Top 5 China E-bike Companies
Aima Technology Group Co. Ltd
Jiangsu Xinri E-Vehicle Co. Ltd
NIU Technologies
Shenzhen TAILG Technology Group Co., LTD.
Yadea Group Holdings Ltd.
Source: Mordor Intelligence
China E-bike Companies Matrix by Mordor Intelligence
Our comprehensive proprietary performance metrics of key China E-bike players beyond traditional revenue and ranking measures
The MI Matrix can diverge from simple revenue ranking because it weighs near term readiness for standards shifts, channel reliability, and product refresh cadence, not only last year sales. It also rewards visible execution signals such as factory upgrades, certified model turnover, and service coverage that reduces downtime for delivery fleets. Many buyers ask which brands best fit 2025 trade in programs and how to confirm CCC and national standard compliance at purchase time. In practice, a buyer should verify the product certificate, confirm CCC details where required, and prioritize battery safety alignment with GB 43854-2024 for lithium packs. These checks reduce operational disruption when enforcement tightens and noncompliant models are cleared out. For supplier and competitor evaluation, this MI Matrix by Mordor Intelligence is more decision useful than revenue tables alone.
MI Competitive Matrix for China E-bike
The MI Matrix benchmarks top China E-bike Companies on dual axes of Impact and Execution Scale.
Analysis of China E-bike Companies and Quadrants in the MI Competitive Matrix
Comprehensive positioning breakdown
Yadea Group Holdings Ltd
2024 reset forced sharper choices on product mix and dealer inventory discipline. The company remains a major player in China e-bicycle retail reach, but 2024 revenue fell to CNY 28.2 billion and profit also dropped sharply. If 2025 trade-in activity accelerates replacement demand for compliant models, there is upside. Execution whiplash during the standards transition is the key risk, since faster redesign cycles can raise quality escape rates.
Aima Technology Group Co. Ltd
Profitability stayed resilient while many peers faced price pressure and channel destocking. Revenue rose to about CNY 21.6 billion in 2024 and net profit also increased, signaling solid cost control. The firm, a leading brand in domestic commuter bikes, is also leaning into overseas capacity with a Vietnam facility starting production and an Indonesia site in commissioning. If GB 17761-2024 tightening removes weaker operators, Aima can convert compliance readiness into faster sell-through. The operational risk is overbuilding capacity ahead of stable demand.
Frequently Asked Questions
What changes in China e-bike rules matter most for 2025 purchasing?
GB 17761-2024 takes effect on September 1, 2025, which tightens compliance expectations at point of sale. Buyers should also watch lithium battery safety rules, especially for fleet charging practices.
How do trade in subsidies affect brand selection?
Subsidies can shift demand toward models with clean documentation, fast registration support, and stable after sales service. Vendors with high compliant model availability tend to convert demand faster during policy windows.
What should a delivery fleet prioritize when choosing a provider?
Start with uptime drivers: battery safety, swap or fast service capability, and parts availability near rider zones. Then confirm warranty terms and the provider's ability to handle peak season repair volume.
How can a buyer validate CCC and compliance documents quickly?
Ask for the product certificate and confirm the CCC information where required by local rules. Keep copies tied to vehicle IDs to reduce disputes during inspections or resale.
Is lithium ion always better than lead acid in China city use?
Lithium ion can reduce weight and improve range, but it raises charging safety requirements and compliance scrutiny. Lead acid can be favored in some subsidy designs and simpler charging environments.
What is the biggest operational risk for vendors in 2025 to 2026?
The biggest risk is failing the standards transition smoothly, which can trigger inventory write downs, recall exposure, and dealer trust loss. Testing capacity, supplier consistency, and traceability systems become critical.
Methodology
Research approach and analytical framework
Inputs were triangulated from company filings, exchange announcements, and company sites. Public journalism and government notices supported policy and capacity signals. Private firm scoring used observable launches, expansion events, and certification related actions. Where company level data was thin, scoring leaned conservative and favored verifiable signals.
Domestic stores, dealers, and fleet relationships determine replacement cycle capture during trade in peaks.
Trust matters more when buyers fear battery fires and want clear certificate backed compliance.
Higher unit and revenue position improves shelf space, supplier terms, and bargaining power with key channels.
China plant footprint and ramp speed determine how fast compliant models replace legacy inventory.
New models aligned to GB 17761-2024 and safer battery systems win upgrades without unsafe modifications.
Profit stability supports warranty reserves, dealer support, and certification testing spend during rule transitions.
