The photovoltaic giant's energy storage book profit is nearly 10 billion, but why are the ones making money Pylontech, Gotion High-tech, and Haibo Sichuang?

Article | Foreseeing Energy

The energy storage financial report for 2025 presents a bizarre picture: on one side, leading photovoltaic companies like Trina Solar and Jinko Solar are collectively losing over 13 billion yuan in their main businesses, while on the other side, pure energy storage companies like Pylontech and Gotion High-tech are experiencing double-digit profit growth.

This profit “dislocation” is no accident. When Longi Green Energy finally decided to acquire Jingkong Energy and complete its energy storage portfolio in November last year, the market suddenly realized—it’s easy for PV companies to enter the energy storage race, but making money from it is another story.

Among the 18 energy storage-related companies that have released performance briefings, the most profitable are not the integrated giants shouting “solar-storage synergy,” but players like Pylontech and Haibo Sichen, which have long been rooted in niche markets. Pylontech’s revenue grew by 57.53% year-over-year, with net profit attributable to shareholders increasing by over 100%; Haibo Sichen’s revenue surpassed 11.6 billion yuan, with net profit up over 40%.

Meanwhile, Trina Solar lost nearly 7 billion yuan, Jinko Solar lost over 6.7 billion yuan, and Atus, though profitable with 1.021 billion yuan, saw a 54.56% decline year-over-year. These figures reveal an awkward reality: photovoltaic companies rushing into energy storage have yet to carve out a profitable path.

Comparison of 2025 Performance Briefings of Related Companies

(Foreseeing Energy compiled from public information)

The “Face” and “Core” of Storage for Module Manufacturers

Trina Solar emphasized in its performance briefing that “storage business overseas shipments have achieved rapid growth, with significant market share increase.” Jinko Solar also stated that “storage business has seen rapid development, with notable results from solar-storage synergy.” But a full review of the complete financial reports shows that these glossy descriptions mask the bleeding of core business.

Where is the problem? Module manufacturers are indeed working on storage, but they are still operating with a “component mindset”—relying on scale, low prices, and large clients. The true profit pools in energy storage are hidden in niche markets like overseas household storage and industrial and commercial storage, which require deep channel development.

Gotion High-tech’s performance confirms this. This company, focused on inverters and storage systems, achieved a net profit attributable to shareholders of 136 million yuan in 2025, nearly doubling from the previous year. The performance briefing explicitly states that the growth benefited from “the implementation of Australian household storage subsidies and the European market emerging from inventory adjustment.” These are not orders won through domestic bidding but profits earned through overseas channels.

Pylontech’s explanation is even more straightforward: “Benefiting from the recovery of international energy storage demand and rising demand in the domestic energy storage and lightweight power markets.” In other words, making money in storage depends not on channel empowerment from PV module manufacturers but on independent overseas market capabilities and deep segmentation.

Atus is a particularly interesting case. The company’s net profit in 2025 was 1.021 billion yuan, down over 50% year-over-year, yet it remains one of the few profitable PV giants. The performance briefing revealed a key point: “A large number of energy storage projects and contracts accumulated earlier are now entering the harvesting phase.” Atus’s foray into storage was not an extension from modules but a premeditated move from early overseas power plant operations. This “genetic” advantage cannot be replicated simply by acquiring an energy storage integrator.

Who is Truly Profiting in the Energy Storage Race?

Lithium battery energy storage system prices have fallen nearly 80% over three years. In 2025, the bid prices for grid-connected systems dropped to an average of 0.44 yuan/Wh, with some orders even below 0.4 yuan/Wh. In this price war, only two types of companies can still make money.

One type includes Pylontech and Gotion High-tech, which focus on niche overseas markets. They do not compete on price with large domestic storage providers but instead capitalize on the profit margins in overseas household and industrial storage. Pylontech’s revenue grew by 57.53% in 2025, with net profit increasing over 100%. Although gross margins are under pressure, absolute values remain substantial.

The other type is Haibo Sichen, a system integrator that has established a leading position in the domestic large-scale storage market. The performance briefing shows that Haibo Sichen “seized the historical opportunity of rapid growth in the domestic energy storage market” and “holds a relatively high market share.” With revenue of 11.604 billion yuan and net profit of 949 million yuan, with a net profit margin of about 8.2%, it is already doing well in this price-competitive industry.

Earo Energy provides a contrasting example. This household storage company’s revenue grew by 32.84%, but net profit fell by 43.16%, falling into the typical “revenue growth but profit decline” trap. The reason is that “overall gross profit margins in emerging markets like Asia, Africa, and Australia are relatively low.” This clearly shows that making money in storage depends not only on market size but also on market structure—the gross profit margin in European household storage far exceeds that in Asian and African markets.

The differentiation among lithium equipment companies is also noteworthy. Autowell’s revenue and net profit declined due to impacts from PV industry adjustments, while Liyuan Heng and Hangke Technology achieved double growth. The industry’s prosperity is not evenly distributed among all companies.

The Survival Rules After Policy Reductions

In 2025, a fundamental change occurred in the energy storage industry: the mandatory storage policy was abolished, and capacity electricity price mechanisms were gradually implemented. This means storage projects are no longer just “decorations” to meet grid connection requirements but must truly profit from peak-valley arbitrage and ancillary services.

This shift demands a completely different approach from companies. Previously, project acquisition relied on relationships with power generation groups and low-price bidding. Now, projects must calculate IRR and demonstrate revenue models. Zhi Guang Electric explicitly stated in its performance forecast that its commissioned independent storage power stations are performing well and generating substantial cash flow.

Nanshan Technology’s performance also confirms this trend. This power station developer’s revenue and net profit increased simultaneously, relying not on equipment sales but on operational capabilities.

In contrast, some PV giants, despite advocating for solar-storage synergy for years, have yet to see substantial profits from storage. Trina Solar lost nearly 7 billion yuan, Jinko Solar over 6.7 billion yuan, and the modest growth in storage is insignificant compared to the bleeding in their main PV businesses.

Longi Green Energy only entered the storage market last November through the acquisition of Jingkong Energy, having previously bet on hydrogen energy as a “second curve.” This strategic hesitation caused Longi to miss the critical period for storage industry layout. Now, the storage market has shifted from blue ocean to red ocean, and with Jingkong Energy, Longi faces well-established competitors like Sungrow and CATL.

Profits in the energy storage industry are increasingly concentrated among companies with genuine technological barriers and channel capabilities. According to Polaris Storage Network, among 130 listed energy storage-related companies, less than 40% show performance growth, with over one-third in loss.

This data indicates that energy storage is no longer the “who enters, who profits” track it once was.

In 2025, the collective entry of PV giants into storage coincides with the industry shifting from rapid growth to professional competition. Overcapacity, price wars, and policy pullbacks are forcing a brutal industry cleanup. According to Carbon Sui Storage Network, more than 30 small and medium-sized integrators exited the market in the first half of 2025.

The energy storage companies that will survive are not those relying on PV “blood transfusions” but those with pricing power in niche markets, overseas channel experience, and project operation expertise. The profit growth of companies like Pylontech has already drawn a clear dividing line in this industry.