Group launched its platform in May, and CITIC BANK established its market cap team). This indicates that at least some bank management teams recognize that reputation in the court of public opinion and valuation in the capital markets are essentially two sides of the same coin—both representing the external "cognitive pricing" of the bank.
Comments