On August 1st, new energy vehicle makers released their July sales results as usual. July is traditionally a slow season for the auto market, with the China Passenger Car Association estimating retail sales of about 1.52 million units for domestic passenger cars, a year-on-year decline of 16.8%.
While the overall market is trending downward, the divergence among new energy vehicle makers is becoming more pronounced. Leapmotor delivered 101,000 vehicles in July, a 102% year-on-year increase, making it the first domestic new energy vehicle maker to achieve monthly deliveries of over 100,000 units. It stands alone in the first tier.
Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance (HIMA) delivered 45,000 units, ranking second, but its year-on-year figures have declined for the second consecutive month. The third tier is crowded with four companies: Xpeng at 38,000 units, NIO at 36,000 units, Li Auto at just over 30,000 units, and Xiaomi at over 30,000 units.
Among traditional automakers, the gap between leading players is also widening. BYD sold nearly 420,000 vehicles in July, a 22% year-on-year increase, with exports reaching nearly 180,000 units, a 124.3% year-on-year increase. Its subsidiary Fangchengbao delivered 41,000 vehicles, a 190% year-on-year increase, closing in on HIMA's volume. Denza approached 20,000 units in a single month. Chery Group's July sales were 277,000 units, a 23% year-on-year increase, including exports of 203,000 units, a 70.1% year-on-year increase, setting a new monthly export record for Chinese automakers for five consecutive months. Geely's July sales were just over 250,000 units, with overseas exports exceeding 100,000 units for two consecutive months, a 202% year-on-year increase, creating a new monthly export high. Its subsidiary Zeekr delivered 36,000 vehicles, a 111% year-on-year increase, also a record high.
Additionally, Changan's three brands showed mixed results: Qiyuan at nearly 40,000 units (up 39.5% year-on-year), Deepal at 29,000 units (up 7.5% year-on-year), and Avatr at 7,626 units (down 24.2% year-on-year). GAC Aion Hyper sold 35,000 vehicles (up 31.7% year-on-year), BAIC Arcfox sold 23,500 vehicles (up 150% year-on-year), and Dongfeng Voyah sold 13,000 vehicles (up 8.7% year-on-year). The trend this year is that brands incubated by traditional automakers are squeezing into the middle positions of the rankings, and the sales gap among new energy vehicle makers will only widen.
Competition is intensifying. On July 16th, six brands, including Li Auto, Xpeng, and Leapmotor, launched seven new models within two and a half hours, with prices ranging from 120,000 to 350,000 yuan. These new vehicles will begin delivery in August, and the rankings will change again.
Top Two, One Rising, One Falling
In the July delivery rankings, the top two positions remained unchanged, but their trends diverged. Leapmotor broke the 100,000-unit mark, while HIMA’s year-on-year figures declined for two consecutive months. Leapmotor delivered 101,267 vehicles in July. In the traditionally slow season, how did it achieve sales of over 100,000 units? Domestically, it relied on new models and promotions to boost volume, while overseas markets contributed new growth. Leapmotor launched new models intensively starting in June, with volume concentrated in July: the C-series three models upgraded the cockpit chip and 800V platform, while the B01 and B10 entered the 100,000-yuan market segment. The simultaneous launch of the "Summer Price" benefits and four lifetime warranties further lowered the barrier for consumers to make a purchase decision. In terms of sales structure, Leapmotor emphasized that the high-end D19 delivered 10,043 units in a single month, which indeed indicates progress in brand upward mobility, but it accounts for less than 10% of total deliveries. The real scale is still supported by the product matrix targeting the mass market: the A10, launched in late March, delivered 28,593 units in July, accounting for nearly 30% of total deliveries; the B and C series aim to expand mid-range market coverage, bringing 800V fast charging, zero-gravity seats, and AR-HUD down to the 100,000-yuan level, essentially using a "low price, high configuration" strategy to attract consumers. Overseas markets further amplified Leapmotor's scale. The company disclosed that it sold nearly 100,000 vehicles overseas in the first half of the year, exceeding the total for the previous year. According to industry estimates, this was about 96,300 vehicles. Among the six new energy vehicle makers, only Leapmotor can achieve this level of overseas sales amid a shrinking market. However, Leapmotor still faces significant sales pressure, with the bottleneck first being production capacity. Cumulative deliveries in the first seven months were about 457,000 units, with an annual target completion rate of about 44% (target 1.05 million units). To meet the target, it needs to deliver an average of 118,000 units per month for the remaining five months, which is about 17,000 units higher than July's figure. Leapmotor Senior Vice President Cao Li mentioned during the launch of the B01 and B10 that he is more concerned about the factory being unable to keep up with demand, as a single factory can only produce over 30,000 vehicles per month. To continue selling over 100,000 vehicles, Leapmotor must stabilize the volume of existing models, ensure new models continuously provide incremental growth, and maintain supply chain and quality control without errors.
HIMA ranked second with deliveries of 45,046 vehicles in July, marking the second consecutive month of year-on-year decline. Unlike Leapmotor and Xpeng, which are single automakers, HIMA is an ecological consolidation across multiple partners, including brands like AITO, Luxeed, and Stelato. Last month, it also disclosed sales figures for AITO and Luxeed by brand and the Shangjie single model, while July data has not yet been released by brand, only mentioning that the Luxeed V9 exceeded 10,000 units in deliveries. Seres has not issued a statement either. Data-wise, HIMA was under pressure in July, with a month-on-month decline of 11% and a year-on-year decline of 5%. The reasons for the decline are not complicated. June was the end of the first half of the year, and HIMA, along with the industry, pushed for volume, reaching a high of over 50,000 units for the year, which borrowed some demand. July had no new models, no promotions, and was a traditional slow season, so deliveries naturally declined. More critically, the focus was on model rhythm. The biggest increment in the first half of the year was the AITO M6, which exceeded 30,000 units in deliveries 54 days after launch. However, by July, this batch of orders had been largely digested, and the increment naturally fell. The AITO M9 has limited monthly sales, and new volume models have not yet taken over. The decision not to promote also has its considerations. Data from Huachuang Securities shows that industry discount rates stabilized month-on-month in late July. After half a year of price wars, the market has entered a stalemate. HIMA's actions in July were all in software: at the end of the month, it pushed a summer OTA update, with ADS 5 and the Harmony cockpit providing 34 new features at once. The Stelato G9 also obtained the Beijing L3 road test license. However, Ryan, a channel source focused on new energy vehicle makers, said that based on industry rhythm, obtaining the L3 road test license usually requires several months of verification and access procedures, so the probability of the G9 being delivered in August is low. Additionally, HIMA’s first FUV (positioned similarly to a "crossover multi-purpose vehicle"), the Luxeed RX, announced at the end of July that it would start small orders in August. According to automotive blogger leaks, the Luxeed RX has been road-tested. The period from road testing to official delivery usually takes a certain amount of time, so the probability of formal delivery in August is also low. Ryan judges that whether HIMA can recover growth in August still depends on whether the AITO M9 can increase volume.
Xpeng and NIO Differ by Only 2,000 Units
The third and fourth places are Xpeng and NIO, respectively, with a difference of just over 2,000 units. The former’s year-on-year growth was only 3.6%, while the latter’s increased by 71%. Xpeng delivered 38,027 vehicles in July, down 5.2% month-on-month and up 3.6% year-on-year. Summarizing Xpeng's month: it was a transition period between old and new products. The new model had high popularity, but deliveries did not keep pace. In mid-July, Xpeng launched the MONA L03 with an official price of 123,800 yuan, 20,000 yuan lower than the pre-sale price. Initial orders were strong, but there was almost no delivery contribution in July, with production capacity ramping up being the bottleneck. A new batch of customers planning to buy current models began to wait and see. Citigroup’s research mentioned that some customers switched to compare competitors. Xpeng officially stated that it would accelerate the nationwide delivery of the L03 in August. Citigroup expects the L03 to deliver 8,000 to 10,000 units in August and about 15,000 units in September. Therefore, Xpeng's July deliveries mainly relied on old models, and the high-end line encountered some trouble. The main delivery volume was still from the MONA M03, P7+/G6/G7. According to Ryan’s analysis, affected by the launch of the L03, the monthly sales of the MONA M03 declined somewhat. As the SUV version of the MONA series, the L03 and M03 have similar price ranges, so the two models compete. The high-end models GX and X9 contributed limitedly: GX production capacity improved, but the delivery rhythm was still constrained; the X9 experienced a high-temperature air suspension failure in July, and Xpeng announced a recall of 33,473 vehicles. In the first seven months of this year, Xpeng delivered 204,000 vehicles. To achieve the annual target of 550,000 to 600,000 vehicles, it needs to deliver an average of 70,000 to 80,000 vehicles per month for the remaining five months, about twice the July delivery volume. Most of the hope is pinned on the L03. For orders to remain strong, production capacity must keep up.
NIO, ranking fourth, is a different story. It delivered 35,934 vehicles in July, a 71.0% year-on-year increase, the highest growth rate among the six companies. In the first seven months, NIO’s cumulative deliveries were 227,057 vehicles, a 68.0% year-on-year increase. Overall, NIO has emerged from last year’s trough and returned to a high-growth track, with an annual target completion rate (456,000 to 489,000 vehicles) of 46.4% to 49.8%. However, NIO’s overall month-on-month decline was 11.5%, the first significant correction since February this year. By brand, all showed month-on-month declines. The main NIO brand delivered 20,008 vehicles (down 8.7% month-on-month), Onvo delivered 10,155 vehicles (down 13.5% month-on-month), and Firefly delivered 5,771 vehicles (down 16.9% month-on-month). Onvo and Firefly, positioned at 150,000 to 300,000 yuan, together contributed 44% of July deliveries, helping to expand NIO's overall scale. But this month, the three brands failed to complement each other. NIO did take action in July. On July 9th, the ES8 five-seat version, starting at 382,800 yuan, was launched and began delivery the next day. Logically, a new model on the market should have driven some volume. However, the main brand not only failed to grow but also declined by 8.7%. The five-seat version had only about 20 days of delivery in July, and production capacity was not fully released. At the same time, the BaaS plan lowered the threshold to 274,800 yuan, attracting new customers but inevitably causing some customers who originally planned to buy the ES6 or the six-seat version of the ES8 to switch to the five-seat version, becoming a "robbing Peter to pay Paul" situation. It is worth noting NIO's pricing strategy. While competitors like Leapmotor were offering significant limited-time benefits to grab orders in July, NIO not only did not follow suit but also raised prices for some of its main models by 5,000 to 10,000 yuan. Li Bin stated at a mid-July communication meeting that aluminum, copper, and lithium carbonate are all rising, and the cost of the ES8 has increased by nearly 20,000 yuan per vehicle. Under cost pressure, NIO chose to protect gross margins. Whether this price increase path will work remains to be seen. Ryan’s judgment is that the key lies in August and September. After the ES8 five-seat version ramps up volume, can Onvo and Firefly maintain their volume in a market without price cuts?
All at the 30,000-Unit Level, All Waiting for New Models
The fifth and sixth places are both just over 30,000 units. Li Auto is stuck in a transition period between old and new models. Xiaomi has remained at this level for the fourth consecutive month, although in recent months, Xiaomi's data has been slightly lower than actual insurance registrations. Li Auto delivered 30,468 vehicles in July, a slight year-on-year decrease of 0.9% and a month-on-month decrease of 1.4%, making it the only brand among the top new energy vehicle makers to experience both year-on-year and month-on-month declines. Although the decline narrowed compared to June (a 14.8% year-on-year decrease), cumulative deliveries in the first seven months were 223,940 vehicles, a year-on-year decrease of 4.6%, indicating that Li Auto is still in a "difficult" period. In the context of generally strong year-on-year growth among the top new energy vehicle makers this year, Li Auto is one of the few brands with negative growth. Li Auto's July can be summarized in two points: first, the generation change of old and new models. The former "volume king" L6 completed its generation change, with the new L6 priced at a fixed 249,800 yuan, sharing the same generation and core as the 500,000-yuan L9. CLSA believes this price is very attractive in its segment. However, it was only launched in mid-month, so its contribution to July deliveries was limited. The real test is in August, the first full month of delivery for the new L6. Second, the main pure electric model unexpectedly stumbled. In mid-to-late July, the i6 had a problem with the supply of its front headlights, resulting in a reduction of about 4,000 units in production. The company officially addressed the issue on July 27th, stating that supply and production had returned to normal. Supply chain fluctuations are one of the reasons for the poor sales performance in July, which indirectly indicates that Li Auto is overly dependent on a single model. Alex, an investor focused on new energy vehicle makers, also noticed that Li Auto's L-series facelift this year is mainly configuration upgrades. He believes that Li Xiang's mind is no longer on the current vehicles; his strategic focus is on three to five years from now. In early July, Morgan Stanley lowered its sales forecast for Li Auto for 2026-2028 by 8%. The capital market also voted in advance, with Li Auto's stock price falling 46% this year, and the company itself buying back shares in July. Based on the annual target of about 488,000 vehicles, Li Auto needs to sell about 53,000 units per month for the remaining five months to meet its target. Ryan’s judgment is that after the new L6 and new L8 ramp up volume, it is not impossible for Li Auto to return to 40,000 units. However, even if it returns to 40,000, there is still a gap from the monthly average of 53,000 required to meet the target. It would need the new L6 to become the next i6-level blockbuster.
Xiaomi delivered over 30,000 vehicles in July. This month, Xiaomi made several promotional moves. The new SU7 offered a financial plan with a down payment starting at 49,900 yuan and monthly payments as low as 538 yuan, with limited-time purchase benefits up to 61,000 yuan. On July 14th, it also opened a small number of in-stock vehicles, with the fastest delivery in 2 hours. Alex analyzed that the initial order pool accumulated from the launch period is basically exhausted. The essence of the July promotion is to accelerate the conversion of existing orders and maintain the delivery base before new models are launched. Going forward, monthly sales will depend more on new orders received. If Xiaomi’s annual target is 550,000 vehicles, subtracting the cumulative deliveries of about 215,000 units in the first seven months (estimated based on the lower end of 30,000 units in July), Xiaomi needs to deliver an average of nearly 67,000 vehicles per month for the remaining five months. This means Xiaomi cannot stay in the "comfort zone" of 30,000 units; delivery volume must more than double in a short period. Can the current two models, SU7 and YU7, support a monthly volume of 67,000 units? Extremely difficult. This explains why Xiaomi launched a new extended-range SUV series called "Xiaomi Pengcheng" (Sky Nomad) at the end of July and directly started pre-sales for the N70 Max and N90 Max. However, the Pengcheng series will not be delivered until September, and production capacity ramp-up will take another one or two months. The time to truly boost volume is only the fourth quarter. In the next two months, Xiaomi will likely remain at the level of an average of 30,000 units per month.
Conclusion
Monthly rankings are heavily influenced by delivery rhythm. Combining the deliveries of the six companies from January to July and comparing them with the final rankings at the end of 2025, the landscape has already changed. The final six-strong rankings for 2025 were Leapmotor, HIMA, Xpeng, Li Auto, Xiaomi, and NIO. Seven months later, the gap between the top two has widened to 170,000 units, and the top position is no longer in doubt. The middle rankings have been reshuffled. NIO has climbed from sixth place last year to third, Li Auto and Xiaomi are holding fourth and fifth, and Xpeng has fallen from third to the bottom. In terms of annual target completion rates, the most comfortable is NIO, which needs to deliver an average of over 46,000 units per month in the second half of the year to meet its target. Leapmotor has the highest target, needing to deliver nearly 120,000 units per month on average. The target lines for Xpeng, Xiaomi, and Li Auto are 70,000 to 80,000 units, 67,000 units, and 53,000 units per month on average, respectively, all far higher than these three companies' July delivery levels of over 30,000 units. The six companies have formed tiers, and the dividing line behind this is product structure. The companies moving upward, Leapmotor and NIO, are generating volume from multiple product lines simultaneously—one relies on four series plus overseas markets, and the other on three brands. The three companies that are stagnating or declining are all stuck in a dependence on a single model or a single cycle. Xpeng, Xiaomi, and Li Auto are all pinning their hopes on new models that have not yet begun large-scale delivery. Production capacity, supply chain, and delivery cycles will be the decisive factors for rankings in the second half of the year.
Comments