logo
Deflation dimming China's market allure

Deflation dimming China's market allure

AllAfrica28-07-2025
Disinflation in China is not being driven by weak household appetite alone. The more decisive factor is a sustained mismatch between policy-driven industrial output and actual market absorption.
The country's price weakness, where the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was in deflation territory from February to May and up a mere 0.1% in June, is the outcome of a long-running expansion of capacity across several sectors that were never disciplined by global demand signals.
For two decades, the model emphasized investment over consumption. Policymakers championed capacity-building in industries they viewed as nationally strategic. These included electric vehicles, solar components, steel, semiconductors, and shipping — all seen as future export engines.
What followed was a flood of credit, coordination between local authorities and state-linked firms, and price competition aimed more at dominance than efficiency.
Today, China's economy is saturated with surplus. Manufacturers are under pressure to maintain volumes, even at the expense of margins. Incentives at the provincial level still reward production benchmarks.
Banks, facing limited profitable lending options, continue to support large state-linked corporates. These factors generate output levels that no longer match demand — domestically or globally.
This is no longer just a domestic phenomenon. Chinese firms are now offloading excess supply into global markets, forcing down prices across multiple categories.
For example, Europe's auto sector, particularly its electric vehicle producers, has already flagged this trend as commercially unsustainable. American policymakers, too, have raised concerns over underpriced Chinese exports in solar technology and green infrastructure inputs.
Investor confidence in China remains under pressure. Deflation is not a cyclical hiccup. It's the logical result of an economic model that continues to treat output growth as a policy goal in itself.
When domestic demand underdelivers, the default response is to lean harder into supply. As that supply grows, prices weaken further.
Markets have stopped giving China the benefit of the doubt. Previous slowdowns were treated as tactical pauses. This one appears to be different.
Price weakness now comes with questions about whether the country's growth model can adapt to changed conditions. International investors, particularly long-term institutions, have scaled back exposure to China's broad equity indices.
Capital allocation is now selective, with a preference for names that are either deeply export-competitive or exposed to high-end consumption trends.
The pricing effect is now visible in upstream materials, manufacturing inputs, and final consumer goods. The pass-through may seem marginal, but the cumulative effect is to put pressure on profitability far beyond China's borders.
This is not a temporary fluctuation in trade flows. It's a result of persistent policy preferences that reward volume regardless of return.
For global investors, this shift alters the map. Exposure to China no longer delivers predictable diversification or scale-based upside.
Instead, it perhaps presents a complex mix of risk: deflationary drag on pricing power, geopolitical friction in key sectors, and weakening margins among global firms that compete head-on with Chinese oversupply.
Passive capital is at particular risk in this environment; broad exposure is not a reliable strategy when entire segments are moving against price discipline.
Allocations need to be more forensic. Portfolios should distinguish between companies benefitting from China's demand for upstream inputs — including energy and advanced capital goods — and those being undercut by its outbound overcapacity.
Multinationals relying on high-margin exports to China may face a softer environment, while firms exposed to its export aggression will encounter tighter spreads and squeezed pricing.
Global capital flows are already responding. There is less appetite for blanket Asia exposure. Investors are tilting toward India, ASEAN, and reshoring beneficiaries in North America and Europe.
Manufacturing investment is being pulled into jurisdictions that offer pricing transparency, enforceable competition rules, and protection from subsidy distortion.
Within China itself, attention is turning to segments that are better aligned with domestic services, premium consumer preferences, or tech sub-sectors that are not yet overbuilt. But this is no longer a momentum story; it appears to be a precision play.
Back in developed markets, the deflationary spillover has implications for policy. Central banks will face a more uneven global pricing environment.
Sectors competing with Chinese exports may see depressed margins and weaker inflation prints. Others, shielded by trade barriers or domestic scale, will remain under pressure from wage and input cost dynamics. For macro investors, that divergence offers opportunity, but only with close attention to exposure mapping.
The assumption that China remains a global engine of demand now looks increasingly flawed. It remains a large, fast-moving economy, but one whose internal dynamics are now as much a source of risk as reward.
What's missing is a pivot away from the metrics that drove past performance. An economy of this scale cannot operate on the same assumptions that shaped its breakout phase. Market realities now require restraint, precision and pricing discipline. Without these, disinflation will continue to weigh on corporate earnings and asset valuations.
Consumption, while vital, cannot absorb the overhang created by a decade of supply-led ambition. Even aggressive fiscal support is unlikely to rebalance the equation while incentives remain fixed on production volumes.
The longer Beijing postpones meaningful correction, the more the investment case shifts elsewhere. Price trends are not the story; they are the evidence.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

'HK and Macau to leverage collaborative strength'
'HK and Macau to leverage collaborative strength'

RTHK

time5 hours ago

  • RTHK

'HK and Macau to leverage collaborative strength'

'HK and Macau to leverage collaborative strength' John Lee led a delegation to Macau to meet his counterpart Sam Hou-fai. Photo courtesy of Information Services Department Chief Executive John Lee emphasised the crucial roles of the Hong Kong and Macau SARs within the Greater Bay Area during an official visit to Macau on Tuesday. Leading a high-level delegation, Lee met with Macau Chief Executive Sam Hou-fai. In a statement following the meeting, Lee said the two SARs will continue to harness their collaborative strengths across key sectors including the economy, cross-boundary infrastructure, tourism and culture. He said both Hong Kong and Macau are integral parts of the Greater Bay Area and will continue to promote its development. The Hong Kong delegation visited the Guangdong-Macau In-depth Cooperation Zone in Hengqin during the visit. Lee highlighted the strategic significance of the cooperation zone, describing it as a key initiative designed to enrich the practice of One Country, Two Systems, fostering Macau's long-term prosperity, stability and integration into national development plans. The delegation also toured a Chinese medicine centre there to learn about the integration of traditional Chinese medicine and the cultural tourism industry. The group also visited the Guangdong-Macau In-depth Cooperation Zone in Hengqin Planning Exhibition Hall that features more than 600 exhibits on new products and technologies. The Hong Kong delegation included Financial Secretary Paul Chan, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Erick Tsang, Secretary for Health Lo Chung-mau, Secretary for Transport and Logistics Mable Chan and director of the Chief Executive's Office Carol Yip. Lee and the officials returned to Hong Kong later in the day.

Vietnam should heed the risks of high-speed rail losses
Vietnam should heed the risks of high-speed rail losses

AllAfrica

time8 hours ago

  • AllAfrica

Vietnam should heed the risks of high-speed rail losses

As Vietnam embarks on building its first high-speed rail (HSR) system, the financial struggles and failures of similar projects worldwide offer important lessons and insights. While Vietnam has only recently moved toward implementation, many countries have operated advanced HSR systems for decades. The experiences of these early adopters provide a valuable roadmap of potential pitfalls to avoid. The financial unsustainability of high-speed rail is a global phenomenon. According to the OECD, most HSR projects worldwide operate at a loss. This is supported by a World Bank study of 258 transport infrastructure projects across 20 countries, which found that nine out of ten exceeded their initial budgets and 84% had inaccurate revenue forecasts. The study's author, Professor Bent Flyvbjerg, noted that a mere 0.5% of all projects were completed on time, within budget and delivered their anticipated benefits, often because governments rushed approval before conducting thorough feasibility studies. Even the most celebrated HSR systems are not immune. Japan's Shinkansen, the pioneer of high-speed rail, required the government to cover nearly 100% of its 380 billion yen construction cost (roughly US$17 billion today) and had lost around $100 million by 1972. Similarly, China operates the world's most extensive HSR network but faces mounting debt nearing $900 billion, with only 6% of its 45,000-kilometer network reportedly profitable. More recent projects highlight specific modern challenges. Indonesia's Jakarta–Bandung high-speed rail, a joint project with China, saw its budget balloon from $5.5 billion to $7.3 billion. Reliant on Chinese loans, the line was already reporting $200 million in annual losses upon opening in 2024. In Taiwan, a $15 billion HSR project launched in 2007 suffered continuous losses for years, with deficits reaching $1.73 billion by 2014. This was largely due to fierce competition from low-cost airlines and passenger volumes falling to nearly half of projections. These cases underscore the importance of cautious planning, realistic financial projections and a thorough assessment of long-term viability. Failure to account for these factors can lead to HSR projects becoming unsustainable financial burdens. Profitability and capital recovery time of global high-speed railway projects. Graphic: The Vietnamese / Luat Khoa Magazine Vietnam need not look abroad for cautionary tales; its own domestic urban rail projects have already suffered from the same issues plaguing HSR globally. Both the Cat Linh–Ha Dong line in Hanoi and Metro Line 1 in Ho Chi Minh City have been marred by severe cost overruns, prolonged delays and continue to operate at a loss. What is particularly concerning is that these are relatively modest urban projects, far less complex than the proposed North–South HSR system. The Cat Linh–Ha Dong line serves as a stark case study. Contracted to a Chinese builder, its budget ballooned from an initial $552.8 million to $886 million. The construction timeline stretched to nearly 10 years (2011–2021) for a railway that runs only 13 kilometers at a top speed of 80 km/h. Financially, the project is unsustainable. In 2024, it reported a post-tax profit of just $600,000—a mere 0.07% return on the original investment—and remains dependent on heavy government subsidies. Current estimates suggest a staggering 6:1 subsidy ratio, meaning for every $1 in ticket revenue, the government provides $6 in support. The financial unsustainability of the Cat Linh–Ha Dong project is apparent. Based on ticket revenue alone, the line would need 247 years to recover its $886 million investment. Factoring in its 2024 net profit of just $600,000, the payback period stretches to an astonishing 1,438 years. This calculation does not even account for its annual operating cost of over $24 million. Despite this sobering precedent, Vietnam is now undertaking its largest-ever public investment: the North–South High-Speed Railway. Approved by the 15th National Assembly in November 2024, with a budget of $67.34 billion for a 1,541-kilomater route, the project's projected cost has already increased by over $35 billion from its initial concept. To mitigate the immense financial risk, the government is shifting its strategy. A revised Law on Railways, along with new resolutions, now allows domestic enterprises to participate as primary investors. As experts like Associate Professor Tran Dinh Thien and Associate Professor Bui Quang Tuan argue, 'The mindset that only the state can build national infrastructure is outdated,' suggesting the project could catalyze the growth of Vietnamese industries. However, this new public-private approach is already facing public anxiety, particularly over the decision to allow VinSpeed—a recently established company with a charter capital of just $230 million—to register for the $67.34 billion project. VinSpeed, a key potential investor, has publicly stated it will 'accept potential losses' and is participating not for land but 'to serve the nation.' The company acknowledged that 98% of global high-speed rail projects are unprofitable but did not clarify whether these expected losses would be borne by its own capital or through state-supported loans, raising concerns about the project's financial transparency. This lack of clarity has been compounded by domestic media coverage that has largely focused on the project's potential, leaving little room for critical discussion of its risks. Procedurally, the project deviates sharply from international best practices. Core assessments for ridership, financial modeling and technology sourcing have yet to be finalized. Even more troubling is the timeline: the official feasibility study is not due until the fourth quarter of 2026, just months before the scheduled groundbreaking in December. This means companies are registering to invest in a multi-billion-dollar project before a formal feasibility report even exists. Financially, the project's costs are already an outlier. Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh has explained that extensive use of elevated tracks and tunnels will push the estimated cost to around $43.6 million per kilometer—more than double the World Bank's global average of $17–21 million per kilometer. Despite all these unanswered questions, planning deficits and alarming cost projections, irreversible actions like land clearance and resident relocation are already underway in many provinces. Graphic: The Vietnamese / Luat Khoa Magazine The HSR era began in October 1964 with Japan's Tokaido Shinkansen, a project that laid the groundwork for a global wave of HSR development. Yet, in the decades since, only one project is widely regarded as a true financial success: the Train a Grande Vitesse (TGV) line connecting Paris and Lyon in France. Inaugurated in 1981, the Paris-Lyon TGV was built for a then-record low of just $4 million per kilometer for a total length of 417 kilometers, and was financed without direct government subsidies. This technical and commercial success was proven almost immediately. The line transported 10 million passengers in its first year, a number that quickly doubled, leading to an internal rate of return (IRR) of 12%—allowing the project to recover its initial investment in just 12 years. This success has endured to this day. By 2023, the TGV network carried 122 million passengers and generated 9.7 billion euros in revenue (approximately $11.3 billion), solidifying its status as one of the few HSR models in the world to achieve long-term commercial viability. This article was published in English by The Vietnamese and originally published in Vietnamese by Luat Khoa Magazine. It is republished here with kind permission.

China fears Nvidia chips could track, trace and shut down its AIs
China fears Nvidia chips could track, trace and shut down its AIs

AllAfrica

time17 hours ago

  • AllAfrica

China fears Nvidia chips could track, trace and shut down its AIs

Beijing has asked Nvidia to explain whether its H20 artificial intelligence chips have backdoors that could allow the United States to position and remotely shut them down. Chinese pundits said similar probes could be extended to other American-made chips. The Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) stated on July 31 that it summoned US tech giant Nvidia over security risks related to its H20 AI chip, which had been sold to China. 'Nvidia's AI chips have been alleged to pose serious security risks, and some US lawmakers have called for advanced chips exported abroad to be equipped with 'tracking and positioning' functions,' said the CAC. The CAC said in a press release that American AI experts have confirmed that the 'tracking and positioning' and 'remote shutdown' technologies of Nvidia chips have matured. It requested that Nvidia explain and submit relevant proof materials regarding this issue. On the same day, Nvidia said its chips do not contain backdoors that would allow anyone to access or remotely control them. It said cybersecurity is critically important to the company. Beijing's summoning of Nvidia came after Reuters reported on July 29 that Nvidia had placed orders for 300,000 H20 chipsets (worth about US$3.6 billion) with the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) a week earlier. It also followed the trade talks between US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng in Sweden on July 28-29. In April, the US government stopped Nvidia from shipping its H20 products to China. When Republican US Senator Tom Cotton introduced the 'Chip Security Act' on May 9, the bill received little to no significant media attention at the time. The bill requires AI chips to be subject to export regulations and mandates that products containing these chips be equipped with location-tracking systems to aid in detecting diversion, smuggling or other unauthorized use. It received support from bipartisan lawmakers in the House of Representatives. 'As Congress's chip designer, AI programmer and PhD physicist, I know we have the technical tools to prevent powerful AI technology from getting into the wrong hands,' said Congressman Bill Foster. 'With advanced AI chips being smuggled into China and posing a national security risk, Congress must act.' Following meetings between US and Chinese officials in London on June 9, China agreed to resume shipments of rare earth minerals to the US. In return, the US agreed to allow Chinese firms to use its electronic design automation (EDA) software and resume the shipment of H20 chips and C919 flight engine parts to China. Some commentators said the strong demand for H20 from Chinese firms may hurt Huawei Technologies' Ascend AI chips' market share. Wang Xinxi, a columnist specializing in the technology, media and telecommunications (TMT) sector, says in an article that the Ascend 910B has already surpassed H20 in terms of computing power. He says Chinese technology firms still use the H20 only because of its higher bandwidth and software support on the CUDA platform. 'Although the US Congress has not yet passed the Chip Security Act, Nvidia may have already added location-tracking functions in its chips,' he writes. 'All Nvidia computing chips have private data areas where the data is encrypted, so it is technically possible to add a backdoor.' Citing Qihoo 360 Chairperson Zhou Hongyi's recent comments, Chen claims that malicious code can be implanted in a chip during the wafer manufacturing, packaging and testing processes. He says it's difficult for Chinese end-users to identify these unsafe products within the global supply chain, which involves numerous suppliers and distributors. 'If there is any security loophole, Chinese firms must stop using H20,' he adds. 'In the end, companies that use Chinese AI chips will win.' 'Imagine if such 'backdoor' probes were expanded to other major American chip manufacturers in China like Micron, Wall Street investors would quickly sell their semiconductor stocks,' Chen Kai, a Fujian-based writer, says in an article. 'The H20 under probes is a 'freak' from the beginning as it is the downgraded version of the H100,' he writes. 'The Trump administration thought China would thank the US for relaxing its chip export control, and it would easily obtain the Chinese rare earth. It did not expect Nvidia to face security probes.' In 2019, the US banned Huawei routers due to concerns about backdoors. The US Department of Commerce added Huawei to its Entity List in May 2019. In May, Nvidia's Chief Executive Jensen Huang said that tracking massive AI servers or accelerators weighing several tons should not be difficult. However, he said, finding the AI chips after they are sold is impossible. Joseph Hoefer, a Washington, D.C.-based government relations strategist focused on AI, said the intent behind the Chip Security Act is understandable, but its approach creates more problems than it solves. 'First, real-time location tracking of chips is simply not feasible at scale,' Hoefer said. 'Attempting to derive meaningful national security insights from hardware geolocation data would require vast infrastructure, reliable international cooperation, and intensive verification protocols. That level of control does not exist in today's global tech ecosystem.' Secondly, he said, any system tracking chip locations would become an immediate cybersecurity vulnerability. Lastly, he said the compliance burden would fall on responsible US chip makers, which would have to spend time and money implementing unproven tracking systems, navigating regulatory ambiguity, and reporting false positives. Some IT experts have said that, technically, Nvidia can utilize its ecosystem of software and tools, such as the Nvidia Management Library (NVML) and Data Center GPU Manager (DCGM), to identify the locations of its AI chips, each of which has a unique serial number. It would be similar to what Google does to track and manage its AI chips. Google has centralized inventory and asset management systems that track every component, including custom chips such as Tensor Processing Units (TPUs), from manufacturing to deployment. Google's datacenter orchestration and resource management (Borg) can track the real-time performance of every chip. Others argue that even if a chip management software can determine the location of a suspicious AI chip cluster, it will be too late, as it means Chinese firms have already obtained and deployed the chips. Alphabet's Google has already started tracking the location of its in-house AI chips and others in its vast network of data centers for security purposes, Reuters reported on May 6, citing two sources familiar with the matter. Read: Chinese worry Nvidia H20 chips are poisoned wine for AI industry

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store