This article is written based on public information and is intended for information exchange only, and does not constitute any investment advice.
On September 14, BLT (Bright Laser Technologies, 688333.SH) closed with a sharp increase of 10.99% at CNY 117.7, with a total market capitalization of CNY 32.288 billion. On the same day, Farsoon Technologies (688433.SH) closed at CNY 91, up 2.09%, with a total market capitalization of CNY 37.818 billion.
Interim reports show that the former earned CNY 51.13 million in the first half of the year, while the latter earned CNY 8.43 million. The company whose profit was only one-sixth of the other's actually had a market capitalization CNY 5.5 billion higher.
And this is already the result after convergence. Nine trading days earlier on September 2, Farsoon's market capitalization once surged to CNY 46.9 billion, with a leading advantage of over CNY 15 billion over BLT; subsequently, Farsoon retreated 18% from its high, while BLT rebounded over 50% from its late-July low, compressing the gap all the way to CNY 5.5 billion.
This is not a failure of the valuation model, but the most realistic portrayal of the 3D printing industry today: industry sentiment is boiling hot, income statements are freezing cold, and stock prices swing violently between the two. BLT and Farsoon Technologies, the "duo" of metal 3D printing, are using two distinctly different curves to compete for a title:
China's First 3D Printing Stock.
01 Export Frenzy and Profit Cold Snap
Let's look at the industry overview first.
Data from the General Administration of Customs shows that in the first half of 2026, China exported a cumulative total of 3.62 million 3D printers, with an export value of CNY 9.611 billion, a year-on-year increase of 109.3%. On July 28, the Ministry of Commerce listed 3D printers alongside industrial robots (export value up 18.6% YoY) as the "new business cards" for AI-related product exports at a State Council Information Office press conference—9 out of every 10 consumer-grade 3D printers sold globally come from China.
The industrial-grade segment shows even stronger fundamentals. According to CCTV Finance, the export value of industrial-grade metal 3D printing equipment grew 76% YoY in the first half of the year, with Europe and Southeast Asia contributing 87% of total exports; equipment manufacturers like Suzhou Xidimo saw orders grow by about 3 times YoY, with schedules fully booked until the end of the year; for some equipment manufacturers, the proportion of overseas orders to total orders on hand approached 60% for the first time, surpassing domestic orders. The delivery cycle for domestic industrial equipment is about 1 month, while overseas peers generally take at least 3 months.
However, hidden within the export data is a detail that must be broken down: out of the total 3.62 million units exported, desktop plastic equipment accounted for 99.99%, driving 94.7% of the CNY 9.6 billion value; the industrial-grade metal equipment, which truly represents the overseas expansion of high-end equipment, accounted for only 760 units and CNY 325 million.
The main body of the export frenzy is the consumer-grade business of companies like Bambu Lab and Creality; the industrial-grade segment is the fastest-growing increment, but it is not yet the main course.
The production side is equally hot. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, 3D printing equipment output grew 48.5% YoY in the first half of the year. The China Commerce Industry Research Institute estimates that the Chinese 3D printing market size was approximately CNY 70 billion in 2025, up about 30% YoY, and is expected to reach CNY 86.2 billion in 2026. Meanwhile, according to the Wohlers Report 2026, the global additive manufacturing market generated USD 24.2 billion in revenue in 2025, with a growth rate of 10.9%, of which system sales grew by only 3.6%. The growth rate of the Chinese market is more than double the global average.
However, the warmth of the industry overview is discounted on the income statements. We compiled data on the 24 companies with the highest business relevance in the 3D printing sector: the median revenue growth rate in the first half of the year was +15.2%, while on the profit side, 9 companies experienced declines or losses.
This is not an industry where everyone is taking off.
02 The Mirroring Moment of the Duo
The interim reports of BLT and Farsoon Technologies hide a highly informative divergence.
Farsoon Technologies' H1 revenue was CNY 341 million, up 42.27% YoY; net profit attributable to the parent company was CNY 8.4348 million, up 87.09% YoY; net profit after deducting non-recurring gains and losses was CNY 3.6645 million, up 115.78% YoY. The real explosion occurred in the second quarter: Q2 single-quarter revenue reached CNY 211 million, with YoY growth surging to 86.1%, compared to only 2.84% in the first quarter. The drivers came from equipment and overseas sales: equipment revenue was CNY 271 million, up 52% YoY, accounting for 79.6% of total revenue, making it a pure "pick-and-shovel player"; overseas sales revenue was CNY 77.94 million, up 74% YoY, accounting for 22.9%.
BLT is exactly the mirror image. H1 revenue was CNY 770 million, up 15.46% YoY; net profit attributable to the parent company was CNY 51.139 million, down 32.99% YoY; net profit after deducting non-recurring gains and losses was only CNY 16.1661 million, down 62.72% YoY. Q1 revenue growth was still 43.57%, but the Q2 single-quarter growth dropped to just 0.95%. Even more glaring is the quality of profit: out of CNY 51.13 million in net profit attributable to the parent, non-recurring gains and losses totaled CNY 34.97 million, including CNY 29.48 million in government subsidies, meaning about 68% of the profit is unrelated to the core business.
Both are leaders in metal 3D printing, so why is one accelerating while the other is decelerating?
The answer lies in the customer structure.
Farsoon rides the "export + consumer electronics" chain, where the order rhythm is determined by overseas equipment procurement, featuring high elasticity and fast transmission. BLT's main focus is the "aerospace and defense" chain: H1 aerospace revenue was CNY 429 million, up 43.03% YoY, accounting for 55.75%, while industrial segment revenue actually dropped 9.76%. Order confirmations from defense and aerospace customers are like an old-fashioned train, departing on schedule rather than according to market sentiment.
A more illustrative comparison: in the same first half of the year, Farsoon's overseas sales revenue grew by 74%, while BLT's overseas revenue was CNY 37.5 million, down 46.42% YoY. In the same industry, two leaders: one is accelerating its overseas expansion, while the other is seeing a retreat.
The story on the profit side is even more alarming. BLT's H1 gross margin was 39.04%, down 3.14 percentage points YoY; financial expenses were CNY 20.33 million, up 580.6% YoY. With both exchange losses and interest expenses rising, compounded by bad debt losses, the income statement is squeezed from multiple directions; operating cash flow was -CNY 174 million (vs. -CNY 302 million in the same period last year), accounts receivable were CNY 1.352 billion, and inventory was CNY 1.635 billion, totaling over one-third of total assets. Farsoon's operating cash flow was also -CNY 79 million, with an additional outflow of CNY 55.09 million YoY, mainly due to inventory stockpiling and capacity expansion.
Thus, it is evident that the entire industry chain is engaged in "inventory stockpiling and capacity expansion + accounts receivable expansion." The growth on the income statement has not yet turned into cash in hand.
03 The Math of 518x and 181x
The story of the market capitalization reversal requires some calculation.
Farsoon Technologies has a market capitalization of CNY 37.8 billion and 2025 full-year revenue of CNY 715 million, with a static P/S ratio of approximately 53x; PE-TTM is approximately 518x. If using the deducted basis, TTM net profit after deducting non-recurring items is approximately CNY 59 million, corresponding to approximately 637x. BLT has a market capitalization of CNY 32.3 billion and 2025 revenue of CNY 1.852 billion, with a P/S ratio of approximately 17x; PE-TTM is approximately 181x, and approximately 264x on a deducted basis.
Farsoon's valuation is built on the assumption that "nothing goes wrong in any link." Assuming that in 2030 the market is willing to give a high-end equipment company a 10x P/S ratio, Farsoon's revenue at that time needs to reach approximately CNY 3.8 billion—starting from CNY 715 million in 2025, the five-year CAGR needs to reach 40%. Apple orders must materialize, high export growth must continue, the CNY 3.91 billion private placement capacity must be smoothly absorbed, and service business must scale up as scheduled; all four things are indispensable.
BLT's math points in another direction. This company is no stranger to radical dreams: the 2020 restricted stock incentive plan had an assessment condition of a 30% revenue CAGR compared to 2019. In hindsight, this "growth shackle" was widely regarded by the market as the deep-rooted cause of its subsequent aggressive revenue recognition, leading up to accounting error corrections and the CSRC investigation. Today, a CNY 32.3 billion market capitalization corresponds to a 181x PE-TTM; the market is still not pricing in current profits, but rather the long-term narrative of "commercial aerospace volume growth + full industry chain." According to brokerage research, BLT's market share in commercial aerospace metal 3D printing exceeds 40%, ranking second globally, only behind Germany's EOS. This is both a foundation and a burden: the heavier the position, the less room there is to lose rhythm.
The valuation gap within the sector is starkly naked: on one end is Farsoon at 518x, and on the other end are Chunli Medical at 18.75x and Medprin Biotech at 28.37x in the bio-3D printing sub-sector (both PE-TTM, as of the closing on September 14). There is almost no transition zone in between. The market uses an almost black-and-white approach, putting "companies with stories" and "companies with performance" into two separate rooms.
04 Four Fronts of the Hegemony Battle
The competition between BLT and Farsoon Technologies is not a simple zero-sum game. The divergence of the two routes is unfolding simultaneously across four fronts.
The first front is customer structure. Farsoon relies on overseas equipment orders and the volume growth of the consumer electronics chain, featuring high elasticity but also high volatility; BLT is tied to aerospace and defense customers, offering high certainty but with a rhythm not entirely in its own control. The former is betting on the "penetration rate story," while the latter is betting on the "mass production cycle."
The second front is profit quality. BLT's net profit after deducting non-recurring items dropped 62.72%, but operating cash flow narrowed from -CNY 302 million to -CNY 174 million, and Q2 gross margin was 40.34%, rebounding 3.08 percentage points QoQ, showing marginal improvement. Farsoon's net profit was CNY 8.43 million, with only CNY 3.66 million after deducting non-recurring items, and only CNY 44.59 million after excluding share-based payments—the absolute volume of profit is too small to withstand the disturbance of a single order confirmation rhythm; meanwhile, R&D expenses were CNY 69.4 million, accounting for 20.4% of revenue, essentially trading current profits for long-term chips.
The third front is valuation logic. Farsoon's bubble valuation is the market's advance pricing of the "Apple supply chain + export chain"; BLT's ultra-high valuation is the market's stock pricing of the "defense leader + full industry chain." The former needs continuous new stories to support it, while the latter needs rhythmic performance catch-up to prove it. Moreover, BLT has an off-balance-sheet liability that Farsoon does not: on December 31, 2025, it was investigated by the CSRC for suspected illegal and irregular information disclosure, and the investigation is still ongoing as of now; in July, it also received a warning letter from the Shaanxi Securities Regulatory Bureau for exceeding the approved quota in cash management of raised funds. The governance discount is a hidden mine that its valuation cannot bypass.
The fourth front is capacity layout. At the end of April, BLT announced increasing the total investment in the "Large-scale Intelligent Production Base for Metal Additive Manufacturing" from CNY 2.449 billion to CNY 3.105 billion; in August, the CNY 1 billion powder base in Xixian New Area started trial production, with a planned annual output of 3,000-4,000 tons; Farsoon's CNY 3.91 billion private placement is advancing, targeting equipment capacity expansion, printing service platforms, and a global operations center. Both production lines are betting on the same future: demand will continue to expand. But the time gap in capacity realization will determine who gets the next round of orders first.
A variable that cannot be ignored is Apple. Apple has officially confirmed that the cases for the Apple Watch Ultra 3 and the titanium Series 11 are manufactured using 3D printed titanium technology: 50-micron recycled titanium powder, six lasers working synchronously, and printing a single watch case takes about 20 hours. Material usage is halved compared to traditional subtractive processes, saving over 400 tons of titanium raw materials in 2025 alone. John Ternus, who comes from a hardware engineering background, assumed the role of Apple CEO on September 1, and the appointment documents even listed the 3D printing process for the Ultra 3 as one of his representative contributions.
However, a cold shower is necessary: Apple has never disclosed its equipment supplier list, and "domestic equipment entering the Apple supply chain" remains at the level of market rumors to this day. Both BLT and Farsoon have been mentioned, but none has been confirmed.
05 First to Enter Xianyang Rules
The hegemony battle between BLT and Farsoon Technologies is essentially a microcosm of an industry swinging between "narrative pricing" and "performance pricing."
BLT has a thicker foundation: a leading position in commercial aerospace, full industry chain layout, and the second-largest global market share. However, its profit curve is constrained by customer rhythms, making it difficult to match the market's optimistic expectations in the short term, and the sword of the CSRC investigation still hangs over its head.
Farsoon has greater elasticity: explosive growth in the export chain, potential penetration in the consumer electronics chain, and a lighter asset structure (debt-to-asset ratio of 26%, interest-bearing debt of less than CNY 10 million). However, its profit base is too small, and the 518x PE requires proving itself with data every single quarter.
The endgame of the hegemony battle will depend on who can first turn "stories" into "orders," and then turn "orders" into "profits."
In the next two quarters, the following signals need to be closely monitored: BLT's Q3: whether the trend of Q2 gross margin recovering QoQ to 40.34% can continue, whether revenue is a rhythmic catch-up or demand deceleration, and when the CSRC investigation will conclude. Farsoon's orders: the +74% growth in overseas sales cannot be perpetual, and whether Apple supply chain orders can turn from "expectations" into "contracts."
Every round of hard tech market rallies ultimately has to answer the same question: when will the stories turn into income statements. BLT and Farsoon Technologies are giving their respective answers at their own paces. The money has arrived first, but the profits are still on the way.
First to enter Xianyang rules; the winner of the hegemony battle belongs to the one who first lets profits catch up with the stories.