A major research report focusing on corporate debt indicators has been released, identifying the 100 publicly listed companies in China with the most favorable debt conditions. This metric is closely watched by investors as a key barometer of a company's overall financial well-being.

On September 22, the Zhejiang University and Zhejiang Public Policy Research Institute jointly published the "2025 National Listed Company Debt Index Research Report." The study evaluated a pool of 5,061 companies, excluding those with special treatment designations (S, ST, *ST), Beijing Stock Exchange listings, and financial firms. The assessment period covered 243 trading days from January 1 to December 31, 2025.

Where the Strongest Performers Are Located

The report indicates that the average debt index for all Chinese listed companies in 2025 stood at 39.47, a modest increase of 1.88 percentage points from the previous year. This relatively small rise is noteworthy, especially considering the backdrop of escalating trade tensions with the US, global supply chain restructuring, and domestic industrial adjustments. Analysts interpret this as a sign of the resilience and underlying potential of the Chinese economy.

The debt index is a crucial tool for gauging the debt pressure on a company. A lower index score signifies better debt health, while a higher score indicates greater financial strain. The release of this index aims to encourage companies to be more proactive in managing their debt profiles and to provide a reference for investors and policymakers. The evaluation considers various debt-related factors such as total market value, long-term and short-term liabilities, debt maturity, equity volatility, and risk-free rates. Financial metrics include interest coverage, cash flow to debt ratios, and quick ratios.

Leading the national ranking is Fujian Expressway (600033.SH) from Fujian province, which recorded a debt index below 0.005, marking it as the healthiest listed company in the country. In the top 500 list, economically advanced provinces show a clear numerical dominance. Guangdong Province leads with 67 companies, followed by Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Beijing, and Shanghai.

For the top 100 list, Guangdong, Zhejiang, and Shanghai performed best, with 19, 12, and 10 companies respectively. Zhejiang province, covered by the report with 687 listed companies, saw its average debt index reach 39.86. This period is marked by a combination of traditional industry upgrades, new industry development, and foreign trade restructuring for the province. Despite this, Zhejiang doubled its representation in the "Top 100" list from the previous year, securing the second-highest number of entries nationally. Its presence in the "Top 500" list has remained within the top three for three consecutive years. The report attributes this to the province's strong base of quality enterprises and market resilience.

In terms of industry breakdown among Zhejiang's "Top 100" healthy companies, the utilities sector is most prominent with 11 entries. The textile and building materials industries follow with 10 and 8 companies respectively, while the power equipment, new energy, basic chemicals, and computer sectors each have 7. This distribution suggests that Zhejiang's industrial restructuring is yielding results, with a balanced mix of traditional manufacturing, foundational industries, new energy, and digital economy sectors, rather than relying solely on conventional industries.

Strategic Recommendations for a Stable Future

The report goes beyond data analysis to offer a set of policy recommendations aimed at fostering a healthier corporate financing environment. One key suggestion is to deepen the use of technology to build proactive risk warning systems. This involves creating digital monitoring platforms that connect government, financial institutions, and enterprises. These systems would analyze financial data for early risk intervention. For export-oriented firms, smart models are recommended to forecast the impact of currency and tariff fluctuations on cash flow. The report also suggests piloting blockchain for debt documentation to reduce financing costs and increase transparency.

Another recommendation focuses on developing differentiated credit evaluation mechanisms suitable for a diverse corporate landscape. Credit and rating agencies are urged to tailor their assessments to different business types. For traditional manufacturers, this means focusing on asset turnover and operating cash flow. Export-focused companies should have metrics for exchange rate risk management added, while science and technology enterprises with high R&D investment should have their innovation conversion rates and patent quality included in core credit parameters. This approach aims to secure long-term funding for the growth of new productive forces.

To support enterprises facing external challenges, the report advises broadening financing channels. Companies are encouraged to leverage policy benefits, integrate industrial chain resources, and use diverse financial tools like technology bonds, green ABS, and infrastructure REITs to optimize their capital structures. In light of global supply chain shifts, it suggests creating a targeted support package to assist key industries with short-term bridge loans and accounts receivable financing. Expanding export credit insurance coverage is also proposed to hedge against external uncertainties.

On the topic of debt resolution, the report calls for a balanced approach to avoid negative spillover effects on the real economy. It recommends establishing a dynamic mechanism that balances debt reduction with economic growth, using special bonds to support key investment projects. For traditional building materials and construction firms heavily reliant on government projects, it proposes a temporary relief fund to help them navigate the transition period and maintain operational stability.

Finally, the report advocates for a collaborative effort to foster a rational understanding of corporate debt among market participants. This involves leveraging university and think tank research to create a platform for joint problem-solving and tailor-made debt optimization plans. It also stresses the importance of managing market expectations and establishing a communication framework to prevent overreaction to isolated cases, thereby creating a stable environment for high-quality corporate development and mitigating the negative impact of adverse information on debt risk management.

The full list of the 100 listed companies with the best debt health nationwide accompanies the report.