Why China’s Middle Class Is Losing Its Confidence

Three years ago, everything seemed to be going right for Blake Xu.

The 33-year-old entrepreneur and his family had built a portfolio of properties during China’s real-estate boom. His wife was expecting their first child. He had just sold an apartment, and put almost half of the proceeds into the stock market.

Since then, the property market has entered a years long downturn, the country’s benchmark CSI 300 stock index has lost around a third of its value and the economy has become increasingly vulnerable, suffering from moribund consumer confidence, weak private-sector investment and sky-high youth unemployment.

Xu has already pulled almost all of his money out of China’s stock market. His next exit may be from China itself. undefined undefined “I don’t know where the future path lies,” said Xu, who lives in Shanghai. “Once our child grows a little older, we intend to send him abroad, and perhaps we will also go.” undefined undefined For most of their lives, China’s new generation of middle-class citizens could take a booming economy for granted. But the property rout, the stock-market slump and the wider economic downturn have forced them to confront a difficult question: Are China’s boom years over for good?

Chinese citizens are spending less, saving more and shying away from risky investments. Household savings in the country reached $19.83 trillion by February, the highest figure on record, according to data from the central bank. Consumer confidence is near its lowest level in decades.

The increasing sense of nervousness among China’s city-dwellers and white-collar workers could be a major problem for Beijing. China’s government has for years derived legitimacy from its reputation for sound economic management. undefined undefined Now, that reputation looks increasingly shaky.

Finding an exit strategy

Hugo Chen, 30, was born during the early stages of China’s remarkable economic transformation, which came after former leader Deng Xiaoping rolled back the worst excesses of Maoism and opened the doors to global trade.

Chen, who was raised in the wealthy coastal city of Shenzhen, studied for a master’s degree in the U.K. He moved back to China in 2017 to work in finance and, like many Chinese citizens, decided to play the stock market. He also bought bonds and invested in insurance products.

But last year, he made a decision: no more Chinese shares.

Chen, a banker, had previously helped an insurance company manage its money. He knew more than most about investing—and China no longer seemed like a smart place to invest money.

By the end of 2023, the CSI 300 index had fallen for three years in a row. Even worse, stocks in the U.S., Japan and elsewhere had surged. It was supposed to be China’s century , but the economy and the stock market were losing ground to those in other countries.

“Becoming poor is one thing. Becoming poor while others get rich is another,” said Chen.

He shifted most of his investments into funds that buy U.S. stocks.

China has more than 220 million individual investors, meaning stock-market moves can have a big impact on the national psyche. These small investors once had a reputation as gamblers. After the slump of the past few years, they have scaled back their bets and increasingly shifted to safer assets such as money-market funds.

The real-estate sector has done even more damage to confidence. What started as an attempt by Beijing to rein in excessive debt in the sector around three years ago has morphed into a multiyear crisis, pushing dozens of developers to the brink of collapse and pulling the rug out from under one of China’s main drivers of economic growth.

The price of existing homes in China’s most developed cities fell 6.3% in February compared with the same month last year— the biggest year-over-year decline on record.

Xu, the entrepreneur, sold a second property in a process he described as extremely painful. But he has no regrets: The money will give him the flexibility he needs to leave the country if things get worse, he said.

“Emotionally, I hope for the best for this country,” said Xu. “However, if this team of leaders stays, to be frank, I have to have an exit strategy, as the outlook is worrisome.”

That is precisely the kind of sentiment that will unsettle officials in Beijing. Although China’s government keeps a tight grip on power, it is acutely sensitive to the public mood.

China’s population has a history of public displays of dissent, including public protests against banks and companies . Beijing has tolerated at least a degree of dissent, as long as its citizens follow one overriding principle: Don’t blame the central government.

But some people in the country do blame Beijing for the current economic troubles, pointing to policy U-turns on internet companies, private education and real estate, and a strict approach to containing Covid-19 that has dealt lasting damage to confidence in the country.

The shift toward low investment and high savings is fuelling a vicious cycle, where the economic slump erodes confidence levels and, in turn, low confidence worsens the downturn, said Yasheng Huang, professor of global economics and management with MIT Sloan School of Management and a fellow at the Wilson Center.

“When a society settles on a particular psychology, it’s not easy to shift,” he said.

From hope to fear

Scarlett Hu, 37, remembers how it felt to be back in China in 2014. She had just returned from studying abroad, and took a job in Shanghai’s luxury-goods sector.

“At that time everyone in the society was full of hope. There was this promising sentiment around,” said Hu. “When we went out to relax after work, we believed that tomorrow would be better and let’s have fun today.”

Hu bought an apartment in Shanghai in 2017 and started buying mutual funds that invest in the stock market in 2020, before the birth of her son. She hoped the money would help pay for his education. At the time, it seemed like a smart bet: The real-estate market was booming, and stocks were nearing a record high, cheered on by China’s bullish state media.
Her apartment has now lost 15% of its value, and her mutual-fund portfolio is down 35%.

“Now we talk about concrete plans and measures to secure a more certain future, focusing on ways to enhance our sense of security. You don’t feel that kind of ambition any more,” she said.

China’s government has taken steps to tackle the downturn, including easing lending rules for battered real-estate firms, cutting borrowing rates and pledging to resolve the debt problems of local governments. But Beijing appears reluctant to adopt the sort of direct stimulus Western governments embraced in the wake of Covid-19, when direct payments to consumers helped get spending back on track.

In early March, Chinese Premier Li Qiang said the government was targeting growth of around 5% for 2024, and there have been recent signs of improvement.

But economists think Beijing will find it difficult to hit this growth target, and some people in the country worry that things are about to get worse.

A 40-year-old equity analyst based in Beijing said she lost her job last August when the consulting firm she worked for closed. She has two children to care for, her husband’s income is unstable, and she is bracing herself for more pain to come.

“Everyone is saying that this year might still be the best in the next decade, so we should be prepared for a long period of hardship,” she said.

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.