1. Report Industry Investment Rating - No industry investment rating information is provided in the report. 2. Core Viewpoints - The "anti - involution" policy is compared with the supply - side reform in 2016 - 2017. Both aim to address supply - demand mismatches through capacity reduction, but there are differences in background, industries covered, policy measures, implementation cycles, and outcomes [14]. - The "anti - involution" policy is expected to have a longer implementation cycle and a more profound impact. It focuses on long - term mechanism building and is likely to achieve more sustainable and healthy results [50]. - Regarding the impact on the bond market, the "anti - involution" policy is unlikely to change the long - term bullish trend of the bond market. In the short term, there is adjustment pressure on bond interest rates due to a slight rebound in commodity prices, but a demand - driven bearish trend is unlikely. In the long run, if the policy can increase corporate profits and drive up factor prices, it may lead to an upward inflection point in bond interest rates [51][63]. 3. Summary by Directory 3.1 "Anti - involution" Policy Context Review - In 2024, the Central Political Bureau Meeting first proposed "preventing 'involution - style' vicious competition." On July 1, 2025, the Sixth Meeting of the Central Financial and Economic Commission incorporated "anti - involution" into the national economic governance framework, accelerating policy implementation. Subsequently, various industries issued implementation opinions, such as the China Cement Association, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology for the photovoltaic industry, and 33 construction central enterprises [10][11]. 3.2 "Anti - involution" and Supply - side Reform Comprehensive Comparison 3.2.1 Background Motivation - Supply - side reform in 2015 was due to the transition from high - speed to medium - high - speed economic growth, with severe over - capacity in traditional industries like coal and steel, and diminishing marginal effects of demand - side stimulus [15]. - The "anti - involution" policy since 2022 is because PPI has been in the negative range again, and over - capacity is more concentrated in emerging industries such as photovoltaic, lithium - battery, and new - energy vehicles. "Involution" is a structural and institutional over - capacity, threatening the long - term health of industries [17][21]. 3.2.2 Key Industries - The "anti - involution" policy covers a wide range of industries, including traditional industries related to real - estate and infrastructure, emerging industries, and downstream consumer - related industries. The policy focuses on the "new three items" (new energy, semiconductors, high - end equipment) [24]. - The supply - side reform in 2016 - 2017 focused on upstream raw - material industries, mainly addressing over - capacity in traditional industries led by state - owned enterprises. In contrast, the "anti - involution" policy is more extensive, emphasizing emerging industries in the middle and lower reaches, with more private enterprises involved [28]. 3.2.3 Policy Measures - The supply - side reform in 2016 - 2017 used "three removals, one reduction, and one supplement" as the main policy tools, featuring administrative means, quantified targets for key industries, supplementary measures, and demand - expansion policies such as shantytown renovation monetization [34]. - The "anti - involution" policy currently mainly uses market - based means such as industry self - discipline, with milder administrative intervention and an emphasis on institutional building. Its ultimate goal is to build a new development pattern and promote high - quality development, and it is unlikely to be accompanied by large - scale demand - expansion policies [39][40]. 3.2.4 Policy Implementation Cycle and Outcomes - The supply - side reform had a short implementation cycle of about 2 years, with significant and rapid results. It led to a substantial increase in capacity utilization, commodity prices, and industrial profits, and had a "first positive, then negative" impact on interest - rate bonds [42][43]. - The "anti - involution" policy may have a longer implementation cycle. It focuses on long - term mechanism building and is expected to achieve more sustainable and healthy results through market - based and legal means [50]. 3.3 "Anti - involution" Impact on the Bond Market Outlook - The impact of the "anti - involution" policy on interest - rate bonds is mainly transmitted through factors such as expectations, commodity prices, monetary policy, and the demand side. Currently, the demand side is weak, and monetary policy remains loose [51]. - It is predicted that the year - on - year PPI will gradually recover to around - 1.5% within the year but will not turn positive immediately. In the short term, there is adjustment pressure on bond interest rates due to a slight rebound in commodity prices, but a trend - driven bear market is unlikely. In the long run, if the policy can increase corporate profits and drive up factor prices, it may lead to an upward inflection point in bond interest rates [63].

8月首个交易日，亚太主要股指多数走低。 截至收盘，日经225指数收盘跌0.66%报40799.6点，韩国综合指数跌3.88%报3119.41点，澳洲标普200指数跌0.92%报8662点，新西兰标普50指数跌 0.74%报12729.4点。 光伏产业链股盘中发力走高，截至收盘，捷佳伟创20%涨停，海优新材涨约13%，双良节能、文科股份亦涨停，赛腾股份涨超9%。 | 代码 | 名称 | � | 涨幅% | 现价 | 涨跌 | 买价 | 卖价 | 总量 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 300724 捷佳伟创 | | R | 20.00 | 66.19 | 11.03 | 66.19 | | 483676 | | 688680 | 海优新材 | K | 12.93 | 51.70 | 5.92 | 51.69 | 51.70 | 74578 | | 600481 双良节能 | | R | 10.05 | 6.13 | 0.56 | 6.13 | | 231.9万 | | 002775 文科胶价 | | | 10.00 | 4.8 ...

作 者丨曹恩惠 编 辑丨骆一帆 6月9日，有媒体报道称，一位接近合盛硅业（603260.SH）的人士透露， 该公司正在谋求股 权转让，特变电工是此前的意向"接盘方"之一。 上述报道指出，截至5月底，双方对价格的谈判未能取得积极成果。"据了解，以董事长罗立 国为代表的合盛硅业实控人罗氏家族，出让全部股权的意向对价在百亿元级别。而特变电工 认为该价格偏离预期。" "对于任何捏造、散布此类不实信息、误导市场及投资者的行为，公司将采取一切必要法律手 段，严厉追究相关方的法律责任，坚决维护公司及全体股东的合法权益。"公司称，"如未来 发生与该事项相关的情形，本公司及相关信息披露义务人将严格按照法律法规要求及时履行 信息披露义务。" 作为工业硅和有机硅领域的双龙头企业，合盛硅业截至2024年底已经形成了工业硅产能122万 吨/年，有机硅单体产能173万吨/年。该公司也布局了光伏多晶硅等光伏制造环节，但受到近 两年光伏产业周期迎来低谷期的影响，其光伏板块的业务表现远不及传统硅基业务。 2024年，合盛硅业实现营业收入266.92亿元，同比增长0.41%；实现归属于母公司股东净利润 为17.40亿元，同比减少33.6%。而今 ...

Core Viewpoint - Wacker Chemie, a leading global player in silicon-based and ethylene/acetic acid-based materials, emphasizes differentiation, new technology development, and globalization as key competitive factors for sustained growth and market leadership [2][3][4]. Differentiation Competition - Wacker focuses on high-value specialty products in its core businesses of silicone and polymers, with 2024 revenue contributions of 50% and 26% respectively, and EBITDA contributions of 41% and 32% [3][19]. - The company has over 3,000 types of silicone products, with specialty silicones accounting for 85% of its silicone sales in 2023 [3][56]. - Wacker has established a strong position in the photovoltaic polysilicon market, particularly in the U.S., maintaining leadership in niche markets despite global competition [3][62]. New Technology Development - Wacker is investing in high-growth areas such as semiconductor polysilicon and biotechnology, with semiconductor polysilicon sales expected to account for approximately 50% of total sales in 2024 [4][19]. - The biotechnology segment has shown a CAGR of 8% from 2008 to 2024, with plans to reach €1 billion in revenue by 2030, up from €370 million in 2024 [4][19]. Globalization Strategy - Wacker operates 27 production sites, 21 technology centers, and 46 sales offices globally, with sales distribution of 16% in Germany, 23% in Europe, 19% in the Americas, and 37% in Asia [5][19]. - The company has enhanced its upstream supply chain through acquisitions, such as the purchase of a silicon metal plant in Norway, achieving about one-third self-sufficiency in silicon-based raw materials [5][19]. - Wacker's global market expansion includes a comprehensive presence in emerging markets like China, benefiting from rising per capita consumption levels [5][19]. Insights for Chinese Chemical Enterprises - Chinese chemical companies are encouraged to focus on fine chemicals and new technology sectors, as well as to enhance their globalization capabilities to expand market reach and reduce costs [6].

Summary of the Conference Call on the Photovoltaic Polysilicon Industry Industry Overview - The polysilicon market is currently experiencing weak transaction volumes post the May Day holiday, with upstream polysilicon manufacturers reluctant to sell and downstream crystal pulling factories adopting a wait-and-see approach. Overall prices are maintaining around 37 RMB per kilogram [1][2][4] - As of the end of April, polysilicon inventory is approximately 260,000 tons, with a slight increase due to some shipments [1][3] - The production of polysilicon has decreased month-on-month since April, with an estimated production of 96,000 tons in April and a forecast of 93,000 to 94,000 tons in May. This decline is attributed to a 10% to 20% production cut by a leading company and maintenance shutdowns by several second and third-tier companies [2][10] Pricing Dynamics - The market reference price for standard dense material (futures delivery product) is about 37 RMB per kilogram, while the price for alternative delivery products (P-type dense material) is slightly above 34 RMB per kilogram. Mixed package material prices range from 36 to 37 RMB per kilogram [1][3][4] - There is a price negotiation between leading manufacturers, who are quoting around 36 to 37 RMB, and crystal pulling factories, which are hoping to procure at 35 to 36 RMB [1][4] - The cash cost for leading companies is around 27,000 RMB per ton, but the production cost for delivery products is higher due to increased quality requirements and energy consumption, potentially exceeding 30,000 RMB per ton [1][7][17] Market Sentiment and Future Outlook - Polysilicon manufacturers are generally pessimistic about demand in the third quarter, hoping for prices to stabilize and recover soon. Some production capacities are being reduced or delayed in resuming operations [2][18] - Currently, no manufacturers are profitable when considering full costs, although some can maintain operations based on cash costs [19] - There is a cautious approach to purchasing among small and medium-sized polysilicon manufacturers due to uncertainties in silicon wafer prices and existing inventory levels [24] Production and Quality Considerations - The production of delivery products requires specialized production lines, and not all capacities can produce these products due to higher quality standards [16][26] - The energy consumption for producing N-type dense material is approximately 45 to 48 kWh, while mixed package materials require about 53 kWh, leading to higher costs for the latter [26][27] Additional Insights - The market is currently seeing a stagnation in transactions, with many downstream manufacturers adopting a wait-and-see attitude. Some manufacturers are holding back on selling their products, indicating a cautious market sentiment [12][20] - The industry has a self-regulatory mechanism in place to ensure production capacity coordination, which is being actively enforced [31] - The acceptance of granular silicon is improving, with an increased technical blending ratio, although this is contingent on the quality of silicon wafers and the control of associated risks [31]