Last night, reports indicated that in mid-November, a large group of public and private fund managers traveled to Shenzhen to conduct research on DJI. The company emphasized that it has no financing needs, IPO plans, or intentions to spin off business units for listing. The focus of the research was DJI’s upcoming unreleased panoramic drone, the Avata 360. Industry insiders view this product as DJI’s key weapon to directly challenge Insta360’s soon-to-be-released Antigravity A1.
The competition between the two companies has already intensified, spanning product innovation, executive statements, market research, and even price wars.
During the recent Double 11 shopping festival, both DJI and Insta360 slashed prices on multiple products. In direct competing categories, DJI’s offerings were priced roughly 400–500 yuan lower than Insta360’s. Earlier, a Frost & Sullivan white paper highlighted the stark market share disparity between the two companies, but the report was later taken down.
**Market Share Mystery** Two conflicting reports have emerged regarding market share. According to a Q3 2025 report by JQ Consulting, Insta360 held 49% of the global panoramic camera market, followed closely by DJI at 43%, with Ricoh, GoPro, and others accounting for 4%, 3%, and 1%, respectively. However, a Frost & Sullivan white paper released on October 31 claimed Insta360 dominated with a 75% share in Q3 2025, while DJI held just 17.1% and GoPro 1.4%.
The significant discrepancy in market share data has raised questions about the true competitive landscape. Notably, Frost & Sullivan’s report, titled *Global and China Handheld Smart Imaging Device Market Development White Paper*, was taken down twice after publication. As of now, the report remains unavailable for download.
When asked about the conflicting data, DJI disclosed that its Q3 panoramic camera shipments totaled 290,000 units, generating 860 million yuan in revenue—a figure that aligns with JQ Consulting’s estimate of an 8.6 billion yuan market (with DJI’s 43% share). Insta360, however, declined to disclose shipment or revenue figures, stating only that the data’s “accuracy, completeness, and authority cannot be verified.”
**Double 11 Price War** Amid the market share controversy, DJI and Insta360 escalated their promotional rivalry during Double 11. On JD.com, DJI’s Osmo 360 was priced at 2,197 yuan (including 105GB storage), while Insta360’s X5 standard edition sold for 2,656 yuan (requiring an additional storage card purchase, bringing the total to 2,756 yuan)—a 559-yuan gap. Similarly, DJI’s Osmo Nano (1,953 yuan) undercut Insta360’s GO3 Ultra (2,426 yuan) by 473 yuan.
Both companies’ products saw steep discounts compared to their launch prices. The Osmo 360, originally priced at 2,999 yuan, dropped by 802 yuan, while the X5’s price fell by 1,142 yuan from its 3,798 yuan launch tag—a clear sign of intensifying competition.
**Financial Impact** Insta360’s Q3 financials reflected the competitive pressure. While revenue surged 92.64% YoY to 2.94 billion yuan, net profit attributable to shareholders fell 15.9% to 272 million yuan. The company attributed the decline to strategic investments in chip customization, algorithm optimization, and new projects, asserting that excluding these costs, profitability improved YoY.
At the earnings call, Insta360 CEO Liu Jingkang acknowledged that DJI’s price competition had expanded the market, calling industry-wide growth a shared goal.
**Internal Challenges** As competition heats up, both companies face internal management issues. A former Insta360 employee recently alleged on social media that the company delayed 2024 virtual stock dividends, originally promised by May 2025. The employee threatened to release year-end bonus documents and CEO chat logs if unpaid. Though the matter was later resolved, it exposed flaws in the company’s exit mechanisms for incentive programs.
Meanwhile, Bambu Lab founder Tao Ye, a former DJI executive, criticized his ex-employer in a lengthy social media post, accusing it of imposing restrictive clauses on a competing 3D printing startup. Tao suggested DJI’s talent retention issues stem from conflating loyalty with blind obedience, deterring open dialogue with departing employees.
Industry observers note that these incidents reveal underlying instability at both companies, despite their outward success.
Comments