Hong Kong-listed companies flock to "return to A-shares" to strengthen industry collaboration and improve financing efficiency

证券时报记者 王军 卓泳

Recently, AIM Vaccines, a leading Hong Kong-listed vaccine company, released an announcement stating that it plans to apply for an A-share listing on the Beijing Stock Exchange. Under the relevant rules, a company’s domestic shares must first be listed on the National Equities Exchange and Quotations. If this “return to the A-shares” process can be advanced smoothly, AIM Vaccines will become the first stock of the kind to return from the Hong Kong market to the Beijing Stock Exchange.

Since mid-June last year, the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council issued documents clarifying support for eligible Hong Kong-listed companies in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area to list on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Combined with the sustained increase in inclusiveness by the STAR Market and the ChiNext for unprofitable biotech and hard-technology companies, Hong Kong-listed companies are now kicking off the “return to A-shares” process in large numbers.

From BGI Group once listed on the STAR Market to Ying’en Biotech, Everbright Environment, Paradigm Intelligent, Yuejiang Technology, and other companies that have recently issued announcements to advance their “return to A-shares,” the “H-share return to A-shares” trend is expected to add more new demonstration cases. “A+H” is playing out a “two-way convergence.”

Leading Sub-Segment Players in Hong Kong Stocks

A-Share Listings Get Under Way in a Rush

At the same time that a large number of A-share companies are “going south” to list in Hong Kong, more and more Hong Kong-listed companies are choosing to “go north,” starting to build an “A+H” dual-capital platform.

AIM Vaccines, which has announced that it plans to apply for an A-share listing, is a vaccine-sector leader. According to the company’s Hong Kong IPO prospectus and financial reports over the years, it is China’s second-largest and the private sector’s largest full-industry-chain vaccine group. At the same time, it ranks first globally in hepatitis B vaccines and second in rabies vaccines, and it also sits within the domestic first tier in mRNA vaccine R&D.

This kind of “return to A-shares” by a top-tier leader is not a one-off. Paradigm Intelligent, the Hong Kong AI (artificial intelligence) leader, recently disclosed that it has already obtained a tutoring-and-advisory record with the Beijing Securities Regulatory Bureau and plans to list on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Yuejiang Technology, the leading collaboration-robot company, announced in March that it plans to list on the ChiNext of the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, raising about RMB 1.2 billion to invest in core projects such as quadruped robots and humanoid robots. Earlier this year, ZhiPu—launched on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and dubbed the “world’s first large-model stock”—is also simultaneously advancing its A-share listing advisory process, moving toward an “A+H” framework.

According to incomplete statistics from Securities Times, there are currently 10 Hong Kong-listed companies that have clearly submitted A-share IPO applications or initiated listing advisory, including Liqin Resources, Everbright Environment, Ying’en Biotech, Xinjiang Xinxin Mining, Jinsaide Communication, China Biopharmaceutical, Beijing Automotive, Xunzong Communication, among others. They cover multiple sectors including biopharmaceuticals, high-end manufacturing, environmental protection, resources, and communications.

In addition to direct IPOs, M&A restructuring has also become an important path for Hong Kong assets to “return to A-shares.” In January, China Hongqiao, a Hong Kong-listed company, successfully achieved a strategic “return to A-shares” by injecting its core aluminum assets into A-share Hongchuang Holdings. This provides the industry with a replicable “curve-return-to-A-shares” sample.

Three Main Drivers

Driving the “Return to A-Shares” Boom

In mid-June last year, the General Office of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council issued documents that explicitly supported eligible Hong Kong-listed companies in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area to list on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. In addition, with increased inclusiveness on the STAR Market and the ChiNext, the “return to A-shares” channels for unprofitable biopharmaceutical and hard-technology companies have been opened. The combined effect of institutional reforms and policy dividends undoubtedly provides Hong Kong-listed companies with stronger policy support and broader development space for “returning to A-shares.”

Beyond policy and institutional dividends, Liu Youhua, research director of Paipaiwang Wealth, told Securities Times that this round of Hong Kong “return to A-shares” boom has two other key drivers: first, A-shares’ liquidity and valuation are more attractive, with clear premiums for sectors such as hard technology and biopharmaceuticals; local investors have higher recognition and better financing efficiency. Second, “returning to A-shares” helps strengthen local industrial coordination, making it easier for companies to connect with mainland supply chains, market and policy resources, and to enhance brand influence. “‘Hong Kong listing and A-share amplification’ is becoming an increasingly smooth capital pathway,” Liu Youhua said.

Among them, the most direct driver is still the valuation gap. He JInlong, general manager of Youmeili Investments, said plainly to Securities Times: “A-shares are driven by a dual-engine of institutions plus retail investors, so overall trading activity and liquidity premium are significantly higher than in Hong Kong stocks. For local tracks such as technology, pharmaceuticals, and new energy, A-share valuations are typically about 30%—60% higher than those in Hong Kong.”

This gap is particularly evident in companies that have already “returned to A-shares.” BaiAoSaiTu, which listed on the STAR Market in December 2025, saw its A-share price rise more than twofold compared with its offering price, and with a premium of over 90% versus its Hong Kong-listed price. Wind data shows that as of March 31, for multiple “A+H” stocks such as Guolian Minsheng, SMIC, and CICC, the A-share premium rate over H-shares is not less than 100%.

Yuan Mei, research-and-investment director at Sullivan Jiel i (Shenzhen) Cloud Technology Co., Ltd., also believes that Hong Kong-listed companies have already passed the listing review of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and can operate in ongoing compliance with higher market trust. After meeting the conditions, the “return to A-shares” process tends to be relatively faster, and domestic-share shareholders can choose more flexibly between the two markets for tradability, which is more favorable for realizing equity value.

However, some private fund practitioners told Securities Times that for some “return to A-shares” companies, their shares are still subject to lock-up periods, and the real stock-price and liquidity performance may only be reflected more objectively after the lock-ups are lifted. The company’s ultimate valuation still needs to match the market environment and how well fundamentals are realized.

Performance and Valuation

The Biggest Risk Point

Although the dividends of “returning to A-shares” are clear, this path is far from smooth. Securities Times noted that companies including Jinsaide Communication, China Biopharmaceutical, Beijing Automotive, and Xunzong Communication have all announced the termination of their “return to A-shares” listing advisory. The reasons given are mostly changes in market conditions, adjustments to capital market rules, and changes in the company’s development strategy. In He Jinlong’s view, such termination of advisory is not a failure; rather, it is a rational “braking” by the company—an慎重 choice made when the market environment, performance, valuation, and strategy do not align. There may still be a chance to restart in the future.

So, in this round of “return to A-shares” trend, what is the biggest risk point faced by companies? Wen Tianna, executive president of Hong Kong Broad Capital International, told Securities Times directly: “First, performance falls short of expectations. Second, the valuation declines. He further analyzed that most ‘return to A-shares’ companies are in an expansion or transformation period. They have high R&D spending and large capital expenditures. Once macro conditions fluctuate, clinical progress fails to meet expectations, technology implementation is delayed, or demand along the industry chain weakens, the difficulty of realizing earnings will increase significantly, directly impacting valuation and the ability to raise new financing—especially crucial for unprofitable biopharmaceutical and robotics companies. As for the valuation decline risk, it comes more from pressure on the supply side. If companies list in a concentrated manner in the short term, it may lead to liquidity dilution in some local sectors, and high-valuation targets are more likely to be affected by market sentiment.”

Liu Youhua also said, “‘returning to A-shares’ means enterprises must bear higher compliance costs. Facing stricter performance expectations and fiercer market competition, companies must make prudent decisions in light of their own development stage.”

Amid the dense “return to A-shares” wave, one of the most concerned questions in the market is: does A-shares have enough capacity to absorb these offerings, and could it trigger an overall valuation convergence? Based on the views of multiple interviewees, A-shares has sufficient overall absorption capacity, and the market is likely to see more of a pattern of structural opportunities than systemic pressure.

On one hand, A-shares have a large pool of funds, and many of the companies returning to A-shares in this round are sector leaders or targets in tracks supported by policy, which makes it easier to attract long-term allocation capital. On the other hand, historical experience shows that when high-quality companies “return to A-shares,” they often lead to a re-rating of sector valuations rather than a comprehensive crackdown.

Wen Tianna analyzed that the current A-share vs H-share premium index is at a relatively low level, and the valuation gap is moving toward rational convergence. The valuation pressure that might truly arise mainly concerns companies whose fundamentals are not solid enough and whose valuations are high while still unprofitable. By contrast, for leading companies whose strategies align with policy and whose tracks are clear, they still have strong valuation resilience.

For the future “A+H” listing pattern in both places, interviewees generally believe that the two markets will move toward deeper integration while maintaining differentiated positioning, forming a complementary, win-win ecosystem. Deep integration is reflected in ongoing policy efforts to promote mutual market connectivity between the two places and to make listing filings more convenient. Companies can also leverage Hong Kong’s internationalized window and A-shares’ local capital and policy resources to achieve dual-platform coordinated financing. Over time, the A-share vs H-share valuation premium will gradually become more reasonable.

Differentiation, however, will exist for a long time. “Hong Kong will continue to maintain the characteristics of international capital, flexible listing tools, and global pricing; while A-shares focuses on the structure of local investors, hard-technology support, policy orientation, and long-term value investing,” Wen Tianna said. For companies, “returning to A-shares” is not the final objective. How to achieve coordinated upgrades of technology, industry, and capital by relying on both platforms is the true value over the long term.