Core Insights - The data trading market in China has shown a decrease in the number of data products listed, with a total of 296 products in October, down by 124 from September [4] - Key performance indicators have shown mixed results, with "element density" and "robustness coefficient" improving, while "application potential" has slightly declined and "transparency" remains low [4] Group 1: Measurement Results - In October, the "element density" score reached 4.22, reflecting a high degree of data core driving and multi-source data integration in new data products [4][6] - The "robustness coefficient" increased by 15.08% from the previous month, indicating enhanced compliance risk identification and safety control among data trading institutions [4][10] - The "application potential" score decreased from 3.23 to 3.08, suggesting a slight pullback in the market adaptability and growth elasticity of new data products [4][12] - The "transparency" score remained unchanged at 1.53, highlighting ongoing issues in price transparency and information disclosure mechanisms within the industry [4][8] Group 2: Element Density - The "element density" metric includes "data participation" and "data integration" sub-indicators, with the former showing overall stability across institutions [6] - Notably, the Hangzhou Data Exchange saw a significant recovery in "data participation" from 2.31 to 4.03 [6] - Beijing International Big Data Exchange leads in "data integration," while other exchanges need to improve their multi-source data fusion and optimization of data structures [6] Group 3: Transparency - The "transparency" score is evaluated based on "basic information disclosure" and "price transparency," with Beijing and Zhengzhou leading in basic information disclosure [8] - Zhejiang Data Exchange achieved the highest score in price transparency, with nearly 40% of products disclosing actual prices [8] - Other exchanges need to enhance their disclosure of product prices and basic information to improve overall transparency [8] Group 4: Robustness Coefficient - The "robustness coefficient" score improved from 1.99 to 2.29, indicating progress in data compliance and safety [10] - Beijing scored the highest in "data classification," while several exchanges lagged significantly, indicating a need for improvement in data classification management [10] - The "data source" dimension saw notable improvement, particularly for Zhejiang Data Exchange, while others still require enhancements in compliance [10] Group 5: Application Potential - The "application potential" score reflects the market adaptability and growth elasticity of data products, with a slight decline observed this month [12] - Most exchanges maintained a low score in "update frequency," indicating a lack of regular maintenance for new data products [12] - The "reusability" score showed a slight increase, with Zhejiang Data Exchange achieving the largest gain among the sample institutions [12]