Connect with us

Finance

China’s deflationary slide worsens as companies spiral into price wars

Published

1 year ago

on

The urban skyline and cityscape in Shanghai China.

Lu Shaoji | Moment | Getty Images

BEIJING — From coffee to cars to real estate, there’s a recurring pattern in China: companies rush into an industry, then resort to discounts to stay afloat. That has economists worried.

Natixis’ study of 2,500 listed Chinese companies reinforce how volume is growing while value is being hurt by deflationary pressure, Alicia Garcia Herrero, the firm’s chief economist for Asia-Pacific, said on a webinar Friday. “You can see it sector by sector, company by company.”

“On the surface you’re dominating, but deep inside you’re paying a high price to dominate,” she said. “You don’t get the revenue needed to continue.”

A reflection of the breadth of impact, consumer prices fell by 0.1% in the first six months of the year from a year ago, while factory-gate producer prices dropped by 2.8%, official data shows. In that time, only seven of 48 producer price sub-categories rose, versus about half of the 37 consumer price components.

That fierce and often unproductive competition is described as “involution” in China. The government has picked up on the term in recent policy documents, calling for efforts to tackle the trend.

While the trend has made tech and products more affordable for the mass market, it has also underscored worries of a vicious cycle that forces businesses to cut more jobs.

“With involution, the Chinese economy feels much colder than the headline growth suggests,” Larry Hu, chief China economist at Macquarie, said in a report Thursday. He pointed out that mainland China-listed “A share” companies expanded their workforces by just 1% in 2024, the slowest on record.

EV price war is bleeding into robotaxis, intelligent driving: Expert

“From a more fundamental perspective, involution is both a feature and a bug of the ‘China model,'” he said. “Massive investment leads to price wars and poor returns for shareholders. But for policymakers, intense competition could help achieve industrial upgrading and self-reliance.” 

China’s push into electric cars has been the most apparent example, with industry giant BYD offering some discounts of nearly 30% or more this year and smartphone company Xiaomi pricing its latest SUV below that of Tesla’s Model Y.

U.S. coffee giant Starbucks has struggled in China with falling sales as it maintains prices of around 30 yuan per cup ($4.20) — while a host of rivals from Luckin Coffee to boutiques sell lattes for as low as 9.9 yuan.

Even in commercial real estate, property owners who have tried to raise prices in Beijing ended up facing higher vacancies, Rayman Zhang, managing director for North China, at property manager JLL, told reporters Thursday. He noted that there’s still insufficient demand — with little expectation for a turnaround in the near future.

China is expected Tuesday to report second-quarter gross domestic product growth of 5.2% from a year ago, according to a Reuters poll. That would be slower than the 5.4% increase in the first quarter, but in line with the national target of around 5% growth for the year.

But the second half of the year will likely reveal a far more stressful picture, warned Jianwei Xu, senior economist for Greater China at Natixis. He was also speaking at Friday’s webinar.

“We are seeing the profits especially for manufacturing companies, are still decreasing,” he said. “There could be more households under stress in [the second half of the year] because it will be more difficult to find a job.”

A different challenge

This isn’t the first time China has dealt with overcapacity, analysts pointed out, referencing excessive capacity in the state-dominated commodities sector about a decade ago. But this time, fewer state-owned companies are involved, making it more difficult for policymakers to act.

“The dominance of private firms in industries with overcapacity tends to complicate the coordination of mergers, even with government guidance,” Robin Xing, chief China economist at Morgan Stanley, and a team said in a report Thursday.

“The economy is also starting from a weaker point, which necessitates more demand-side stimulus to counter the impact of supply reduction,” the report said. “However, the government’s debt level is already high (~100% of GDP), which may constrain its willingness and ability to undertake aggressive fiscal expansion.”

China’s top leaders are expected to maintain the current fiscal stimulus at a high-level Politburo meeting late this month. Beijing in March raised the country’s fiscal deficit for the year to 4% — up from 3% last year.

Weekly analysis and insights from Asia’s largest economy in your inbox
Subscribe now

Notably, Chinese President Xi Jinping on July 1 led a high-level financial and economic commission meeting that called for more governance of “low price, disorderly competition,” according to a CNBC translation of Chinese state media.

The ruling Chinese Communist Party’s official Qiushi journal on July 1 even outlined several measures that promote standardized government behavior to address involution-style competition, warning of serious economic damage. The article cited high-level government meetings from the last several months. 

“To achieve the growth target, Beijing will have no choice but to launch a major demand stimulus,” Hu said. “Afterwards, the improved domestic demand would ease the price competition among material producers and internet giants. But for manufacturers, it will be a long and painful process to absorb the existing capacity.”

Global spillover

Exacerbating problems with resolving China’s domestic overcapacity is the trade war with the U.S., Goldman Sachs analysts pointed out in a July 1 report.

The U.S. and European Union became more critical of China’s persistent overcapacity issues last year. Both have raised tariffs on Chinese electric cars in particular in an attempt to protect domestic automakers. The U.S. in April also targeted China with higher duties across the board.

The escalation of tariffs has made Chinese manufacturers more determined to build factories overseas, “potentially generating redundant supply in the coming years,” the Goldman report said. The analysts estimated a 0.5% to 14% increase in capacity by the end of 2028, up from the 0.4% to 10% expansion projected a year ago.

And among seven sectors — air conditioners, solar modules, lithium batteries, electric vehicles, power semiconductors, steel and construction machinery — five have more capacity than the entire global demand, the Goldman analysts said. Only ACs, and EVs — just barely — enjoy some market potential.

— CNBC’s Victoria Yeo contributed to this report.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Finance

Big Tech Enterprise Borrowing Reaches $135 Billion as Hyperscalers Fund AI Infrastructure

Published

5 days ago

on

September 10, 2026

By

Big Tech Enterprise Borrowing Reaches $135 Billion

Corporate debt markets are undergoing a major structural shift as major technology hyperscalers execute unprecedented debt offerings to finance large-scale artificial intelligence infrastructure. According to institutional market estimates, the annual value of debt issued by top technology firms reached $135 billion in 2026, marking a massive increase from the $35 billion annual average recorded between 2020 and 2024. This wave of corporate borrowing reflects the immense capital required to build next-generation data centers, secure specialized silicon, and build energy infrastructure.

The scale of AI-driven capital expenditures is reshaping corporate finance frameworks. While tech giants historically maintained fortress balance sheets dominated by cash reserves and minimal debt liabilities, the speed of the AI infrastructure deployment race has led corporate treasurers to access debt capital markets. These multi-billion-dollar corporate bond issuances are competing directly with sovereign debt for institutional investment capital.

Credit rating agencies and fixed income analysts are evaluating the long-term balance sheet implications of this corporate borrowing boom. While technology hyperscalers possess substantial revenue streams and strong operating margins, the high interest rate environment means new debt issuances carry higher coupon burdens. Financial analysts are closely tracking return-on-investment (ROI) metrics to ensure capital outlays generate sufficient cash flow to service expanding debt obligations over the coming decade.

Despite elevated borrowing costs, primary market demand for high-grade technology bonds remains robust. Institutional asset managers, pension funds, and insurance firms are absorbing new issuances, attracted by investment-grade credit ratings and attractive yields. However, the concentration of corporate debt issuance within the technology sector highlights growing exposure to enterprise technology spend cycles.

Why This Information Matters
The massive surge in technology sector debt issuance impacts broader credit markets and institutional liquidity. For corporate leaders and investors, understanding how major enterprise tech firms fund infrastructure expansion provides key insights into market interest rate dynamics, corporate credit availability, and the long-term ROI expectations driving modern corporate finance.

Continue Reading

Finance

S&P 500 Outperforms Amid Strong Corporate Earnings as Treasury Yields Cap Equity Multiples

Published

1 week ago

on

September 5, 2026

By

S&P 500 Outperforms Amid Strong Corporate Earnings as Treasury Yields Cap Equity Multiples

Financial markets opened September on a firm footing following a solid performance in August, where the S&P 500 gained 2.6% and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite rose 3.9%. Corporate earnings across major index constituents showed impressive momentum, with S&P 500 year-over-year earnings growth topping historic averages. However, despite robust corporate balance sheets, equity market valuations face headwinds as benchmark 10-year Treasury yields remain elevated near 4.75%.

The current financial environment is characterized by a strong divergence between corporate earnings resilience and bond market pressure. Enterprise technology leaders, financial institutions, and consumer sectors reported strong profit margins, benefiting from operational efficiency gains and disciplined cost management. Yet, institutional investors remain cautious about expanding price-to-earnings multiples when risk-free benchmark bond yields offer yields near 4.7%.

Fixed income markets continue to reflect restrictive monetary conditions. The broader aggregate bond market recorded flat total returns year-to-date, while fixed income yields—such as 30-day SEC yields on core bond funds—stayed above 4.6%. This yield profile provides institutional and retail investors with meaningful cash flow returns without taking on equity market downside risk, creating a competitive alternative for institutional capital allocation.

Portfolio managers and investment strategists recommend a disciplined, quality-oriented approach entering the final quarter of 2026. Rather than chasing speculative momentum, capital flows are favoring companies with strong cash flow generation, low debt-to-equity ratios, and robust pricing power capable of withstanding elevated input costs.

Why This Information Matters
The tension between strong corporate earnings and elevated bond yields directly impacts portfolio allocations and retirement wealth. Individual investors and wealth managers must balance equity market participation with fixed-income yield opportunities, ensuring portfolios are diversified against sudden valuation adjustments caused by fluctuating benchmark interest rates.

Continue Reading

Finance

Treasury Bond Volatility Forces Bessent to Double Debt Buyback Size as Yields Swing

Published

3 weeks ago

on

August 26, 2026

By

Bessent

A turbulent week in the U.S. Treasury market prompted the Treasury Department to sharply increase the size of its long-term debt buyback program, as bond prices fell even while equity markets pushed toward record highs. The divergence has drawn attention from fixed-income strategists who see it as a signal of underlying investor unease about federal borrowing levels.

What Happened This Week

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC on Thursday, August 20, 2026, that the Treasury had doubled the size of its long-term debt buyback operations, moving from roughly $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation. Bessent indicated the figure could climb further, saying “we’re going to increase the size of the buyback,” and noted the accelerated pace could exceed the announced $4 billion threshold per issue.

Buybacks allow the Treasury to repurchase outstanding government bonds directly from the market, which can help support prices and dampen yield volatility during periods of stress. The expanded program came as stocks staged a late-week recovery: the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 both advanced on Friday, August 21, even as Treasuries logged mild losses, according to Bloomberg market data.

Why Bond and Equity Markets Are Diverging

Capital.com senior market analyst Daniela Hathorn described the week’s dynamic as markets “ending the week on a softer tone after the relative calm of early August was disrupted by renewed pressure in global bond markets, another rise in oil prices, and growing uncertainty around the Federal Reserve’s next move.” She noted that higher long-term borrowing costs are increasingly challenging elevated equity valuations, even as U.S. equities pull back modestly from record highs.

This divergence — equities near record levels while bonds sell off  is unusual and reflects two different sets of investor concerns. Equity investors have remained focused on corporate earnings strength, particularly from large technology companies ahead of Nvidia’s closely watched August 26 earnings report. Bond investors, by contrast, are more directly exposed to concerns about the scale of federal borrowing, highlighted this week by the national debt crossing the $40 trillion threshold for the first time.

The Fed and Treasury “Working in Opposite Directions”

Wilmington Trust senior bond portfolio manager Wil Stith told Yahoo Finance that current conditions reflect “the Fed and the Treasury basically working in sort of opposite directions,” adding that the imbalance will likely require the Federal Reserve  which he described as having “the larger sandbox”  to adjust the federal funds rate rather than relying on Treasury market interventions alone to manage yields.

Notably, the bond market’s reaction to the Treasury’s buyback expansion was relatively muted; strategists described the move as being largely absorbed without a major rally, suggesting the underlying pressure on yields stems from factors, such as inflation persistence and debt sustainability concerns, that a buyback program alone cannot resolve.

What Comes Next

Markets are now looking to two major events in the days ahead: Nvidia’s earnings report on Wednesday, August 26, and the Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole Economic Symposium, running August 27-29. This will be the first Jackson Hole gathering under new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, whose public communication style and policy signals remain less established than his predecessors’, according to market commentary from Regards of Wall Street.

For investors, the key metrics to watch are the size and frequency of future Treasury buyback operations, movements in the 10-year Treasury yield, and any policy signals from Warsh’s keynote address. Continued yield volatility alongside record equity valuations would suggest the market imbalance identified this week has not yet been resolved.

 

Continue Reading

Trending