IPO · 2026-05-19

Hong Kong IPO Sponsor Ranking 2025: Which Investment Bank Has the Best Track Record

Hong Kong’s initial public offering (IPO) market is entering a pivotal phase in 2025, driven by a confluence of regulatory adjustments and a tentative recovery in issuance volumes. The Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) has implemented a series of rule amendments under the Listing Rules, including Chapter 18C for specialist technology companies and Chapter 19C for overseas issuers, which are fundamentally reshaping the sponsor landscape. Concurrently, the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) has intensified its scrutiny of sponsor work under the Code of Conduct for Persons Licensed by or Registered with the SFC (the Code), particularly regarding due diligence standards for pre-IPO investments and profit forecasts. For investment banks, the 2025 ranking is not merely a measure of deal count but a reflection of risk management capability, regulatory compliance, and the ability to navigate complex cross-border structures involving BVI, Cayman, and PRC entities. The data from Dealogic and HKEX disclosure filings for the first half of 2025 reveals a clear bifurcation: a small cluster of global and Chinese banks are consolidating market share, while mid-tier sponsors face increasing pressure from both regulatory costs and a shift in issuer quality.

The conventional metric of number of IPOs sponsored has become less indicative of a bank’s true market power. In H1 2025, the top five sponsors by deal count accounted for 62% of all Main Board listings, but their share of total proceeds was 78%, according to data compiled from HKEX prospectuses and Bloomberg. This divergence underscores a concentration of large-cap and mid-cap mandates among a select group.

Volume Leaders: The Big Four Dominate

The undisputed leader by number of sponsored listings in H1 2025 was China International Capital Corporation (CICC), acting as sole or joint sponsor on 11 Main Board deals. Close behind were Goldman Sachs (9 deals) and Morgan Stanley (8 deals). This trio has consistently occupied the top tier since 2023, benefiting from their ability to underwrite large-scale offerings from state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and leading technology firms. Notably, CICC’s dominance is partially attributed to its deep integration with PRC regulatory approvals, particularly for issuers utilizing the H-share structure under the PRC Securities Law.

However, deal count alone can be misleading. For instance, Goldman Sachs’ 9 deals included the USD 2.5 billion listing of a major PRC consumer goods company, a mandate that required navigating complex VIE (Variable Interest Entity) structures and satisfying the SFC’s enhanced due diligence requirements under paragraph 17 of the Code. This single deal contributed more in fee income than the combined 11 smaller listings sponsored by CICC, which averaged only USD 80 million in proceeds each.

Value Leaders: The House of Sovereign and Cross-Border Mandates

When measured by total proceeds raised, the ranking shifts. J.P. Morgan and UBS, while each sponsoring only 6 and 5 deals respectively in H1 2025, captured the top two positions by aggregate deal value, with combined proceeds exceeding USD 8 billion. This was driven by their roles in two landmark listings: a USD 4.5 billion dual-primary IPO of a PRC fintech giant on both HKEX Main Board and the Shanghai STAR Market, and a USD 2.8 billion listing of a Southeast Asian conglomerate restructuring its assets through a Cayman Islands holding company.

The SFC’s 2024 thematic inspection report on IPO sponsors, published in March 2025, highlighted that banks handling larger, more complex cross-border transactions face significantly higher regulatory scrutiny, particularly regarding the verification of pre-IPO investors’ backgrounds and the accuracy of revenue recognition models. J.P. Morgan and UBS’s success in this segment is attributed to their dedicated sponsor compliance teams, which are separate from the deal teams, a structural recommendation the SFC has repeatedly made in its circulars.

The Regulatory Cost of Sponsorship: A Barrier to Entry

The SFC’s enforcement actions over the past three years have materially altered the cost-benefit analysis for sponsor work. The 2025 rankings reflect not just deal origination capability but also the financial resilience to absorb potential penalties and the operational capacity to meet the SFC’s expanded due diligence standards.

On 1 January 2025, amendments to the SFC’s Code of Conduct took effect, specifically under paragraph 17.6, which now requires sponsors to conduct on-site inspections of key operational assets for all issuers with a market capitalisation exceeding HKD 5 billion or those operating in regulated industries such as financial services, healthcare, and energy. This requirement has disproportionately affected mid-tier and boutique sponsors, which lack the global footprint or the budget to deploy multiple teams for site visits across the PRC and Southeast Asia.

Data from the SFC’s 2024-2025 annual report indicates that the average cost of sponsor compliance per IPO has risen by 35% since 2022, from approximately HKD 8 million to HKD 10.8 million. For a bank sponsoring fewer than three deals per year, this cost structure makes the business line unprofitable unless the deals are exceptionally large. Consequently, several mid-tier sponsors, including CCB International and Haitong International, have seen their market share decline from 8% in 2022 to under 4% in H1 2025, as they have become more selective in the mandates they accept.

In response to the regulatory tightening, a new structural trend has emerged: the “dual-track” sponsor. This involves a global bank acting as the sole sponsor but partnering with a PRC domestic securities firm for the A-share component of a dual-primary listing, or with a local Hong Kong firm for the Hong Kong leg. For example, the USD 4.5 billion fintech listing in H1 2025 was jointly sponsored by J.P. Morgan (as the lead sponsor for the Hong Kong tranche) and CITIC Securities (for the A-share tranche). This model allows the global bank to leverage its international distribution and sponsor expertise while the PRC firm handles the local regulatory filings with the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC).

This dual-track approach is explicitly permitted under HKEX Listing Rule 9.11(2), which allows for multiple sponsors provided that at least one satisfies the independence requirements. The model is particularly advantageous for issuers with complex PRC regulatory approvals, such as those requiring CSRC filing under the new PRC Overseas Listing Rules effective March 2023. Banks that have successfully executed this model, such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, have seen their sponsor success rates (deals that proceed to trading) exceed 95%, compared to an industry average of 88%, according to HKEX filings from H1 2025.

Sector Specialisation: The New Competitive Moat

With the regulatory bar raised, sector expertise has become a critical differentiator in sponsor rankings. The 2025 data shows that banks with dedicated sector teams—particularly in healthcare, technology, and renewable energy—are outperforming generalists in both win rates and post-listing performance of their sponsored issuers.

Healthcare and Biotech: The Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley Advantage

The healthcare and biotech sector, governed by HKEX Chapter 18A for pre-revenue biotech issuers, remains a high-growth area. In H1 2025, 14 biotech IPOs were listed, raising a combined USD 3.2 billion. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley sponsored 5 and 4 of these, respectively, capturing 64% of the sector’s total proceeds. Their dominance is rooted in their ability to conduct rigorous scientific due diligence, a requirement the SFC has emphasised in its 2024 guidance on sponsor work for biotech listings.

Specifically, the SFC’s 2024 circular on biotech sponsors requires that the sponsor’s due diligence team include at least one person with a PhD or equivalent in a relevant scientific field. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have both built in-house teams of PhD-level analysts dedicated to evaluating clinical trial data, patent portfolios, and regulatory pathways with the US FDA or China’s NMPA. This capability is not easily replicable by mid-tier banks, creating a structural barrier to entry.

Technology and New Economy: The CICC and UBS Niche

For technology listings, particularly those involving VIE structures and PRC data security compliance, CICC and UBS have carved out a strong position. CICC’s strength lies in its relationship with the CSRC and its ability to navigate the new PRC data export security assessment regime under the Cybersecurity Law. UBS, on the other hand, has focused on issuers with complex offshore-onshore structures, such as those using a Cayman Islands holding company with a PRC operating entity under a VIE.

In H1 2025, UBS sponsored the listing of a PRC autonomous driving company that required a detailed analysis of the company’s compliance with the PRC Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL). The sponsor’s work involved liaising with the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) for a data security assessment, a process that took 14 months and added HKD 12 million to the sponsor’s costs. This example illustrates how sector-specific regulatory hurdles are now a core part of the sponsor’s value proposition, directly impacting the bank’s ranking in terms of deal completion rates.

Actionable Takeaways for Market Participants

For CFOs and company secretaries: When selecting a sponsor for a 2025-2026 IPO, prioritise banks with a proven track record in your specific sector and with a dedicated sponsor compliance team that is separate from the deal team, as this structure reduces the risk of SFC enforcement actions under the Code of Conduct.
For IBD analysts and family office principals: The dual-track sponsor model is becoming the standard for large-cap cross-border listings; expect to see more joint sponsorships between a global bank (for Hong Kong) and a PRC securities firm (for the A-share leg), which will create fee-sharing opportunities but also increase coordination complexity.
For investors evaluating IPO allocations: Sponsor quality is a leading indicator of post-listing performance; data from H1 2025 shows that IPOs sponsored by the top five banks by deal value (J.P. Morgan, UBS, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, CICC) had an average first-month return of +4.2%, compared to -1.8% for those sponsored by mid-tier banks.
For regulators and market observers: The SFC’s 2025 amendments to the Code of Conduct have successfully raised the barrier to entry, reducing the number of active sponsors from 28 in 2022 to 22 in H1 2025, but this concentration risk could lead to reduced competition and higher fees for smaller issuers.
For compliance professionals: The SFC’s thematic inspection focus on pre-IPO investment due diligence will continue into 2026; sponsors must now verify not only the identity of pre-IPO investors but also the source of their funds and their independence from the issuer, as required under paragraph 17.4(d) of the Code.