China Price Index: Structural Capacity Adjustments Drive Price Volatility for Glyphosate and Glufosinate
2 de julho de 2025 Nota do editor: O escritor colaborador David Li oferece um instantâneo das tendências atuais de preços para os principais herbicidas, fungicidas e inseticidas no mercado agroquímico chinês em seu Índice de preços da China. Below he also discusses how glyphosate prices are rebounding amid tighter supply, why glufosinate struggles with weak demand and regulation shifts, and other key trends shaping 2025 buying decisions for agrochemicals.
Ver tudo
Purchasing decisions are almost impossible to make at price bottom, and more realistically, buying behavior occurs before or after price turning points. As buyers, we only need to recognize where was the true turning points.
Recently, volatility on the supply side of pesticides is increasing in China. In terms of basic raw materials, pyridine supply tension continues. Downstream pesticide producers have been concentrating on stocking up in stages, resulting in a certain scheduling tension for pyridine downstream products. Therefore, the price of pyridine downstream pesticide active ingredient is showing a U-shaped stabilization trend. For example, the current price of paraquat is under high-cost pressure, so the mainstream paraquat producers scheduling production basically to the end of July.
From August 2025, China’s domestic stockpiling and northern hemisphere purchases in the second half of the year may positively impact paraquat offers. China’s plant capacity may lag behind overseas demand and affect paraquat supply in the 2025/2026 purchasing season, which is expected to face steadily higher prices as paraquat supply is mainly dominated by even production. August may be the best time for overseas customers to stockpile paraquat raw material in China. By the end of 2025 and the beginning of 2026, when China’s winter stockpile overlaid with North America’s demand occurs at the same time, China’s paraquat AI EXW price may return to 2.5 USD/Kg level.
The bromine market is running relatively stable. The supply of bromine is affected by the stage of environmental protection inspections, and the market inventory is under some pressure. However, the long-term capacity release is still relatively optimistic. Some downstream products are entering the off-season, especially the purchasing season in South America is coming to an end before the end of July, so the market transaction atmosphere is light. This is also the main reason why the price of diquat has stabilized after a period of tension for exporting.
In addition to the impact of upstream raw materials on Chinese AI prices, Chinese pesticide companies are generally adjusting their operation rates in 2025. This is increasing the likelihood of higher prices for the supply market. A new balance between supply and demand is gradually taking shape.
Glifosato prices in China have shown an upward trend in the recent past. This is mainly due to the reduction of inventory in the supply market and the concentrated release of demand in South America. Brazilian buyers have shifted from just-in-time purchases to one-time purchases of large quantity. This has had a significant impact on Chinese glyphosate producers. The supply-side scheduling has led to a gradual pullback in China’s glyphosate prices from February 2025 after bottoming out. Glyphosate prices are expected to remain in a stable price pullback until August.
For the supply of glufosinato in China, the market competition is chaotic. Overseas demand is sluggish and the so-called trend of glufosinate replacing glyphosate is not likely happening. Overseas customers are more likely to utilize glufosinate for resistance management in the field.
For example, the compounding of glufosinate with clethodim is a commonly used co-formulation. The price of the key AI like clethodim in the co-formulation, has risen sharply, which has also led to an increase in the price of brand products with glufosinate and clethodim in the overseas market at the same time. Therefore, the cost-effectiveness of the glufosinate formulation in the market has decreased.
In the short term, there is no possibility of a significant increase in the supply of glufosinate. This also affects the demand increase of glufosinate market on the side. Overall, the continuous low price of glufosinate cannot be exchanged for an increase in sales volume, as the various factors affecting demand are becoming more complex.
On the other hand, it is worth noting that China is in the process of developing a standard for chlorine content in glufosinate formulations. In the future, glufosinate formulations from the Chinese market will have to be formulated from the AI and not directly from the unpurified MUP (ICAMA stipulates that MUPs should in principle also be formulated from the AI).
With the increase in exports of formulated products from China, the Chinese government is stepping up its efforts to monitor the quality of formulations and to manage the quality in conjunction with the Chinese Customs. When the Chinese standard for chloride ions in glufosinate formulations is introduced, overseas customers purchasing glufosinate formulations will also strengthen the monitoring the chloride ion content of their suppliers’ formulations. What can be expected is that the quality of China’s glufosinate formulations will further develop toward standardization and high quality. So the price of Chinese glufosinate formulations will also have a certain degree of upward space.
Similar to herbicides, the production of mancozeb in China is relatively stable. Moncozeb prices in China have also remained firm as demand from South America continues to be released. Spot supply of moncozeb in the Chinese market is low as South American customers move from fragmented just-in-time orders to long-term orders in 2025, thereby locking in supply. This is the main factor influencing the continued upward trend in moncozeb prices.
Tight supply of 1,2,4-triazole has eased, so prices of triazole fungicides were generally stable. Prices of prothioconazole are facing great challenges due to the gradual release of production capacity supplied by China. It is expected that the price of this product will continue to run in the low status in 2025-2026, and the price of prothioconazole may still have room for downward movement.
In pesticides, the most attention was paid to the impact of the Youdao Chemical explosion on chlorantraniliprole (CTPR) in China. The impact of the accident on the price of the CTPR AI is indirect, as the utilization rate of Youdao Chemical was not very high before the explosion. Currently, there is sufficient supply of the key intermediate K acid in the Chinese market, but the bottleneck of supply is K amine. The upstream nitrification intermediates of K amine are not able to ensure sufficient raw material production by various manufacturers due to the hazardous nature of the production. The shortage of upstream nitrification intermediates of K amine may continue to support the price of CTPR in China. In particular, the price of CTPR in China may peak after the release of winter storage demand in the local Chinese market at the end of 2025.
Chinese abamectin producers are in a tight balance in terms of operation rate adjustment, which continues to push up Chinese abamectin prices. Abamectin benzoate producers are lining up production orders, and high offers are in a tight game with market demand. The cost of pyrethroid insecticides is on the rise, mainly due to the increase in the cost of key intermediates.
Compared with the same period last year, the pattern and situation of China’s AI supply is undergoing a profound change. With the exit of small and medium-sized production capacity, the concentration of the Chinese industry is advancing with great efficiency.
However, low price is not a sufficient condition for tier one suppliers. Analyzing the overall situation of Chinese enterprises, having independent technology R&D as well as the support of the whole industry chain of upstream raw materials is the root of the enterprise’s sustainable development ability. In addition, breakthroughs in high-value markets and more services are enabling Chinese pesticide enterprises with long-term strategies and globalization vision to break out of the trap of low-priced red sea competition.
Even more promising is the fact that China’s pesticide administration is strengthening the protection of intellectual property rights. Respect for IP and penalties for stealing process IP from other Chinese suppliers will be more conducive to the emergence of continuous innovation in the Chinese pesticide industry. The establishment of quality standards and the control of key impurities are actively helping overseas customers to obtain better quality Chinese products. This shows the responsibility of the world’s second largest economy.
The only unsatisfactory aspect is that the process of mutual acceptance of data (MAD) between China and overseas is basically at a standstill at present. The new patented products of multinational companies cannot be marketed in China. Instead, Chinese pesticide companies can only choose overseas GLP laboratories for GLP data preparation. The disruption of international organizations’ accreditation of Chinese GLP laboratories is the main reason for MAD’s predicament. In a highly uncertain global economic and geopolitical environment, removing barriers between the world and China is more conducive to offsetting risks on both sides than “building a wall of separation.”
Halfway through 2025, gaining an in-depth understanding of China’s pesticide supply market and influencing the country’s supply is becoming an important strategic component for multinational companies. Price volatility and the complexity of influencing factors are in a double helix. Risk management and price forecasting are being weighted at the same level.
Receba a Newsletter hoje mesmo!
