Cui Dongshu: In September, the market value of complete vehicle automakers fell 5% month-on-month in the U.S. stock market, 11% in the Hong Kong stock market, and 4% in the A-share market.

Cui Dongshu, Secretary-General of the China Passenger Car Association, wrote that among the market value of global complete vehicle automakers, U.S. stock market complete vehicle automakers are the largest, reaching a scale of 12.9 trillion yuan in September 2026, down 5% month-on-month from August and down 13% year-on-year from September 2025; while the market value of Hong Kong stock market complete vehicle automakers also reached a scale of 0.87 trillion yuan, down 11% month-on-month from August and down 50% year-on-year; the domestic A-share market reached a scale of 1.4 trillion yuan, down 4% month-on-month from August and down 36% year-on-year. Here, for some companies listed in multiple locations in the A-share and Hong Kong stock markets, market value is weighted according to the primary listing venue, with the core being BYD Company Limited (002594.SZ), Great Wall (601633.SH), and GAC (601238.SH) as A-share companies. Looking at the combined A-share and Hong Kong stock market values of Chinese automakers and parts companies, the A-share market tends to support smaller upstream companies in the automotive supply chain, while the Hong Kong stock market tends to support large complete vehicle companies. The differences in domestic personalized support are enormous. The market value of listed complete vehicle automakers is not only the capital market's pricing of a company's current operating results, but also a "barometer" reflecting automotive industry trends, technological changes, and policy direction. Many complete vehicle companies regard market value management as important work, so tracking market value changes is also an important area of industry research. The difficulty for complete vehicle companies to list on the A-share market has led to relatively poor competitiveness of the A-share market compared with international stock markets. In September, the market value changes of domestic and international complete vehicle automakers were relatively large, and consumer-oriented complete vehicle companies were generally extremely brutal. Due to high subsidies, Chinese commercial vehicles, despite having the worst global competitiveness, saw market value decline 7% year-on-year, with a relatively strong market value position in September over the five-year period. Tesla's market value fell 11% year-on-year, while the market value of other international automakers in September was generally at its lowest level since the beginning of last year, with the market relatively sluggish. The market value of international automakers such as Toyota and General Motors fell 14% year-on-year, that of private automakers such as Great Wall fell 31% year-on-year, that of state-owned complete vehicle companies fell 37% year-on-year, and that of new forces automakers fell 58% year-on-year. The market value of phone-related automakers fell 59% year-on-year. 1. Analysis of Industry Profit Changes In August, automotive industry profits recovered significantly month-on-month, but cumulative profits still declined 17% year-on-year, and profit pressure has still not been fundamentally alleviated. The automotive industry is simultaneously squeezed from both ends: on one hand, prices of electronic components such as memory and chips are rising; on the other hand, costs of raw materials such as nonferrous metals are increasing, continuously eroding automakers' profits. By comparison, the computer and communications industry benefits from the upward chip cycle, with profits exploding; while automobiles are downstream consumers of chips and nonferrous metals, passively bearing cost pressure. Although automotive profits rebounded in the short term in August, it was more an improvement brought by the fading of phased promotions rather than a fundamental reversal. Fluctuations in chip and nonferrous metal prices, combined with the industry price war, remain the core factors constraining a sustained recovery in automotive industry profitability. 2. Complete Vehicle Stock Market Value Listed complete vehicle automaker companies are mainly studied across three major markets: the U.S. stock market, the Hong Kong stock market, and the domestic A-share market. The European market is temporarily not studied due to its relative fragmentation. Among the market value of global complete vehicle automakers, U.S. stock market complete vehicle automakers are the largest, reaching a scale of 12.9 trillion yuan in September 2026, down 5% month-on-month from August and down 13% year-on-year from September 2025; while the market value of Hong Kong stock market complete vehicle automakers also reached a scale of 0.87 trillion yuan, down 11% month-on-month from August and down 50% year-on-year; the domestic A-share market reached a scale of 1.4 trillion yuan, down 4% month-on-month from August and down 36% year-on-year. Here, for some companies listed in multiple locations in the A-share and Hong Kong stock markets, market value is weighted according to the primary listing venue, with the core being BYD Company Limited, Great Wall, and GAC as A-share companies. From the market value trends of complete vehicle automakers in the A-share, Hong Kong, and U.S. stock markets, the market value trend in Hong Kong stocks performed relatively strongly in the first three quarters of 2026. Compared with the market value trend in U.S. stocks, the upward trend in Hong Kong stock market value is relatively obvious. Since the beginning of 2026, A-share and Hong Kong stock complete vehicle automaker market values have faced relatively greater downward pressure. Overall, in the domestic A-share market, there have been few new listings of complete vehicle companies, and overall growth has been relatively flat. The U.S. stock market, relying on the AI wave and Tesla's myth, has also seen relatively large growth. Since October 2025, with domestic retail growth declining, Hong Kong stock and Shanghai-Shenzhen complete vehicle automakers have performed poorly. 3. Comparison of Market Value Changes of Complete Vehicle Companies Looking at the combined A-share and Hong Kong stock market values of Chinese automakers and parts companies, the supply chain advantage is obvious. In September, auto parts accounted for 21.8% of stock market value (21.7% in 2025), performing relatively well, while complete vehicle companies accounted for 69.1% (69.2% in the same period), declining relatively quickly. Although Chery joined, its market value share still declined significantly. 4. Changes in Market Value of Major Stocks in September In September 2026, the global complete vehicle sector market value showed significant divergence. Tesla was listed separately with a scale of 9.4 trillion yuan, benefiting from AI and FSD progress, with a relatively large year-on-year increase, but its tech stock attributes make its valuation logic completely different from traditional automakers. Among U.S. automakers, General Motors' electrification transformation results have emerged, with outstanding stock price performance; Toyota is at its lowest point in two years, reflecting pressure on Japanese automakers' transformation. Chinese automakers overall outperformed international peers. BYD Company Limited and Xiaomi were also at phased lows, while VOYAH AUTO achieved a huge market value increase. NIO, BAIC Foton Motor, and Sinotruk Jinan Truck performed relatively well, mainly directly driven by stronger non-consumer performance. The core DRIVE of the current market value landscape remains the impact of weak demand, and it is widely believed that passenger vehicles, representing consumption, cannot be lifted. Strong heavy truck subsidies and the trade-in policy have boosted commercial vehicle demand, respectively supporting the market value performance of related automakers. The commercial vehicle sector is generally stable, with better cyclical resistance than passenger vehicles. Leading companies such as BYD Company Limited and Great Wall are at two-year lows, indicating excessive market pricing of intensifying industry competition, with the possibility of subsequent valuation repair. Overall, sales volume and transformation results are becoming the core pricing logic in an era of divergence. 5. Market Value Performance of Various Types of Complete Vehicle Stocks In September, the market value changes of international complete vehicle automakers were relatively large, and overall extremely brutal. Tesla's market value fell 11% year-on-year, while the market value of other international automakers in September was generally at its lowest level since 2025, with the market relatively sluggish. The market value of international automakers such as Toyota and General Motors fell 14% year-on-year, that of private automakers such as Great Wall fell 31% year-on-year, and that of phone-related automakers fell 59% year-on-year. The market value of state-owned complete vehicle companies fell 37% year-on-year, and that of new forces automakers fell 58% year-on-year. Commercial vehicles fell 7% year-on-year due to high subsidies. In September, relative to August, Japanese automakers performed relatively strongly. The market value improvement of other second-tier automakers was mainly due to the growth effect of commercial vehicles. Although overall valuations are under pressure, sales growth in the two major sectors of new energy and exports remains strong, significantly higher than traditional fuel vehicles. This means the market is not applying a "one-size-fits-all" approach to all auto stocks, but maintains relatively higher tolerance for sub-sectors with clear incremental logic (such as new energy and overseas markets). The divergence between growth and valuation precisely shows that growth in these areas has not yet been fully reflected in stock prices. The valuation changes of auto stocks in 2026 are essentially the market's concern about consumption. In September, domestic sales automakers faced relatively greater pressure, commercial vehicles performed relatively well due to unusually favorable subsidy policies, exports are the core growth of new energy vehicles, and companies with strong exports performed somewhat better. 6. Analysis of Market Value and Operating Status of Listed Complete Vehicle Companies From the comprehensive performance of price-to-earnings and price-to-book ratios of complete vehicle companies, it should be said that the price-to-earnings ratios of companies such as Tesla are relatively high. In particular, Tesla's scale of 9.4 trillion yuan has a price-to-earnings ratio of 367 times, while companies such as Li Auto also have relatively high price-to-earnings ratios typical of the early stage of new energy vehicles. The main companies with lower price-to-earnings ratios are slow-growing international companies, represented by Toyota, Honda, General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis, all at price-to-earnings ratios of 5-9 times. Next, relatively strong traditional domestic automakers such as CHERY AUTO and GEELY AUTO are at price-to-earnings ratios of around 10 times. From the perspective of price-to-book ratios, some companies' price-to-book ratios have also fallen to a relatively large extent. For example, Stellantis' price-to-book ratio is only 0.2, while Honda is only at 0.5. General Motors and Ford's price-to-book ratios are also at 1.1 and 1.5. Therefore, overall, the valuations of traditional international automakers are currently relatively low, while the valuations of new forces companies and international companies such as Tesla are favored by investors. 7. Core Domestic Automotive Supply Chain Non-Complete Vehicle Listed Companies There are huge problems in the automotive industry valuation system. The stock market valuation of complete vehicle companies is far lower than that of parts companies. This is not because the market is more correct, but because the A-share market is more distinctive. The situation of listed companies in the automotive supply chain is relatively complex. Mining companies have performed particularly well, and upstream speculation on price increases has brought enormous pressure to the industry. Battery and parts companies are relatively better, while dealer groups face relatively greater pressure.