Eve of Listing: 'Big Boss of Pleasant Goat' Makes Second Attempt at HK IPO, Aulton New Energy Loses 1.47 Billion in Three and a Half Years
NIO Power's competitor, Aulton New Energy, has filed for a second Hong Kong IPO despite reporting a cumulative net loss of approximately 1.47 billion RMB over three and a half years. Revenue has declined sharply from 1.155 billion RMB in 2023 to 677 million RMB in 2025, while gross margins remained negative for core battery-swapping operations throughout this period. The company’s primary revenue-generating segment, self-owned swap stations, is contracting with station counts dropping from 321 t
Analysis
TL;DR
- NIO Power's competitor, Aulton New Energy, has filed for a second Hong Kong IPO despite reporting a cumulative net loss of approximately 1.47 billion RMB over three and a half years.
- Revenue has declined sharply from 1.155 billion RMB in 2023 to 677 million RMB in 2025, while gross margins remained negative for core battery-swapping operations throughout this period.
- The company’s primary revenue-generating segment, self-owned swap stations, is contracting with station counts dropping from 321 to 214, and nearly 84% of remaining stations are operating at a loss.
- Cash reserves have dwindled from 634 million RMB in early 2023 to 298 million RMB by April 2026, raising concerns about liquidity and suggesting the IPO is primarily for survival rather than expansion.
- Despite being ranked third in China by operational service revenue, Aulton’s income is significantly lower than the market leader, highlighting its struggle to gain scale in a rapidly growing but unprofitable industry.
Why It Matters
This case study illustrates the severe profitability challenges inherent in the heavy-asset battery-swapping business model, serving as a cautionary tale for investors and operators in the EV infrastructure sector. It highlights how technological advantages, such as Aulton’s rapid swapping speed, do not automatically translate into commercial viability or market share against better-capitalized competitors like NIO. For AI and tech practitioners, it underscores the importance of unit economics and operational efficiency over pure technical metrics when scaling hardware-intensive services.
Technical Details
- Financial Performance: Aulton reported net losses of 655 million RMB (2023), 419 million RMB (2024), and 307 million RMB (2025). Adjusted net losses remained high at 370 million, 290 million, and 281 million RMB respectively, indicating persistent operational inefficiencies.
- Operational Metrics: The number of self-owned swap stations decreased from 321 in late 2023 to 214 in April 2026. The utilization rate of swap station production lines plummeted from 57.9% in 2023 to just 9.2% in early 2026.
- Revenue Structure: In 2025, 64.3% of revenue came from self-owned station services, which had a negative gross margin of -21.4%. Equipment sales, which had positive margins, saw revenue drop by 70% from 2023 to 2025.
- Cost Dynamics: The average cost per swap exceeded revenue, with gross margins hovering around -3% to -5%. Additionally, the actual fee per swap dropped by 34% from 34.2 RMB to 22.7 RMB due to promotions and battery degradation.
- R&D vs. Operations: The company employs 1,149 people, with 82.6% dedicated to operations and only 5% to R&D and digitalization, reflecting a resource allocation skewed towards maintaining existing infrastructure rather than innovation.
Industry Insight
- Capital Intensity Risk: The battery-swapping industry requires massive upfront capital and ongoing operational subsidies. Companies must achieve significant scale to amortize costs, and those failing to do so face existential threats, as seen with Aulton’s cash burn.
- Competitive Moats: Technical superiority (e.g., speed) is insufficient without a robust ecosystem and brand loyalty. NIO’s dominance suggests that vertical integration and user experience create stronger moats than third-party hardware providers.
- IPO Timing and Valuation: Aulton’s attempt to list at a 17.6x PS ratio amidst declining revenues and negative cash flows highlights the difficulty of valuing pre-profitability infrastructure companies. Investors should scrutinize liquidity positions and path-to-profitability plans closely.
Disclaimer: The above content is generated by AI and is for reference only.