海光信息终止并购曙光:资本周期、估值逻辑与国产算力格局的再平衡

Core Viewpoint - The recent decision by Haiguang Information to terminate the acquisition of Shuguang Co. reflects a strategic choice influenced by the current high valuation cycle in the AI chip and computing power industry, rather than a failure in technical collaboration or increasing conflicts of interest [1][19][37] Group 1: Market Context - The AI chip and computing power industry in China has entered a rare valuation uplift period, with significant price increases and market enthusiasm for AI hardware technology [1][19] - Companies like Cambrian and Moer Thread have seen substantial stock price increases, with Cambrian's revenue for the first three quarters of 2025 reaching 4.607 billion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 2386% [2][21] - Moer Thread's stock surged 425.46% on its debut, reflecting high market expectations despite its current losses [4][22] Group 2: Haiguang's Position - Haiguang Information, as a mature CPU manufacturer, possesses high technical barriers and significant replacement potential, making it attractive in the current market [7][25] - The company's stock price rose from 136.13 yuan per share in May to 219.3 yuan by December 9, 2025, indicating a 61% increase in market capitalization [6][25] Group 3: Reasons for Termination - The termination of the merger was influenced by concerns from Haiguang's shareholders about the dilution of its technology value and the potential shift from a "scarce technology" valuation to a "hardware engineering" model [8][26] - The differing business models and profit structures of Haiguang and Shuguang create challenges in merging their valuations, as Haiguang focuses on high R&D and long-term growth, while Shuguang operates in a more traditional hardware engineering space [9][27] Group 4: Strategic Implications - Maintaining independence allows Haiguang to fully benefit from its unique valuation and enhances its negotiating power for future capital operations [8][26] - The relationship between Haiguang and Shuguang is characterized by strong collaboration rather than dependency, allowing both companies to pursue their strategic goals without being constrained by a merged capital structure [14][32] Group 5: Future Outlook - The decision to remain independent is seen as a rational choice that aligns with industry trends, enabling both companies to innovate and collaborate more effectively in the evolving AI infrastructure landscape [19][37] - The flexibility gained from this strategic "unbinding" may lead to increased innovation and cooperation opportunities within the domestic CPU and computing power ecosystem [19][37]