In recent times, the sentiment within China's capital markets has exhibited signs of hesitation and caution. This unease can be seen through a decline in trading volumes, fluctuations in the Hang Seng Index, and the persistence of the dividend and value sectors attracting investors at elevated levels. The overall picture suggests a landscape marked by investor fragility.

The broader context of the situation reveals significant downward pressures on China's economy. Financial metrics spanning from April to May have indicated a weakening demand for credit, while the Producer Price Index (PPI) continues to hover within deflationary territory, and the Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) has also seen a downward revision. A troubling trend has emerged, wherein the growth of essential consumer goods is faltering across the board. Since the onset of the controversial monetary easing measures at the end of 2023, which sought to stabilize the economy, we have witnessed a continuous decline in interest rates related to societal loans, such as government bonds and mortgages. However, this credit relaxation has yet to find a tangible foothold, resulting in waning confidence among households and businesses regarding leverage for investments, compounded by insufficient governmental fiscal stimulus. Under such circumstances, it has become increasingly prevalent for investors to gravitate toward low-volatility, fixed-income assets, leading to continued strong performances in dividend-focused and value-oriented stocks.

In the realm of real estate policy, a comprehensive pivot to bolster domestic demand marks an encouraging beginning; however, addressing stagnation in a colossal economy requires patience. Optimistic projections indicate that the latter half of 2024 could witness a gradual revitalization in internal demand. Nevertheless, risks loom due to the possibility of intensifying trade frictions and the European and American markets approaching the midpoint of their inventory replenishment cycles. Such complexities could exert further pressure on the economy in the latter half of the year. Overall, this is a critical juncture necessitating more assertive and effective economic stimulus policies from China. There is a growing sentiment that we are on the verge of a policy inflection point, prompting optimistic expectations for enhanced economic strategies as the year progresses.

Advertisement

Focusing back on the capital markets, a defensive sentiment dominates short-term investor behavior, with the exception of dividend and debt-like equities showing resilience. Both the A-share and Hong Kong markets have been through a prolonged bear phase spanning over three years, leading to compelling valuation appeal at this stage. Interestingly, when viewed in the context of China's global integration, it becomes evident that bolstering the stock market does not necessarily correlate with soaring GDP growth rates; rather, factors such as a favorable competitive landscape, a global operational outlook, and a commitment to shareholder returns are paramount. Despite recent market fluctuations over the past couple of years, leading firms within certain industries have provided outstanding case studies of resilience and performance.

Looking to the future, despite ongoing macroeconomic pressures, the stability within the market continues to unveil numerous investment opportunities within quality companies. On one hand, state-owned and central enterprises are advancing reforms aimed at increasing dividends and return on equity (ROE) as part of a broader high-quality growth agenda. Simultaneously, one can observe a transition among leading private enterprises within sectors such as the internet, new energy, and machinery, all aligning their strategies towards enhancing shareholder returns. Our approach to stock selection not only involves assessing industry conditions but also increasingly prioritizes factors like competitive dynamics and shareholder dividend strategies.

Exploration of Business Models for Growth Stocks

This discussion centers on the lithium-ion battery industry.

The lithium battery industry has witnessed a rollercoaster of growth and decline over recent years, propelled by booming downstream demand in electric vehicles and energy storage, which once drove valuations to exceed 50 times earnings. However, following 2022, excessive manufacturing capacity has led to severe oversupply, triggering significant reductions in product prices and profit margins, and causing the battery sector to experience considerable downturns. Many leading companies have seen valuation compress to below 20 times earnings, reverting to levels last seen in 2018 and 2019.

However, the lithium battery sector fundamentally remains rooted in manufacturing. Key upstream materials include cathodes, anodes, separators, electrolytes, and various additives, while the downstream encompasses a wide array of electric vehicle manufacturers and energy integrators. Notably, the majority of production processes are standardized, leading to minimal variation in manufacturing equipment, and only slight differences in product technology across manufacturers; leading players tend to maintain superior technical consistency and performance.

This raises the pertinent question: when product technology, manufacturing processes, raw materials, and customer bases all display high levels of homogeneity, and when downstream demand surges at an explosive rate creating temporary supply shortages with remarkable profits, there's a natural inclination for the industry participants to ramp up production to meet this demand. However, such explosive growth in demand is transient. As demand stabilizes, the overcapacity and homogeneity issue on the supply side becomes predominantly evident, subsequently igniting price wars. This scenario has unfolded over the past few years, marked by a brief period of extraordinary sector profits followed by prolonged price wars, leaving most firms within the industry with negative shareholder cash returns.

Wherein lies differentiation among enterprises within the lithium battery sector? First is the scale; companies seeking to attain significant competitiveness under standardization of technology and processes will pursue larger operational scales. After reaching production benchmarks of 500 GWh or 1 TWh, companies can enhance their competitive edge through scale efficiency and bargaining power over upstream materials. Secondly, effective supply chain management is crucial, given the diversity of lithium battery raw materials and their susceptibility to price volatility. Different firms exhibit stark contrasts in their operational cycles and asset turnover rates. Lastly, minor technological advancements can occur, leading to competitive advantage for leading firms that can capitalize on short-term innovations, producing products that command premium pricing in the market, while laggers may face the persistent challenge of obsolete capacities and the necessity for continuous investment in new technologies.

Is there still investment value in the lithium battery industry? The prior era characterized by explosive demand appears to have concluded, and the industry currently finds itself at the tail end of an intense price struggle. Future investment opportunities may arise from two conditions: first, as the price wars stabilize, a considerable amount of capacity exits the market while elevation of technological and scale barriers raises the entry costs for new entrepreneurs. Secondly, the existing global players, all of substantial scale, will need to navigate competitive equilibrium while managing the ramifications of trade barriers between markets in China, the United States, and Europe. As the competitive landscape eases on the supply side, demand remains poised for a continued upward trajectory, which could present significant returns for leading enterprises that successfully capture market share.

Lithium batteries represent a complex industrial product; intense technological advancements set high expectations for industry players, with even the giants needing to remain agile. Overall, while the commercial model does not offer stellar shareholder returns, those leading players with considerable differentiated capabilities might shine with potential investment opportunities in a maturing industry.