From the moment the Duryea brothers built the first American automobile in 1895, more than 1,900 registered automakers emerged within five years—most evolving from horse-drawn carriage workshops and relying on handcrafted production, with 99% manufacturing fewer than 100 vehicles a year. Yet by 1908, only 253 remained, as Ford’s Model T and its breakthrough in standardized parts and assembly-line production rapidly eliminated firms unable to scale. History never repeats itself, but it often rhymes.
A similar pattern appeared in China in 2018, when more than 2,000 chip design and packaging firms materialized almost overnight. The consolidation logic behind America’s early automotive industry offers a useful lens for anticipating the trajectory of China’s EV sector today—though now shaped by electrification, automation, intelligence, and scenario-driven applications. These forces will determine which companies emerge as global leaders by 2035.
History as a Mirror: Why the US, Japan, and Europe Ended Up Where They Did in the Auto Industry
The evolution of the U.S., Japanese, and European automotive industries reveals three distinct development logics that continue to shape today’s global competition. The American trajectory followed a path of industrialization, vertical integration, and financial leverage, eventually settling into an anti-monopoly equilibrium. Ford exemplified extreme vertical integration and large-scale standardization, while GM built dominance through multi-brand consolidation and platform synergy. In China, BYD reflects Ford’s integration logic, achieving one of the world’s highest levels of in-house component development, and Geely mirrors GM’s global multi-brand strategy with its unique ecosystem spanning vehicles, chips, operating systems, and software. Li Auto’s rapid ascent through technological leaps and precise market segmentation resembles Chrysler’s historic role, though its long-term ability to evolve from a strong product company into a true system-level ecosystem leader remains uncertain.
Japan’s rise was built on lean manufacturing, tightly coordinated supply-chain clusters, and export orientation, enabled by a network of hidden technology champions such as Denso and Aisin. A comparable layer is now emerging in China with CATL, Huawei, Horizon Robotics, and Desay Electric. Yet a critical difference distinguishes the Chinese path: national policy requires core technologies—including operating systems, autonomous-driving algorithms, and chips—to remain domestically controllable. As a result, pure OEM or ODM models that defined parts of Japan’s ecosystem are not viable in China; every large automaker must maintain a technology-sovereignty anchor point.
Germany’s automotive strength stems from high-end brand equity, an engineering-driven culture, and long-standing alliances. Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW leveraged these advantages to dominate global premium markets. But their slow adaptation to electrification and intelligent mobility highlights a structural weakness: the absence of large-scale data, usage scenarios, and digital infrastructure that now drive competitive advantage. China, despite lacking century-old brands, benefits from exactly those assets—enabling rapid iteration and deployment of intelligent and electric systems.
Taken together, the emerging shape of global leadership in the automotive sector is clear. Winning players must ultimately command a complete technology closed loop—from batteries and electric systems to autonomous driving, chips, operating systems, and data. They must extend their reach beyond vehicles into broader ecosystems spanning energy, mobility services, lifestyle integration, and AI. They must develop true globalization capabilities across manufacturing, distribution, compliance, and local R&D. And they must align strategically with national policy priorities to ensure long-term resilience. These are the determinants of who becomes a lasting global automotive giant in the next era.
The Final Chapter of 2035 — A Prediction
The Final Chapter of 2035 will depict a Chinese auto industry entering its most concentrated and unforgiving phase. Industry leaders such as He Xiaopeng, Yu Chengdong, and Wang Chuanfu have already warned that the coming decade will witness an intense elimination cycle, in which only a handful of technologically sovereign, globally competitive private or mixed-ownership automakers will remain. Their remarks will reflect a sector that will be shaped not by incremental competition, but by a decisive struggle for scale, capital, and innovation capacity. As the market consolidates, firms without transnational reach, robust ecosystems, or proprietary technology will steadily lose relevance or be absorbed into stronger groups.
By 2035, this consolidation will likely leave China with roughly five dominant private or mixed-ownership automakers—entities capable of competing globally across electrification, intelligence, and software-defined mobility. Their rise will be driven by integrated supply chains, aggressive innovation cycles, and strategic international expansion. However, this outcome will not be guaranteed. The trajectory of the industry will remain vulnerable to black swan events, including breakthroughs such as mass-produced solid-state batteries, geopolitical shocks such as a Taiwan Strait or South China Sea conflict that could trigger embargoes on China, and disruptive policy changes such as the expansion of global carbon tariffs. Under these volatile conditions, the final configuration of the Chinese automotive landscape will be shaped not only by competition, but also by resilience in the face of uncertainty.
BYD’s Rise as China’s Ford: Total Chain Control and Global Cost Power
BYD is poised to emerge as a transformative force in global electrification, drawing on a strategic model that will parallel the integrated might of the Ford River Rouge complex, the discipline of Toyota’s lean production, and the negotiating leverage exemplified by CATL’s supply-chain power. This combination will define BYD’s next phase as it moves from a vertically integrated automaker to a foundational provider of new-energy vehicle infrastructure.
The company will continue to expand the world’s highest self-production rate in the automotive sector, bringing core systems—IGBTs, SiC components, Blade Batteries, DM-i/DM-p hybrid systems, the e-Platform, chassis technologies, and intelligent-driving modules—under one roof. This depth of control will allow BYD to push its per-vehicle cost structure lower, sustain high gross margins even in aggressive price-war environments, and reinforce the scale advantages that few global competitors will be able to match.
At the same time, BYD will accelerate its overseas footprint. With factories in Thailand, Brazil, and Hungary already underway, the company will rapidly expand its presence across Southeast Asia and Latin America. As key technologies such as the e-Platform and Blade Battery become available to external customers—including major groups like FAW and Mercedes-Benz—BYD will evolve from being viewed primarily as an OEM to being recognized as a global automotive infrastructure supplier.
Challenges will remain. BYD’s intelligent-driving stack will still depend partly on partners such as Momenta and DJI, leaving it behind the end-to-end algorithmic capabilities of Huawei and XPeng. Its brand premium will also lag the industry’s upper tier, with limited traction above the 300,000-RMB segment. Even so, the scale of its vertical integration and its expanding global technology footprint will position BYD to shape the underlying architecture of new-energy mobility worldwide. Ultimately, BYD will stand not merely as “China’s Ford,” but as a foundational utility of the electric-vehicle era—supplying essential platforms, components, and capabilities much like a global provider of “water, electricity, and gas” for the industry.
Geely’s Rise as China’s GM: Multi-Brand Integration & Ecosystem
Geely Holding Group is poised to emerge as the closest analogue to a “Chinese General Motors,” built on a tightly structured multi-brand matrix and an expanding global ecosystem. Benchmarking GM’s multi-brand synergy, the Sony-style mobile ecosystem, and a SoftBank Vision Fund–like strategic layout, the group will increasingly use brand diversification and technology integration as the foundation of a scalable international mobility platform.
Geely will maintain one of the most complete brand pyramids in the industry. At the base, Geely Galaxy will address the mass market, while JK will target the mid-range smart-car segment with the SEA architecture, self-developed intelligent-driving capabilities, and a European production foothold. Volvo will continue to operate as a global premium anchor rooted in safety leadership, Nordic design, and established European channels. Lotus will move further into the high-performance electric segment with UK-driven R&D, and Lynk & Co will strengthen its youth-oriented positioning through the CMA platform, a European factory, and subscription-based pilots. The smart brand will reinforce Geely’s presence in global micro-mobility through its Sino-German joint-venture structure.
Underneath this brand matrix, Geely will deepen its platform integration. The SEA architecture will support vehicles spanning A0 to D segments, while the in-house “Dragon Eagle One” chip and the Flyme Auto system co-developed with Meizu will form the backbone of an integrated mobile-phone × car × AIoT ecosystem. The group’s globalization strategy will further mature as Volvo, Proton, Lotus, and JK’s European facilities form a closed loop of R&D, manufacturing, and sales across continents. Capital leverage—through Li Shufu Group, Xingji Times, Qianjiang Motorcycle, and Cao Cao Mobility—will create a four-dimensional network encompassing manufacturing, chips, operating systems, and mobility services.
Still, Geely will face material risks. Managing such a broad multi-brand portfolio will introduce significant coordination complexity and the possibility of internal friction. In addition, while the company will advance its intelligent-driving algorithms, it will continue to rely partly on Mobileye and DJI, leaving its self-developed stack trailing leading domestic competitors such as Huawei and XPeng.
Ultimately, Geely will position itself not merely as a vehicle manufacturer but as a global intelligent-mobility ecosystem operator. Vehicles will serve as the entry point, while long-term value will increasingly come from subscription-based services, energy-management platforms, data monetization, and brand licensing.
Huawei ICT–Auto Fusion: China’s Apple+Bosch Trajectory
Huawei’s expanding role in the automotive sector will reshape the industry by merging the logic of consumer ICT ecosystems with next-generation intelligent mobility. The company will not manufacture cars, but it will define them—much like how operating-system owners define smartphones. Prediction: Benchmarks: Apple (iOS ecosystem) + Bosch (Tier-1 technology dominance) + Google (Android open source but GMS closed loop) will frame Huawei’s future position as it blends ecosystem control, deep tech capability, and platform-level influence.
Huawei’s full-stack strengths will place it at the center of China’s intelligent-vehicle transition. Its self-developed hardware—ranging from the MDC computing platform to LiDAR, radars, and advanced sensor suites—will integrate tightly with software layers such as AOS for autonomous driving, VOS for vehicle control, and the HarmonyOS cockpit. Algorithms built on ADS 3.0 and trained on over a billion kilometers of Chinese road data will further accelerate performance gains. These will be supported by Huawei’s chip portfolio, from Ascend for training to Kirin for inference and Balong for communications. Surrounding it all, the company’s control over more than 800 million HarmonyOS devices will create a seamless “Human–Vehicle–Home” ecosystem that automakers will find difficult to replicate.
This technological and ecosystem leverage will redefine Huawei’s business relationships. The Smart Car Selection model will elevate Huawei from a component supplier to a co-branding and product-defining partner. Seres, with the deepest integration but weaker manufacturing fundamentals, will likely become increasingly dependent on Huawei’s platform. Changan’s Avita brand—with state-owned resources, Huawei’s technology stack, and CATL’s battery advantage—will likely emerge as the flagship Huawei-aligned automaker. Chery and BAIC, operating at a shallower level of cooperation, will not sustain comparable momentum.
Ultimately, Huawei will position itself as a three-in-one hegemon of the intelligent-vehicle era: operating system + chip + algorithm, analogous to a combined Qualcomm, Google, and Nvidia for the automotive domain. Automakers that choose not to adopt Huawei’s solutions will, in all likelihood, face the same structural disadvantage as smartphone manufacturers that refused to embrace Android—technically constrained and commercially marginalized.
Changan’s Mixed-Ownership Path: Integration & National Access
Changan Automobile will increasingly stand out as a showcase of mixed-ownership reform, demonstrating how state capital and market-driven mechanisms can be effectively integrated. Having introduced partners such as Huawei, CATL, Aulton, and Horizon Robotics, the company will solidify a governance structure that blends central-enterprise stability with private-sector efficiency. This hybrid model will give Changan broader strategic determination, more flexible resource deployment, and privileged access to national-team channels including policy pilots, L3 testing pathways, and high-precision map permissions. Within this context, its long-term trajectory will align with the strengths of global counterparts—Benchmarking: Toyota (Supply Chain Management) + GM (Alliance Cooperation) + CNPC (Energy Network).
The company’s three-tier brand architecture will mature into a coordinated ecosystem. Qiyuan will target mainstream households and directly confront products like BYD Qin. Shenlan will continue to evolve as a youth-oriented, technology-forward brand spanning both range-extended and pure-electric lines. Avita, supported most deeply by Huawei, will position itself as the high-end intelligence spearhead. Meanwhile, Changan’s collaboration with CATL on the “Chocolate Battery Swapping” system will expand into an operational network, reinforcing Changan’s foothold in energy services and helping it converge mobility, infrastructure, and energy ecosystems.
As overseas markets diversify, Changan will deepen its presence in the Middle East, South America, and ASEAN, leveraging Belt and Road infrastructure ties to build supply chains and brand influence abroad. However, its market-based mechanisms will still trail the agility of firms like Geely or BYD, and its dependence on Huawei and CATL will continue to constrain the depth of its self-developed technologies. Even so, in scenarios of global technological decoupling, the Changan–Avita system will increasingly function as a strategically secure backup. It will be positioned to operate independently of external supply chains and serve as a stabilizing force under China’s bottom-line thinking, ultimately becoming both a national strategic asset and a benchmark for high-end intelligent mobility.
Chery Forecast: Export Power + Cost Edge in a Suzuki–Hyundai Fusion
Chery Automobile will increasingly resemble a fusion of the qualities that propelled Suzuki, Hyundai-Kia, and Volkswagen to global relevance. Drawing on benchmarks such as Suzuki’s dominance in emerging markets, Hyundai-Kia’s blend of value and rising quality, and Volkswagen’s disciplined platformization, Chery will position itself as a mass-market force shaped by export scale, relentless cost efficiency, and deep localization.
The company will strengthen its role as China’s most stable global automaker. It will continue to lead passenger-vehicle exports—an achievement already sustained for more than two decades—and it will consolidate its presence in major non-Western markets where its share already exceeds 15%. This expansion will be supported by more than ten overseas KD plants in regions such as Latin America, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia, enabling Chery to bypass trade barriers and anchor itself in local industrial ecosystems.
Chery’s platform-based strategy will become a central engine of its competitiveness. High-reuse architectures—ranging from the Kunpeng hybrid powertrain to the Mars off-road architecture and E0X pure-electric platform—will allow the company to control costs while scaling product families rapidly. Simultaneously, Chery will accelerate intelligent-vehicle upgrades through partnerships such as its work with Horizon Robotics and the rollout of its in-house Lion cockpit and end-to-end NOA capabilities. Unlike peers that chase luxury market positioning, Chery will maintain strategic discipline by focusing on the global mainstream segment between 100,000 and 250,000 RMB, where demand is large and price elasticity is high.
Supported by flexible powertrain options, strong government backing, and significantly higher brand recognition across much of the Global South than China’s premium EV startups, Chery will sustain a smoother transition from fuel to hybrid to pure electric models. By building on its export network, cost-optimized platforms, and localized manufacturing base, Chery will evolve into a leading driver of mass-market electrification in developing economies. If electric-vehicle penetration in these regions reaches 50% by 2035 as expected, Chery will stand as a credible candidate to become the “Toyota of developing countries”—a global, value-driven brand shaped by the same forces that once lifted Suzuki, Hyundai-Kia, and Volkswagen.
The Fate of the Fallen: A Realistic Look at the Five Waves of Industry Cleansing
China’s automotive industry will undergo a prolonged and unforgiving consolidation as electrification, intelligentization, and ecosystem competition reshape the entire competitive order. The restructuring will unfold through five overlapping waves of cleansing, each removing companies whose structural weaknesses can no longer be disguised by a growing market. These forces will converge into an endgame in which only a handful of firms will retain technological sovereignty, ecosystem reach, and sustainable economic models.
The first wave will sweep away pure OEM assemblers—companies that lack core technologies, brand control, and a defensible product system. Their dependence on outsourced design, supply chains, and platform engineering will render them fragile once cost pressures and technological thresholds tighten. As seen with early asset-light ventures such as Byton or Aiways, similar firms in the future will collapse under cash-flow strain, fragmented supply chains, and operational instability. Their facilities will be absorbed by contract manufacturers, their licenses will be repurposed, and their teams will disperse into the lower tiers of the industrial ecosystem.
The second wave will eliminate traditional joint ventures and domestic brands that fail to break free from fuel-vehicle path dependency. Companies attempting to preserve their legacy gasoline business while launching electric portfolios will be trapped in contradictory strategies. With declining utilization rates, rigid dealer structures, and inefficient organizational transitions, these firms will face factory shutdowns, shrinking workforces, and accelerated marginalization. Many will survive only as internal cash generators rather than as growth engines.
The third wave will target automakers that lack full-stack intelligent-driving capabilities. As software becomes the primary determinant of user value, companies that outsource perception, decision-making, and data loops will lose algorithmic autonomy and will rely on suppliers for OTA updates and iteration. Without control of data and the intelligence stack, technically impressive but hollowed-out brands will fail to keep pace and will be absorbed by ecosystem players such as Huawei, Xiaomi, or other technology-driven conglomerates.
The fourth wave will strike manufacturers that excel at engineering but fail to build or join a broader digital ecosystem. Firms that continue to rely solely on single-vehicle margins—without integrating mobility services, smart-home interfaces, or subscription-based value expansion—will be cornered by players operating in multi-terminal ecosystems. If companies like Xpeng or Leapmotor do not establish deep ecosystem linkages, they will risk becoming technologically competent but strategically isolated, ultimately being folded into larger alliances as sub-brands or component suppliers.
The fifth wave, unfolding in the early 2030s, will engulf asset-heavy autonomous-driving operators. Ambitious fleets, battery-swap infrastructures, and self-operated mobility networks will face long investment cycles and deteriorating financing conditions. Once capital tightens, operators pursuing expensive Robotaxi platforms will fall into cash-flow cliffs. In contrast, asset-light mobility platforms and distributed-ownership models will prevail, pushing autonomous-driving companies toward acquisition by ecosystem giants and mobility platforms.
Across these five waves—overlapping between 2025 and 2035—the industry will contract, concentrate, and restructure at unprecedented speed. By 2035, fewer than 10 percent of new-energy entrants will remain independent. Among them, only Li Auto, assuming it successfully completes its intelligent-driving stack and ecosystem integration, will likely retain full autonomy. Others, including NIO and Xpeng, will likely join larger industrial alliances or be absorbed through strategic mergers as the industry consolidates into a small circle of ecosystem-anchored winners.
Final Landscape Prediction: Three Giant Archetypes Shaping Global EV Dominance
China’s intelligent electric vehicle sector will ultimately be defined by three distinct types of giants, each rising from a different strategic foundation. Together, they will form a multidimensional industrial structure capable of meeting global demands for cost efficiency, intelligent experience, and systemic safety.
The first class of leaders will emerge from infrastructure-driven enterprises, represented by BYD. These companies will build their strength on full-stack independent R&D, rigorous cost control, and vertically integrated supply chains spanning batteries, motors, electronic controls, and even chips. Their model will continue to rely on hardware scale, reinforced by the external supply of high-value core components. By 2035, this group will hold close to 28% of the global market, establishing itself as a dominant force.
A second cluster will form around ecosystem-platform enterprises, including Geely and the vehicle brand matrix empowered by Huawei’s intelligent full-stack systems. These companies will depend on multi-brand coordination, self-developed automotive operating systems, and comprehensive service ecosystems that will enable revenue through software subscriptions, user-data monetization, and platform-level sharing. By 2035, Geely will contribute about 15% of global share, while Huawei-supported brands will collectively reach 22%, making this group a central driver of software-defined mobility.
The third category will consist of national strategic enterprises, exemplified by Changan and Chery. Their strength will lie in policy alignment, resilient supply-chain architectures, and mature channels for government and overseas institutional cooperation. Their business models will prioritize domestic procurement needs and large-scale exports to emerging markets across the Belt and Road, Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa. By 2035, Changan and Chery will secure 8% and 12% of the global market respectively, forming a combined 20% and anchoring China’s global strategic deployment.
Collectively, these three types of enterprises will stand as the pillars of China’s new-energy vehicle landscape. The leading five players will account for more than 85% of China’s output and over 80% of the global market, echoing—but surpassing—the concentration once seen in the United States. What will emerge is not merely dominance in car manufacturing, but a higher-order transformation: the operation and orchestration of mobile, intelligent lifestyles on a global scale.
Final Thoughts
History may not repeat, but it often rhymes. Just as the Ford Model T democratized mobility and later Chrysler’s advances redefined automotive technology, today’s transition from affordable EVs to large-scale intelligent driving platforms signals a deeper shift: the contest is no longer about who builds the car, but who ultimately defines what a car is. As vehicles evolve into “wheeled robots” linked to AI-assisted interfaces, digital payment systems, and coordinated national vehicle-road-cloud networks, manufacturing strength becomes merely the foundation—ecosystem sovereignty becomes the true strategic high ground.
China’s emerging industry leaders, together with a fast-maturing Huawei-centered ecosystem, are shaping this endgame. The coming elimination round will be a comprehensive test of technology depth, scale, and global reach. Consumers will benefit from higher quality and lower costs; companies will survive only if they align rapidly with policy, sustain heavy R&D investment, and balance short-term resilience with long-term vision. Behind this intense competitive cycle may lie the genuine golden age of China’s automotive industry.