在大宗商品贸易领域，供应链金融早已超越单纯的资金周转功能，成为衔接产业与金融的核心枢纽。如今，不少从业者仍困在传统贸易垫资（融资代采）业务的低毛利竞争中，却忽视了多元创新模式带来的增量空间。本文结合权威数据与行业头部实践，剖析大宗商品贸易供应链金融的盈利本质与创新方向，为从业者提供可落地的破局思路。
In the bulk commodity trade sector, supply chain finance has long gone beyond the function of capital turnover, becoming a core interface linking industry and finance. Today, many practitioners remain trapped in the low-margin competition of traditional trade bridging (financing and procurement agency) business, overlooking the incremental space created by diversified innovative models. Drawing on authoritative data and leading industry practices, this article analyzes the profit fundamentals and innovation directions of supply chain finance in bulk commodity trading, providing actionable insights to help practitioners break through current bottlenecks.
传统融资代采盈利低下
传统融资代采（贸易垫资）模式的低盈利性已成行业共识，其毛利空间受多重因素制约。收益端来看，国企背景供应链公司的贸易垫资服务费普遍仅 1%–3%，市场化机构的年化利率虽达 8%–12%，但需覆盖 5%–6% 的资金成本、0.3%–0.8% 的年度仓储监管费，以及人力与风控开支，实际净利率仅 1%–3%（中国物流与采购联合会物流与供应链金融分会，2025，《2025 年供应链金融发展趋势预测》）。
头部企业数据同样印证这一现状：厦门象屿股份有限公司 2024 年财报显示整体毛利率为 2.3%，受大宗商品需求疲软影响，传统贸易相关业务盈利承压（民生证券，2025，《2024 年年报点评》）；物产中大（中大物资集团）同期传统业务净利率也维持在低位。该模式完全依赖资金周转，缺乏核心竞争力，且对价格波动与信用风险的抵御能力较弱。
From The low profitability of the traditional financing and procurement agency (trade bridging) model has become an industry consensus, with margins constrained by multiple factors. On the revenue side, SOE-backed supply chain companies typically charge only 1%–3% for trade bridging services, while market-oriented institutions charge an annualized interest rate of 8%–12%. However, these returns must cover a 5%–6% capital cost, a 0.3%–0.8% annual warehousing-supervision fee, as well as labor and risk-control expenses, resulting in an actual net profit margin of just 1%–3% (Logistics and Supply Chain Finance Branch of the China Federation of Logistics and Purchasing, 2025, 2025 Supply Chain Finance Development Trend Forecast).
Among leading enterprises, the 2024 financial report of Xiamen Xiangyu Co., Ltd. shows an overall gross profit margin of 2.3%, with traditional trade-related business profitability under pressure due to weak bulk commodity demand (Minsheng Securities, 2025, 2024 Annual Report Comment). Similarly, Materials Zhongda (Zhongda Material Group) reported that its traditional business maintained a low net profit margin during the same period. This model relies solely on capital turnover, lacks core competitiveness, and remains highly vulnerable to price fluctuations and credit risks.
供应链金融盈利升级
供应链金融的盈利升级核心，在于从 “单纯提供资金” 转向 “全链路服务输出”。以下四类创新模式均经过实践验证，其盈利水平与风控能力均有权威数据支撑：
The core of profitability upgrading lies in shifting from "pure capital provision" to "full-link service output." Four innovative models have been verified:
-
仓单质押融资：依托大宗商品的高标准化属性，贸易商将钢材、有色金属等标准化商品存入期货交易所指定仓库，凭标准仓单申请融资，质押率达 70%–90%，放款周期可压缩至 24 小时内（上海期货交易所，2024，《质押业务年度报告》）。核心收益包括 4.5%–5.5% 的融资利差与 0.3%–0.8% 的年度监管费，叠加动态质押、仓单拆分服务后，综合收益率可达 6%–8%，行业不良贷款率低于 1.2%。
Warehouse receipt pledge financing: Leveraging bulk commodity standardization, financing via warehouse receipts from exchange-designated warehouses, with 70%–90% pledge rate and 24-hour disbursement (Shanghai Futures Exchange, 2024), comprehensive yield 6%–8%, non-performing rate below 1.2%;
应收账款融资：聚焦产业链应收款项盘活，贸易商将核心企业确认的应收账款转让给银行或保理公司，快速回笼 70%–90% 货款（智研瞻咨询，2025，《2025–2030 年中国保理行业发展趋势与市场策略分析报告》）。银行保理年化收益率为 5%–8%，商业保理可达 8%–12%，反向保理模式可额外收取 1%–2% 的担保费；2024 年国内大宗商品领域应收账款 ABS 发行规模达 1.6158 万亿元，利率较普通流动资金贷款低 100–200 个基点，服务机构综合收益率可达 8%–12%（中国债券信息网，2024，《资产证券化市场年度报告》）。
Accounts receivable financing focuses on activating outstanding receivables: traders transfer core-enterprise-confirmed accounts receivable to banks or factoring companies to quickly recover 70%–90% of payments (Zhiyan Consulting, 2025, China Factoring Industry Development Trends and Market Strategy Analysis Report 2025–2030). Bank factoring offers an annualized yield of 5%–8%, while commercial factoring yields 8%–12%, with an additional 1%–2% guarantee fee for reverse factoring. In 2024, the issuance scale of accounts-receivable ABS in China’s bulk commodity sector reached RMB 1.6158 trillion, with interest rates 100–200 bps lower than ordinary working-capital loans, enabling service providers to achieve an 8%–12% comprehensive yield (ChinaBond, 2024, Annual Report on the Asset Securitization Market).
预付账款融资（保兑仓模式）：针对下游采购商资金缺口，收取 1%–2% 的服务费与 7%–10% 的年化资金占用费（广西自贸区管委会，2024，《大宗商品交易监管年度报告》）。叠加基差点价与场外期权工具后，收益率可提升至 8%–10%。某建筑企业采购螺纹钢的案例显示，该模式收益较传统贸易垫资翻倍（建发股份，2024，《供应链业务专项运营报告》）。
Advance payment financing (trust receipt model) addresses capital shortages among downstream purchasers, charging a 1%–2% service fee and a 7%–10% annualized capital-occupation fee (Guangxi Pilot Free Trade Zone Administrative Committee, 2024, Annual Report on Bulk Commodity Trade Supervision). Combined with basis pricing and OTC options, the yield can increase to 8%–10%. In a case involving a construction enterprise purchasing rebar, returns doubled compared to traditional trade-bridging services (C&D Inc., 2024, Special Operational Report on Supply Chain Business).
综合供应链服务：整合采购、物流、风控、数据等多维能力，中企云链 2024 年招股书显示其工业数字金融业务毛利率达 95.9%，核心确权服务毛利率更是高达 97.5%；平安银行通过跨境供应链结算服务实现 12%–18% 的净利率，按交易额收取 0.5%–1.5% 的服务费（平安银行，2024，《跨境金融业务发展报告》）。 Comprehensive supply chain services integrate procurement, logistics, risk control, and data capabilities: • Linklogis, in its 2024 prospectus, reported a 95.9% gross profit margin for its industrial digital-finance business, with core-confirmation services reaching 97.5%. • Ping An Bank, through its cross-border supply-chain settlement services, achieves a 12%–18% net profit margin, charging a 0.5%–1.5% fee based on transaction volume (Ping An Bank, 2024, Cross-Border Financial Business Development Report).
不同模式的盈利差距源于价值创造能力的差异。传统贸易垫资属于 “重资产 + 资金驱动”，而创新模式多为 “轻资产 + 能力驱动”，通过 “利差 + 服务费 + 分成” 的多元收益叠加实现盈利倍增。头部企业凭借规模效应，资金成本可低至 3%–4%，进一步扩大盈利空间。
The profit gap among models stems from differences in value-creation capabilities. Traditional trade bridging is “asset-heavy + capital-driven,” while innovative models are mostly “asset-light + capability-driven,” multiplying revenue through the combination of spreads, service fees, and profit-sharing. Leading enterprises benefit from economies of scale, accessing capital costs as low as 3%–4% to expand margins.
03
高质量发展是方向
当前，中国供应链金融市场持续扩容，行业发展正向 “质量提升” 转型（中国物流与采购联合会物流与供应链金融分会，2025）。从业者唯有扎根产业本质，选择与自身实力匹配的创新路径，方能在这万亿级市场中实现稳健盈利。
China’s bulk commodity supply chain finance market continues to grow, with development shifting toward “quality improvement” (Logistics and Supply Chain Finance Branch of the China Federation of Logistics and Purchasing, 2025). By staying rooted in industrial fundamentals and selecting innovation paths aligned with their strengths, practitioners can achieve stable profitability in this trillion-yuan market.
-
-
-
点击蓝字，关注我们