China Offers a Little Regulatory Clarity

Editors’ Note: In the course of discussing a broader topic, this article touches on a couple of individual companies. As a reminder, MarketMinder doesn’t make individual security recommendations. Those mentioned are merely to support the broader discussion.

What a difference a day makes! On Monday and Tuesday, as investors digested news of a lockdown in Shenzhen—a high-tech manufacturing powerhouse—Chinese stocks fell -13.3%, extending a slide that began over a year ago.^[i] This also followed a selloff last week, when a few small, US-listed Chinese firms were put on delisting watch by the SEC. Yet Wednesday was very different. In the early morning US time, the Chinese State Council’s Financial Stability and Development Committee (FSDC) announced several new measures to help calm markets, some of which hit the chief causes of the last year’s slide. Now, the last time they tried a large intervention, in January 2016, it stoked fear, causing a drop. Yet today, markets leapt, suggesting officials have learned from prior mistakes and seem aware of the issues impacting investors’ confidence. Time will tell if this recovery holds, but for now, the direct response to investors’ concerns is encouraging.

By definition, Chinese stocks are in a bear market. Their peak-to-trough decline breached -20% and is now over a year old. But its shape is more correction-like, as the decline occurred in a series of panicky plunges as investors reacted first to some regulatory changes, then defaults of distressed property developers, and now the latest COVID lockdown. Also more correction-like, in our view, sentiment seemed largely detached from reality throughout, with rumors and fears far exceeding the scope of the actual regulatory changes. For instance, as we wrote last year, when Chinese officials disrupted private tutoring firms and jawboned about tightening the strings on giant Tech-like companies, investors responded with a big sell-off in the latter—even though actual measures taken ended up quite small and didn’t much disrupt earnings. But the unpredictability and lack of transparency around the measures stoked many and varied fears. Draconian policies didn’t follow, but the impact on sentiment was understandable.

Investors globally also had concerns about whether Chinese stocks would be investible. The US passed regulations that would force Chinese companies trading on US exchanges to delist in three years (unless they complied with auditing requirements, which would be illegal under Chinese law).^[ii] Meanwhile, when Didi, a large Chinese ride-sharing company IPOed on the New York Stock Exchange over the summer, the Chinese government cracked down, eventually forcing its move to Hong Kong—which is where other US-listed stocks are likely headed. US investors can access Hong Kong markets pretty easily, and shares listed there are quite liquid, but the heated political rhetoric often drowned out that reality—just as hyperbolic headlines about Evergrande and other property developers’ defaulting often drowned out officials’ efforts to stabilize property markets and backstop healthy firms.

Today, the FSDC held a special meeting to address all of these concerns. On the delisting front, Chinese policymakers came out in support of letting mainland companies continue listing overseas, stating the US and China maintain a dialogue on this matter, have achieved progress and would unveil plans in due course. Now, depending upon what the plan is exactly, Congress may have to repeal or amend the legislation in question (the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act), which China obviously can’t control. But China’s apparent willingness to bend on audits is new—and seems like a positive step.

Elsewhere in the statement, officials said Tech regulation should be transparent, predictable and completed as soon as possible, indicating the associated uncertainty should end soon. They also reiterated their focus on managing risks in the property sector and announced plans to facilitate a new development model that wouldn’t rely on local government financing—another positive step. Lastly, they reiterated monetary and fiscal policy would remain accommodative, with an aim of keeping economic and loan growth steady.

This is a far cry from January 2016, when officials responded to sharp negativity by halting trading multiple times, blaming insiders’ sales and having the state buy stocks. That gave global investors the perception something was fundamentally broken, requiring artificial life support. This time, they are taking a more technocratic approach and addressing investors’ concerns, and major institutions including the central bank, finance ministry and securities regulators released quick statements of support. It remains to be seen whether the impact will be lasting, or if today’s bounce is a one-off, yet we see the potential for these actions to materially improve sentiment toward Chinese stocks, should follow-through prove material. Notably, they follow the standard Chinese policy blueprint: high-level statements setting out the overall policy direction, with the expectation of more specific measures to come. There also appears to be a great degree of coordination, suggesting top policymakers are increasingly aware of how last year’s uncertainty hit sentiment.

In a sense, this development isn’t a huge shock to us. This is China’s version of an election year, and President Xi Jinping has been laying the groundwork for an unprecedented third term. Key to ensuring this? A happy, prosperous citizenry, and the mainland’s stock market is increasingly important to this. We have long observed that Chinese policymakers tend to turn on fiscal and monetary stimulus to speed growth in election years, and midwifing a stock market recovery seems like a natural extension of this.

Not that Chinese stocks needed the intervention, mind you—again, we think sentiment has overshot to the downside, which is a prime environment for a strong recovery. The strong reaction to a mere statement of plans and policy aims illustrates that very point. Perhaps the bounce doesn’t hold, but the acknowledgment of the issues affecting sentiment is a positive step—one that wasn’t lost on the markets today.