Platinum 3D Printing vs. Huaru High-Tech: The Race for China’s First 3D Printing Listing

Article by Jin Duan

On September 14, BLT (688333.SH) closed up 10.99% at ¥117.70, with a total market capitalization of ¥32.288 billion. On the same day, Huashu High-Tech (688433.SH) closed at ¥91, up 2.09%, with a total market capitalization of ¥37.818 billion.

The interim report showed that the former earned 51.13 million in the first half of the year, while the latter earned 8.43 million. The company with only one-sixth the profit has a market capitalization that is 5.5 billion higher.

This is the result after the convergence. On September 2, nine trading days ago, Huashu's market capitalization once reached 46.9 billion, surpassing Bilit by over 15 billion; subsequently, Huashu retreated 18% from its high, while Bilit rebounded more than 50% from its low at the end of July, narrowing the gap to 5.5 billion.

Chart: Baoli Tech vs. Huashu High-Tech — Profit and Market Cap Inversion

This is not a failure of valuation models, but rather the most authentic reflection of the current state of the 3D printing industry: industry sentiment is scorching hot, profit statements are freezing cold, and stock prices swing violently between the two. Baoji Platinum and Farsoon Technologies, the "twin titans" of metal 3D printing, are racing for a title using two entirely different trajectories:

China's first 3D printing company to go public.

First, look at the overall market.

According to data from the General Administration of Customs, China exported a cumulative total of 3.62 million 3D printers in the first half of 2026, with an export value of RMB 9.611 billion, representing a year-over-year growth of 109.3%. On July 28, the Ministry of Commerce highlighted 3D printers alongside industrial robots (whose export value grew by 18.6% year-over-year) as "new calling cards" for AI-related product exports at a press conference held by the State Council Information Office—globally, nine out of every ten consumer-grade 3D printers sold are made in China.

Industrial-grade equipment has stronger momentum. According to CCTV Finance, exports of industrial-grade metal 3D printing equipment increased by 76% year-over-year in the first half of the year, with Europe and Southeast Asia accounting for 87% of total exports; companies such as Suzhou Xidimo saw order volumes grow by approximately threefold, with production schedules extended through the end of the year; for some manufacturers, overseas orders now account for nearly 60% of total outstanding orders, surpassing domestic orders. The delivery cycle for domestically produced industrial equipment is approximately one month, while overseas competitors typically require a minimum of three months.

But hidden within the export data is a critical detail that must be unpacked: of the total 3.62 million units exported, desktop plastic devices account for 99.99% and make up 94.7% of the $9.6 billion in export value; in contrast, industrial metal equipment—truly representing high-end equipment going global—amounts to just 760 units, valued at RMB 325 million.

The main focus of the export boom is the consumer-grade businesses of Bambu Lab and Creality, while industrial-grade products are the fastest-growing segment—but still not the main course.

Chart: Industrial-grade products account for only 5% of the $9.6 billion in export value.

Production is equally robust. According to statistics from the National Bureau of Statistics, the output of 3D printing equipment in the first half of the year increased by 48.5% year-over-year. Zhongshang Industry Research Institute estimates that China’s 3D printing market size will reach approximately RMB 70 billion in 2025, growing by about 30%, and is projected to reach RMB 86.2 billion in 2026. In contrast, according to the Wohlers Report 2026, the global additive manufacturing market generated $24.2 billion in revenue in 2025, with a growth rate of 10.9%, of which system sales increased by only 3.6%. China’s market growth rate is more than double the global average.

However, the positive sentiment in the broader industry was reflected in a weaker performance on the income statement. We analyzed the 24 companies in the 3D printing sector with the highest business relevance: the median revenue growth rate for the first half of the year was +15.2%, but nine companies experienced declining or negative profits.

This is not an industry where everyone gets rich.

The interim reports of SLM Solutions and Huashu High-Tech conceal a highly informative "spread."

In the first half of the year, Huashu High-Tech achieved revenue of RMB 341 million, a 42.27% year-over-year increase; net profit attributable to shareholders amounted to RMB 8.43 million, up 87.09% year-over-year; non-GAAP net profit reached RMB 3.66 million, a 115.78% year-over-year increase. The real surge occurred in the second quarter: Q2 revenue alone reached RMB 211 million, with year-over-year growth accelerating to 86.1%, compared to just 2.84% in Q1. This growth was driven by equipment sales and overseas exports: equipment revenue totaled RMB 271 million, up 52%, accounting for 79.6% of total revenue—making Huashu a pure “seller of shovels”; overseas revenue reached RMB 77.94 million, up 74%, representing 22.9% of total revenue.

Blastech is the exact mirror image. Revenue for the first half of the year reached RMB 770 million, a year-over-year increase of 15.46%; net profit attributable to shareholders was RMB 51.14 million, a year-over-year decline of 32.99%; non-GAAP net profit was only RMB 16.17 million, down 62.72% year-over-year. While first-quarter revenue growth was still at 43.57%, second-quarter growth dropped to just 0.95%. More striking is the quality of profits: of the RMB 51.14 million in net profit attributable to shareholders, non-recurring gains totaled RMB 34.97 million, including RMB 29.48 million in government subsidies—meaning approximately 68% of the profit is unrelated to core operations.

Profit Quality: Net Profit Attributable to Parent vs. Non-Recurring Items (in ten thousand yuan)

Both are leaders in metal 3D printing—why is one accelerating while the other is slowing down?

The answer lies in the client structure.

Huashu focuses on the "export + consumer electronics" chain, where order timing is determined by overseas equipment procurement, offering high flexibility and rapid transmission. Bao Li Te’s core business is the "aerospace and defense" chain: in the first half of the year, aerospace and aviation revenue reached RMB 429 million, up 43.03% year-over-year, accounting for 55.75%, while industrial segment revenue declined by 9.76%. Orders from defense and aerospace clients proceed like a traditional train—departing on schedule, not influenced by market sentiment.

A more telling comparison: In the same first half of the year, Farsoon’s overseas revenue increased by 74%, while BLT’s overseas revenue was RMB 37.5 million, a year-over-year decline of 46.42%. In the same industry, two leading companies—one accelerating its global expansion, the other experiencing a retreat from international markets.

The story on the profit side warrants greater caution. Platinum’s gross margin for H1 was 39.04%, a year-over-year decline of 3.14 percentage points; financial expenses reached RMB 20.33 million, up 580.6% year-over-year, driven by increased foreign exchange losses and interest expenses, compounded by bad debt losses, resulting in multiple pressures on the income statement. Operating cash flow was -RMB 174 million (compared to -RMB 302 million in the same period last year), with accounts receivable at RMB 1.352 billion and inventory at RMB 1.635 billion, collectively accounting for over one-third of total assets. Huashu’s operating cash flow was also -RMB 79 million, an additional outflow of RMB 55.09 million year-over-year, primarily due to inventory buildup for production expansion.

Thus, the entire industry chain is preparing inventory and expanding production while increasing accounts receivable. The growth in the income statement has not yet become cash in hand.

The story of surpassing market capitalization requires some calculations.

Huashu High-Tech has a market capitalization of RMB 37.8 billion, with full-year 2025 revenue of RMB 715 million, resulting in a static price-to-sales ratio of approximately 53x and a PE-TTM of about 518x. Using non-GAAP adjusted figures, the TTM adjusted net profit is approximately RMB 59 million, corresponding to a PE-TTM of about 637x. Bao Li Tech has a market capitalization of RMB 32.3 billion, with 2025 revenue of RMB 1.852 billion, yielding a price-to-sales ratio of approximately 17x; the PE-TTM is about 181x, and 264x on an adjusted non-GAAP basis.

Huashu's valuation is based on the assumption that every aspect proceeds without error. Assuming the market is willing to assign a 10x price-to-sales ratio to a high-end equipment company by 2030, Huashu will need to achieve revenue of approximately RMB 3.8 billion—starting from RMB 715 million in 2025, requiring a five-year CAGR of 40%. The Apple order must materialize, export growth must continue, the RMB 3.91 billion private placement capacity must be fully absorbed, and the service business must scale up as planned—all four conditions are indispensable.

BLT’s math problem points in another direction. The company has certainly had ambitious dreams: in its 2020 restricted stock incentive plan, the performance target was a 30% compound annual revenue growth rate compared to 2019. Looking back, this “growth shackles” is widely viewed by the market as the underlying catalyst for its later aggressive revenue recognition, culminating in accounting corrections and regulatory investigation by the CSRC. Today, with a market capitalization of RMB 32.3 billion and a P/E ratio of 181x TTM, the market is still pricing not current earnings, but the long-term narrative of “commercial aerospace scaling up + full industrial chain.” According to broker research, BLT holds over 40% market share in commercial aerospace metal 3D printing, ranking second globally behind Germany’s EOS—this is both its foundation and its burden: the heavier the position, the less room there is to miss the rhythm.

The valuation gap within the sector is starkly obvious: on one end, Huashu trades at 518 times, while on the other, Chunli Medical and Maipu Medical in the 3D bioprinting sub-sector trade at 18.75 and 28.37 times respectively (all PE-TTM, as of September 14 closing). There is almost no middle ground. The market has almost black-and-white separated “companies with stories” from “companies with earnings” into two distinct rooms.

The competition between SLM Solutions and Huashu High-Tech is not simply a zero-sum game; the divergence between their two approaches is unfolding simultaneously across four fronts.

First front: customer base. Huashu relies on overseas equipment orders and scaling in the consumer electronics supply chain—highly elastic but also volatile; Boliite is tied to aerospace and defense customers, offering high certainty but lacking control over timing. The former bets on the "penetration rate story," while the latter bets on the "mass production cycle."

Second front: Profit quality. Platinum's non-GAAP net profit declined by 62.72%, but operating cash flow narrowed from -RMB 302 million to -RMB 174 million; the gross margin in Q2 was 40.34%, up 3.08 percentage points sequentially, indicating improving margins. Huashu's net profit is RMB 8.43 million, with non-GAAP profit at only RMB 3.66 million—after excluding share-based compensation, it rises to RMB 44.59 million; however, the absolute scale of profits is too small to withstand fluctuations in order recognition timing. Meanwhile, R&D expenses of RMB 69.4 million account for 20.4% of revenue, effectively trading current profits for long-term strategic advantages.

The third front: valuation logic. Huashu’s inflated valuation reflects the market’s preemptive pricing of an “Apple chain + export chain” narrative; Bilit’s ultra-high valuation represents the market’s pricing of its status as a defense industry leader with a full industrial chain. The former requires continuous new stories to sustain its valuation, while the latter needs periodic earnings growth to justify it. Moreover, Bilit carries an off-balance-sheet liability that Huashu does not: in December 2025, it was investigated by the CSRC for suspected violations of information disclosure regulations, and the investigation is still ongoing; in July, it received a warning letter from the Shaanxi CSRC for exceeding approved limits in cash management of raised funds. Governance discount is an unavoidable hidden risk in its valuation.

The fourth front: production capacity planning. In late April, SLM Solutions announced an increase in the total investment for its "large-scale intelligent production base for metal additive manufacturing" from RMB 2.449 billion to RMB 3.105 billion. In August, a RMB 1 billion powder production facility in the Xixian New Area commenced trial operations, with an annual capacity planned at 3,000–4,000 tons. Huashu is currently advancing a RMB 3.91 billion private placement to expand equipment production, develop a printing service platform, and establish a global operations center. Both lines are betting on the same future: demand will continue to grow. But the timing of capacity deployment will determine who secures the next round of orders first.

An unavoidable variable is Apple. Apple has officially confirmed that the cases of the Apple Watch Ultra 3 and the Titanium Series 11 are manufactured using 3D-printed titanium technology: 50-micron recycled titanium powder, six lasers operating simultaneously, approximately 20 hours to print a single case, reducing material usage by half compared to traditional subtractive manufacturing methods, saving over 400 tons of titanium raw material in 2025 alone. John Ternus, with a background in hardware engineering, assumed the role of Apple’s CEO on September 1, and his appointment documents even list the 3D printing process for the Ultra 3 as one of his key contributions.

However, it must be noted that Apple has never disclosed its list of equipment suppliers, and the claim that domestic equipment has entered Apple’s supply chain remains at the level of market rumors—both Platinum and Farsoon have been mentioned, but none have been officially confirmed.

The competition between SLM Solutions and Farsoon Technologies is essentially a microcosm of an industry swinging between narrative pricing and performance pricing.

Blimet has a stronger foundation: it holds a leading position in commercial aerospace, has a full-industry-chain layout, and commands the second-largest market share globally. However, its profit trajectory is constrained by customer timing, making it difficult to meet market optimism in the short term, and it still faces an ongoing investigation.

Huashu has greater flexibility: explosive growth in its export chain, potential penetration in the consumer electronics chain, and a lighter asset structure (debt-to-asset ratio of 26%, interest-bearing debt under ten million). However, its profit base is too small, requiring it to prove itself with solid data every quarter to justify its 518x P/E ratio.

The outcome of the battle for dominance will depend on who can first turn a "story" into "orders," and those orders into "profit."

Over the next two quarters, closely monitor the following signals: For BLT, will the trend of gross margin rebounding to 40.34% in Q2 continue into Q3, is revenue growth driven by catch-up or weakening demand, and when will the investigation be concluded? For Farsoon, the 74% year-over-year growth in overseas orders cannot be sustained indefinitely—will Apple supply chain orders transition from "expectations" to "contracts"?

In every cycle of hard tech rallies, the same question ultimately must be answered: When does the story become a profit statement? Baoji and Sinterit are each providing their own answers at their own pace. The money has already arrived; the profits are still on the way.

The first to enter Xianyang shall be king; the winner of the power struggle belongs to the one who gets profits to catch up with the story first.