By 2026, China's new energy vehicle market has evolved from an early-stage race over electric motors, batteries, and electronic controls into a systemic contest centered on battery technology roadmaps, supply chain depth, and cost-control capabilities. Leading domestic players — NIO, Li Auto, XPeng, BYD, and Leapmotor — have each charted a distinctly different path in their battery strategies. What lies beneath these divergent choices is not merely a matter of technical preference, but a reflection of fundamentally different business models, brand identities, and competitive philosophies. NIO: Anchored by Battery Swapping, Building a Multi-Supplier, Multi-Chemistry Matrix NIO's battery strategy stands apart within the industry. At its core is not the choice of a single supplier or chemistry, but rather a battery-swapping network serving as infrastructure, upwardly compatible with battery packs of varying capacities, chemistries, and suppliers. Currently, NIO's lineup runs primarily on 75 kWh and 100 kWh packs, while a higher-energy-density 150 kWh semi-solid-state pack, produced by WeLion New Energy, has already entered volume production and deployment. On the chemistry front, certain NIO models employ a hybrid cell arrangement blending ternary lithium and LFP cells — the LFP cells provide foundational range and cost advantages, while the ternary cells serve as a state-of-charge reference, addressing the well-known pain point of inaccurate SOC estimation inherent to LFP's flat voltage curve. On the supplier side, CATL has long held a core position, with CALB and WeLion also playing significant roles in the supply chain. In early 2026, NIO and CATL further signed a five-year comprehensive strategic cooperation agreement covering long-life batteries, swap-station compatibility, and overseas market expansion. For the full year 2025, NIO Group delivered 326,000 vehicles, up 46.9% year-on-year, and achieved its first quarterly operating profit in Q4 — signaling that its battery-swapping business model is beginning to enter a virtuous cycle. The ramp-up of its two sub-brands, ONVO and Firefly, has further amplified the scale effects of the swapping ecosystem, diluting the per-unit cost of infrastructure. Li Auto: EREV-Led, BEV in Pursuit — Deep Supplier Ties and the Shift Toward In-House Development Li Auto's battery strategy presents a sharp contrast to NIO's. Where NIO pursues breadth in its swapping network and flexibility in battery pack compatibility, Li Auto places greater emphasis on deep ties with top-tier suppliers and meticulous cost-side management. Li Auto's EREV models have long relied on ternary lithium batteries as their primary solution and are now progressively introducing LFP to optimize vehicle cost structures. In the pure-electric domain, the flagship MPV MEGA carries a high-performance ternary pack co-developed with CATL; in 2025, the i6 electric SUV formally adopted a dual-supplier model, sourcing from both CATL and Sunwoda for complementary supply. More significantly, in September 2025, Li Auto and Sunwoda jointly established a battery company, marking a definitive shift from a procurement relationship to one of equity-linked co-development. In May 2026, Li Auto delivered 33,350 vehicles, with the i6 surpassing 20,000 monthly deliveries for the third consecutive month and ranking among the top three electric SUVs by volume, while the EREV L-series remained its sales backbone. With "family comfort" as its core brand proposition, Li Auto's battery strategy has always served a single through-line: eliminating range anxiety while optimizing total cost of ownership — pragmatic and focused. XPeng: LFP as the Mainstay, a Three-Supplier Landscape Taking Shape, and the Dual-Powertrain Strategy Accelerating XPeng's battery strategy is centered on LFP, with a stable landscape of three core suppliers: CALB, EVE Energy, and FinDreams Battery (BYD). CALB has been one of XPeng's first-tier battery suppliers since 2021 and has long held the dominant share. In September 2025, EVE Energy formally entered XPeng's MONA series supply chain, providing prismatic cell solutions for base MONA variants, while longer-range versions continue to use BYD FinDreams cells. XPeng's technology identity has always revolved around full-stack self-developed AI — spanning advanced intelligent driving, proprietary chips, and large-model integration — which gives its battery strategy a notably pragmatic character: choose a mature, safe, and cost-controllable LFP route so that more resources can be concentrated on its core competence in intelligence. Since 2025, XPeng has fully embraced a dual-powertrain strategy of BEV plus EREV, with the addition of range-extender models introducing new variables to its battery demand structure. In May 2026, XPeng Group delivered 32,158 vehicles, with the flagship SUV GX becoming a core incremental contributor right from its debut, while the MONA series and P7+ continued to scale, validating the market appeal of its "technology for all" positioning. BYD: Full Vertical Integration as the Ultimate Moat If NIO, Li Auto, and XPeng respectively embody the brand paths of "service-driven battery swapping," "family comfort," and "technology intelligence," then BYD's defining label points squarely at vertical integration. From FinDreams battery cells and FinDreams Powertrain motors and electronic controls, to in-house IGBT and SiC power semiconductors, BYD has mastered the manufacturing of virtually every core component in a new energy vehicle — a level of supply chain depth unmatched both domestically and globally. The Blade Battery, BYD's signature technology, builds on an LFP foundation and achieves a balance of safety and energy density through structural innovation; it has now achieved scaled deployment across the entire lineup. On the cost side, the scale effects of selling 4.6 million units in 2025 have endowed BYD with extreme supply chain bargaining power. On the technology side, the "Eye of the Gods" advanced driver-assistance system has been deployed in over 2.5 million vehicles, generating more than 160 million kilometers of real-world driving data daily — a data flywheel that competitors will find difficult to replicate. In 2025, BYD's battery-electric vehicle sales reached 2.26 million units, surpassing Tesla (approximately 1.63 million) for the first time to claim the global BEV sales crown. From the Seagull at RMB 70,000 to the Yangwang at over RMB 1 million, from city commuters to hardcore off-roaders, BYD has built the world's most complete new energy product matrix, with its multi-brand strategy covering every mainstream price band and use case. Leapmotor: Full-Stack Self-Development Driving Extreme Value, Multi-Supplier Strategy Fueling the Volume Leap Leapmotor has emerged as a dark horse that can no longer be ignored among China's new-energy startups. Its battery strategy is defined by a clear formula: all-LFP plus parallel multi-sourcing, with core cell suppliers including Gotion High-Tech and CALB, among others — different batches of the same model may mix cells from different brands, but core parameters remain consistent. In November 2025, Leapmotor and CALB jointly established a battery factory, signaling Leapmotor's progression from multi-source procurement toward equity-linked core-supplier relationships. Leapmotor's true moat lies in its full-stack self-development approach — over 65% of core components are developed in-house, spanning electric drives, battery BMS, intelligent cockpits, and autonomous-driving chips. This is what enables Leapmotor to deliver extreme value in the RMB 100,000–200,000 mainstream price band. In May 2026, Leapmotor delivered 81,569 vehicles, up 81% year-on-year, holding the new-energy startup sales crown for multiple consecutive months, with the one-million-unit annual target now within reach. Leapmotor's product matrix has expanded into four series — A, B, C, and D — covering sedans, SUVs, and MPVs, while overseas exports have rapidly climbed to over 37% of total volume, becoming a second engine for growth. The Industrial Logic Behind Divergent Strategies When the battery strategies of these five automakers are examined side by side, several clear industrial patterns emerge. First, LFP's dominance in the mainstream market continues to strengthen. Whether it is BYD's Blade Battery, XPeng's all-LFP lineup, Leapmotor's extreme value proposition, or Li Auto's progressive LFP adoption in its EREV models, all point to the same trend: in the RMB 100,000–250,000 core consumption band, LFP's combined advantages in cost, safety, and cycle life have made it an unshakable baseline. Second, supply chain relationships are upgrading from simple buyer-seller transactions to capital-linked co-development. The joint ventures between Li Auto and Sunwoda, between Leapmotor and CALB, and the five-year agreement between NIO and CATL are all reflections of this trend. Third, battery strategy choices are increasingly dictated by each automaker's business model: NIO's battery-swapping system demands pack standardization and compatibility; BYD's vertical integration demands in-house production; Li Auto's EREV approach imposes unique requirements on battery capacity and cost. For participants in the upstream lithium resource and battery materials industries, understanding the battery strategies of leading automakers — and the direction in which they are evolving — is a critical entry point for gauging mid- and downstream demand structures, the cadence of technology-route shifts, and the changing landscape of supply chain dynamics. In this industrial contest that remains very much at halftime, the divergence in battery strategies not only determines each automaker's cost structure and product competitiveness, but will also profoundly reshape the value distribution across the entire lithium battery supply chain.

The China second-life application market was generally stable this week, with prices for most categories unchanged. On the cost side, lithium carbonate continued to rise this week, cobalt sulphate held steady, and nickel sulphate pulled back slightly. Quoted prices for ternary large-capacity EV-grade second-life battery cells eased downwards due to weak end-use demand in the EV sector, but no actual transaction prices pulled back, with buyers and sellers still locked in negotiation. LFP Grade A downgraded cells, serving as the mainstay of energy storage, saw firm prices and transactions dominated by rigid demand; Grade B cells, leveraging cost advantages, secured the low and mid-end market with stable transactions; dismantled cells, constrained by policies and safety regulations, faced sluggish acceptance and prices held steady at low levels.

Developing local processing capacity is not simply a matter of building another plant next to a mine. It requires a country to simultaneously possess reliable energy supply, logistics infrastructure, chemical-industry capabilities, engineering expertise, customer qualification systems, access to financing, policy continuity and transparent pricing mechanisms. Resources can attract investment, but they cannot guarantee project success.

SHFE tin opened the week with a rally in full swing, pushing prices to within striking distance of an all-time high, primarily driven by supply-side disruptions and the computing power theme. In the last two days, however, the market suddenly reversed course, with prices pulling back sharply in a broad decline that completely erased the week’s earlier gains. What changed in the market’s trading logic? Rise and Fall on the Same Catalyst: Semiconductor Stocks Pull Back As the iteration of large AI models advances and high-end computing power chips are upgraded, the amount of solder required in their production increases. This year, tin’s label as a computing-power metal has continued to strengthen. Amid the AI frenzy, semiconductor indices outside China maintained a sustained rally, which not only boosted demand expectations for tin but also significantly benefited tin prices through the stock-futures linkage effect. However, heights breed danger. After a parabolic surge, chip stocks repeatedly hit new highs. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index components recently traded at 26 times forward 12-month earnings, well above the 10-year average of 21 times. The AI space became increasingly crowded, and market disagreement grew over the rally’s sustainability. Going forward, whether AI demand effectively spreads and the earnings performance of chip leaders have become the market’s center of focus. The newly released revenue of chipmaker Broadcom missed expectations, cooling the AI fervour to some extent. Overnight, chip stocks suffered a collective sell-off, and today the South Korean stock market plunged, with Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix falling sharply. Against the backdrop of a significant pullback in semiconductor stocks, tin prices were inevitably dragged down, leading the decline in China’s commodity futures market today. The market is now assessing whether AI infrastructure investment has already overdrawn future growth expectations, though some investors remain optimistic. Yesterday, the US Nasdaq index opened lower but rebounded to largely recoup its losses by the close. The overall market style displayed a rotation of funds rather than a mass exodus, making it difficult to argue that the bullish expectations for future semiconductor stocks have completely dissipated. Overseas Central Bank Policy Expectations Turn Hawkish, Liquidity Concerns Intensify Recent US-Iran negotiations have seen repeated developments, but judging by the overall trend in precious and base metals, the market largely ignored the short-term headline noise. The overall trend remained under pressure, mainly weighed down by liquidity concerns. Market expectations for the timing of potential interest rate hikes by European and US central banks are being pulled forward, with multiple factors reinforcing this view. On one hand, US economic data showed resilience. The US ISM Manufacturing PMI rose to 54 in May, a near four-year high and the fifth consecutive month in expansion territory. Some employment data showed improvement, and the labour market maintained its characteristic of "low hiring, low layoffs," providing ample justification for a policy shift. On the other hand, US inflationary pressures are evident. Both the PCE price index and the US Fed’s Beige Book indicated that cooling consumption and rising price pressures have emerged simultaneously across multiple sectors. Uptick in inflation is tightening the outlook for monetary policy. In addition, the overall stance of US Fed officials has turned hawkish. The minutes from the April Federal Reserve meeting showed that the internal assessment has shifted, from previously expecting interest rate cuts later in the year to a greater inclination to maintain current rate levels for an extended period, and even not ruling out a further increase in borrowing costs. Recently, several officials also released hiking signals, stating that if inflation remains persistently high, the possibility of further policy tightening cannot be ruled out. Fundamentals Have Not Shifted, Supply-Side Support Remains Overall, the sharp pullback in SHFE tin over the latest two days was mainly dragged down by liquidity risk and a cooling of the AI frenzy. Tin prices have always exhibited high elasticity. Currently, the futures price has only given back the gains of the preceding two days, with the center not yet moving further downward, which indirectly reflects that support from the tin market’s supply-demand structure still exists. Currently, traditional demand-side tracks remain subdued, while the emerging computing power engine remains robust. Marginal growth keeps demand expectations for the tin market bullish, while ongoing supply-side disruptions bring more upward momentum. Recently, key producing regions including Myanmar, the DRC, and Indonesia have all seen varying degrees of disturbance. Specifically, supply recovery in Myanmar has been slow, hampered by operational restrictions, material approvals, and accidents. The Goma border crossing in the DRC was previously closed due to an Ebola outbreak, raising market concerns about supply disruptions. Indonesia’s export policy outlook carries high uncertainty, with the overall policy direction showing a persistently tightening trend, reflecting deeper resource nationalism and the bottleneck of tin ore flows against the backdrop of resource de-globalization. In summary, current inflationary pressures are intensifying, and interest rate hikes by European and US central banks seem to be on the verge of deployment, making it difficult to expect any easing in liquidity. Commodity trends will remain under pressure. However, the computing power theme is unlikely to fizzle out, and mine-side supply growth is limited, which may restrict near-term downside space. The market retains a bullish outlook for SHFE tin over the medium and long term. (Wenhua, Synthesized)

This week’s macro theme remained the intertwined expectations of US-Iran peace talks and geopolitical conflicts. At the start of the week, elevated ceasefire expectations (progress in Israel-Lebanon ceasefire, Trump’s comment that weekend negotiations with Iran might see progress) led to a pullback in oil prices and improved risk appetite, while production cuts in Chile, pending US copper cathode tariff rulings, and AI-driven demand supported copper prices near record highs with a firm center. Mid-week, the late-May PCE rose to a near three-year high, reinforcing the US Fed’s stance of keeping rates steady with the future path depending on inflation and employment; lingering differences between the US and Iran on nuclear issues and strait passage disrupted sentiment. By the end of the week, funds rotated out of semiconductors in US equities and oil prices weakened again, pulling copper prices back about 1.5% on profit-taking at highs and tariff uncertainty to around $13,700/mt on the LME. Overall, the US Fed remained on hold with sticky inflation, copper prices moved sideways near record highs, and macro drivers provided limited marginal upside momentum. Fundamentals side, spot moved from weakness to stability. The weekly average discount for SMM #1 copper cathode was 52.98 yuan/mt, with the daily average discount steadily narrowing from a Tuesday low of 70 yuan/mt to 35 yuan/mt on Friday — the copper price pullback stimulated downstream consumption and a pickup in restocking interest, combined with a narrowing price spread between futures contracts as delivery approached, providing support to the futures market. However, high-quality copper supply remained tight, supply and demand in North China both declined, and overall trading was sluggish. Inventory-wise, unexpected destocking occurred this week, presenting a picture of narrowing spot discounts and a mild demand recovery, providing limited upward momentum for copper prices but some support to the downside. Looking ahead to next week, the macro focus will remain on the May nonfarm payrolls, US-Iran negotiations, and S232 tariff rulings, with tariffs and geopolitics as the main disruptions. Fundamentals side, narrowing spot discounts and tight high-quality copper supply will provide support to the downside, but high copper prices will cap aggressive buying. LME copper is expected to trade in a range of $13,450–$13,850/mt, while SHFE copper is expected to trade at 104,300–106,800 yuan/mt, with sideways movement near highs. Spot premiums are expected to continue narrowing slightly with overall fluctuations; watch for downstream restocking strength after any futures pullback.

This week, China's second-life battery cell market edged up overall. Upstream lithium carbonate dropped sharply, while nickel sulphate and cobalt sulphate declined in tandem. However, the high production costs accumulated in the earlier period had not yet been fully absorbed, and costs were gradually transmitted downstream to second-life products. Constrained by end-use demand, the extent of cost pass-through remained limited. Trends diverged across sub-categories: ternary second-life battery cells only edged up slightly, with weak downstream power demand and limited room for further price increases; LFP cells showed relatively promising upside potential, as Grade A LFP cells, being core raw materials for energy storage second-life applications, maintained solid rigid-demand fundamentals; Grade B cells leveraged price advantages to penetrate low and mid-end and specialized application scenarios; disassembled battery cells, subject to safety concerns and related policy restrictions, had low market acceptance, with quotes remaining stable. This round of price increases was primarily driven by lagging cost pass-through from the earlier period. Combined with the current rapid decline in lithium prices, all categories faced significant resistance to further price increases.