01 China MAP Market Review in H1 2026

1.1 China MAP Market Overview

In the first half of 2026, China’s domestic monoammonium phosphate (MAP) market was characterized by persistently high costs, phased supply-demand mismatches, rising prices amid volatility, and widespread industry losses. The market was mainly driven by the interaction of three core factors: upstream raw material costs, domestic agricultural seasonal cycles, and export control policies.

Price upside was consistently constrained by weak domestic demand and export controls. Only cost pressure and adjustments to policy guidance prices supported phased price increases, and the market did not develop into a sustained strong uptrend.

According to FDD data, as of June 30, 2026, China’s domestic 55% powder MAP index stood at 4,435.00, the 55% granular MAP index stood at 4,450.00, and the 58% powder MAP index stood at 4,710.00.

In the first quarter, the domestic MAP market generally moved from stability to strength. In January, sulfur prices fluctuated at high levels and sulfuric acid prices also strengthened, keeping production costs under pressure. However, downstream spring farming restocking had not yet started on a large scale, and compound fertilizer producers had already completed phased raw material restocking earlier, so procurement was mainly need-based replenishment. Producers mainly executed earlier pending orders, market supply tightened, and prices showed no significant changes under the guidance of policies ensuring supply and price stability.

In February, affected by the Spring Festival holiday, the market entered a temporary rest phase. Producers mainly delivered earlier orders, and market participants maintained a strong wait-and-see stance.

Entering March, geopolitical conflicts sharply pushed up raw material costs. Sulfur prices surged historically due to sharply reduced imports and continuous port inventory drawdowns. Sulfuric acid followed higher, further intensifying cost pressure. Some producers suspended sales or became reluctant to sell, circulating supply tightened, and prices rose rapidly. In late March, policies to ensure supply and stabilize prices, together with tighter export controls, led major producers to lower quotations, bringing the rally to an abrupt halt and returning the market to a high-level stalemate.

Overall, MAP prices stayed high throughout the first quarter without any significant correction, forming a narrow fluctuation pattern of cost support and policy-controlled upside.

In the second quarter, the market remained in a high-level stalemate amid deep competition between cost support and weak demand. In April, spring farming demand still provided support from some tail-end orders, and the market consolidated at high levels. From May onward, as spring farming ended in major markets such as Northeast China, demand for MAP in summer high-nitrogen fertilizer production weakened noticeably. Downstream compound fertilizer producers maintained need-based procurement, with insufficient momentum for large-scale concentrated restocking.

However, cost pressure did not ease and instead increased. Sulfur prices continued rising from the beginning of the year and exceeded RMB 10,000/tonne in mid-June, setting a historical high. Sulfuric acid prices also moved higher, while phosphate rock prices remained firm. The three major raw materials all operated at high levels, providing a solid cost floor for MAP.

02 China MAP Capacity Analysis in H1 2026

2.1 China MAP Output Analysis

In the first half of this year, MAP industry output rose first and then fell. According to FDD data, total MAP output from January to June 2026 was approximately 5.6778 million tonnes, up 56,700 tonnes from the same period last year, representing a year-on-year increase of 1.01%.

Production maintained steady growth at the beginning of the year. However, as raw material costs surged and producer losses intensified, industry capacity utilization continued to decline, leading to a significant contraction in output in the second quarter.

2.2 China MAP Market Operating Rate Analysis

The MAP industry operating rate also rose first and then fell this year. According to FDD data, the average monthly operating rate of China’s MAP market from January to June 2026 was approximately 58.07%, up 0.96 percentage points from the same period last year.

The domestic MAP industry operating rate showed a sustained downward trend, mainly affected by high raw material costs and severe production losses. Producers were forced to actively reduce loads or suspend production. Enterprises responsible for supply protection maintained high-load operations during the spring farming season. However, as cost pressure intensified and demand weakened, overall industry capacity utilization gradually declined, and more producers in major producing regions arranged maintenance and production cuts.

03 China MAP Export Analysis in H1 2026

3.1 China MAP Export Volume from January to May

From January to May 2026, China’s MAP exports showed clear characteristics of moderate total growth, a high-to-low monthly rhythm, and near stagnation after policy tightening. According to customs data, China’s cumulative MAP export volume from January to May 2026 was 111,800 tonnes, up 22.40% from 91,300 tonnes in the same period last year.

Exports in May were only 200 tonnes, hitting a new low in recent years. Overall, MAP exports maintained growth in total volume from January to May, but under the dual pressure of continuously tightening domestic supply protection policies and intensified competition in the international market, the export window rapidly narrowed from March onward and had nearly fully stalled by May. This pattern also reflects China’s clear policy orientation of prioritizing domestic demand between food security and resource exports.

3.2 China MAP Export Destinations from January to May

According to customs data, the top ten MAP export destinations from January to May this year were Brazil, Taiwan, China, Australia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey, Mexico, Pakistan and the UAE.

Their shares of total export volume were 74%, 6%, 5%, 4%, 4%, 3%, 1%, 1%, 1% and 0%, respectively.

04 China MAP Apparent Demand Analysis in H1 2026

According to FDD data, as of May 2026, China’s total apparent MAP consumption was 4.7337 million tonnes, up 129,500 tonnes from 4.6042 million tonnes in the same period last year, representing a year-on-year increase of 2.81%.

05 China MAP Inventory Analysis in H1 2025

In the first half of 2026, domestic MAP port inventories remained at zero, with no inventory available at ports since the first quarter. According to FDD data, as of June 30 this year, major port inventories in the domestic MAP market were approximately 0 tonnes, down 79.80% year-on-year.

06 China MAP Market Outlook for H2 2026

On the supply side, China’s domestic MAP market in the second half of 2026 is expected to see marginal recovery, but incremental supply will remain limited. In the third quarter, small and medium-sized producers may continue operating at low loads due to earlier losses, while high-temperature maintenance may tighten market supply in phases. In the fourth quarter, new capacity is expected to be released more intensively, and suspended units may gradually restart after the market improves, bringing supply growth back.

Although export relaxation later may help divert some inventories, overseas demand is expected to weaken toward year-end. With no concentrated maintenance, pressure from ample supply may re-emerge. Operating divergence within the industry is expected to continue, and producers without resource support will have limited room to restart.

On the demand side, agricultural demand is expected to receive two seasonal boosts. Demand will be light in July and August, while autumn base fertilizer preparation in August and September will drive concentrated replenishment by compound fertilizer producers, forming the core bullish factor of the year. In the fourth quarter, after autumn sowing ends, winter reserve procurement is expected to be more scattered, and support will weaken significantly.

Industrial downstream demand is expected to remain flat over the long term, with no incremental contribution. Exports may only adjust inventories in the short term, while fluctuations in domestic-foreign price spreads will restrict export scale, making it difficult for exports to continuously ease domestic supply pressure.

Overall, in the second half of 2026, the MAP market is expected to operate at high levels under the dual drivers of rigid cost support and recovering autumn demand. Downside room is limited, while upside flexibility will depend on the pace of fertilizer preparation and changes in export policy.

07 China DAP Market Review in H1 2026

7.1 China DAP Market Overview

In 2026, China’s domestic diammonium phosphate (DAP) market prices generally followed a pattern of high-level stalemate and cost-driven movement. Price stabilization policies and high costs formed the two core market themes.

According to FDD data, as of June 30, 2026, China’s domestic mainstream 64% granular DAP index stood at 4,571.67, the 60% brown DAP index stood at 4,350.00, and the 57% DAP index stood at 4,425.00.

In the first quarter, the DAP market remained in a high-level stalemate, with policy and costs competing. From January to February, market wait-and-see sentiment was strong. Producers executed earlier pending orders, and prices remained stable under supply protection and price stabilization policies.

Entering March, spring farming fertilizer demand started and provided fundamental support. At the same time, geopolitical conflicts pushed sulfur prices sharply higher, causing cost pressure to increase suddenly and forcing DAP prices upward. However, under the dual constraints of supply protection policies and industry guidance prices, price gains were clearly smaller than raw material increases. The market showed a narrow fluctuation pattern of cost support and policy-controlled upside.

In the second quarter, DAP costs surged, while deep losses and quoted prices without active transactions coexisted. Sulfur prices continued climbing to the RMB 10,000/tonne range, phosphate rock prices remained firm, and producer costs rose sharply. Industry guidance prices were raised twice in May and June, but the increases were far smaller than cost increases, leaving the industry in deep losses.

After spring farming ended, agricultural demand declined rapidly, exports were fully suspended, downstream procurement willingness was low, and new order transactions were scarce. Under the dual pressure of cost pass-through and weak demand, industry operating rates continued to decline. In June, capacity utilization fell to a historical low, and the market showed a typical stalemate of firm quoted prices but limited transactions.

08 China DAP Capacity Analysis in H1 2026

8.1 China DAP Output Analysis

In the first half of 2026, DAP output showed a pattern of high early output and lower later output, with total volume still described by the original data as declining year-on-year. According to FDD data, total DAP output from January to June 2026 was approximately 5.5554 million tonnes, down 818,400 tonnes from the same period last year, representing a year-on-year decrease of 12.84%.

At the beginning of the year, output increased significantly under supply protection policies, but later, affected by persistently high raw material costs and worsening producer losses, industry operating rates gradually declined to historical lows. Monthly output contracted month by month, and total output in the first half ultimately fell from the same period last year.

8.2 China DAP Market Operating Rate Analysis

This year, China’s domestic DAP industry operating rate showed a high-to-low and continuously declining trend. Under cost pressure, producer maintenance and production cuts increased, and capacity utilization gradually declined.

According to FDD data, the average monthly operating rate of China’s DAP market from January to June 2026 was approximately 48.85%, down 3.19 percentage points from the same period last year.

09 China DAP Export Analysis in H1 2026

9.1 China DAP Export Volume from January to May

From January to May 2026, China’s DAP exports showed a significant pattern of sharply shrinking total volume and near-zero exports after the policy window closed. According to customs data, China’s cumulative DAP export volume from January to May 2026 was 18,900 tonnes, down 79.62% from 92,700 tonnes in the same period last year.

Compared with the same period last year, cumulative DAP exports in the first five months fell sharply. From the monthly rhythm, exports showed a pattern of limited early shipments followed by no exports. There were still small export volumes in January and February, but exports dropped directly to zero after March, with no export records in March, April or May.

Overall, DAP exports from January to May fell sharply year-on-year, and exports were zero for three consecutive months from March onward. This pattern fully reflects China’s clear policy orientation of prioritizing domestic demand between food security and resource exports. It also shows that under the framework of supply protection and price stabilization policies, DAP exports are no longer a regular operating option for producers.

9.2 China DAP Export Destinations from January to May

According to customs data, the top DAP export destinations from January to May this year were Vietnam, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Their shares of export volume were 37%, 21% and 42%, respectively.

10 China DAP Apparent Demand Analysis in H1 2026

According to FDD data, as of June 2026, China’s total apparent DAP consumption was 4.8864 million tonnes, down 386,400 tonnes from 5.2728 million tonnes in the same period last year, representing a year-on-year decrease of 7.33%.

11 China DAP Inventory Analysis in H1 2026

In 2026, China’s DAP port inventories remained near zero, mainly because port collection stalled under export control policies, leaving traders and producers with no cargo available for storage.

According to FDD data, as of June 30 this year, major port inventories in the domestic DAP market were approximately 29,500 tonnes, down 89.07% year-on-year.

12 China DAP Market Outlook for H2 2026

On the supply side, China’s DAP market is expected to remain tight in the second half of 2026, with limited incremental supply. Sulfur and phosphate rock prices are expected to continue operating at high levels, and producers remain in deep losses. Industry capacity utilization had already fallen to a historical low in June.

Although low-priced sulfur resources may gradually arrive and supply-protection enterprises are expected to maintain production, small and medium-sized enterprises without resource advantages have already suspended production one after another. Although the third quarter is traditionally a peak production season, operating load recovery will remain limited unless cost pressure is fundamentally eased. Overall supply is expected to remain tight.

On the demand side, autumn fertilizer preparation will be the core driver, while export policy remains uncertain. July is the transition period between the end of summer fertilizer demand and autumn fertilizer preparation, and the market is expected to remain mainly wait-and-see. In August and September, the peak season for autumn high-phosphorus fertilizer production will arrive, and higher compound fertilizer operating rates are expected to drive concentrated DAP demand release. Current raw material reserves at compound fertilizer producers are generally low, and replenishment demand may expand.

On the export side, exports are basically unlikely before August. Whether the export window opens after September and how quota management is implemented will directly affect domestic supply-demand balance. If export restrictions are relaxed and international prices are higher than domestic prices, exports may provide phased support. If restrictions remain tight, domestic demand pressure will increase accordingly.

Overall, the DAP market in the second half is expected to remain firm at high levels under the dual support of rigid cost floors and recovering autumn demand. Downside room is limited, while upside flexibility will depend on the pace of fertilizer preparation and changes in export policy.

13 Sulfur Market Review in H1 2026

13.1 China Sulfur Market Overview

In the first half of 2026, China’s domestic sulfur market experienced an extreme volatile trend, with a one-sided surge followed by a high-level correction at month-end. The price center rose sharply from the beginning of the year. The overall market was driven by three major factors: global supply chain disruptions, domestic supply-demand mismatches and downstream rigid demand support.

Cost pressure continued to transmit across the industrial chain. Downstream sectors such as phosphate fertilizer remained in losses for an extended period, and structural shortage remained a defining feature throughout the first half.

According to FDD data, as of June 30, 2026, the domestic granular sulfur price at Zhenjiang Port was RMB 8,850.00/tonne, down 0.56% from the previous working day. The granular sulfur price at Dafeng Port was RMB 8,830.00/tonne, down 0.56% from the previous working day. The powder/block sulfur price at Zhenjiang Port was RMB 8,800.00/tonne, down 0.56% from the previous working day. The powder/block sulfur price at Dafeng Port was RMB 8,780.00/tonne, down 0.57% from the previous working day. Solid sulfur in East China stood at RMB 9,250.00/tonne, flat from the previous working day, while liquid sulfur in East China stood at RMB 9,080/tonne, up 0.39% from the previous working day.

In the first quarter, the core driver of the sulfur market came from the sudden escalation of geopolitical conflict in the Middle East. Obstruction of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz nearly halted outward sulfur transportation from the Middle East. Combined with the extension of Russia’s sulfur export ban and long-term structural constraints such as insufficient supply elasticity from global refineries, imported supply contracted sharply.

The extreme supply tightness collided with post-holiday downstream rigid replenishment and the start of spring farming fertilizer preparation demand, creating a severe supply-demand mismatch. Port inventories continued to decline to low levels. The rapid widening of the supply gap pushed sulfur prices sharply higher, breaking historical highs by the end of March. During the same period, surging freight rates from the Middle East to China and rising insurance premiums further increased import costs and fueled domestic price gains.

Entering the second quarter, supply tightness intensified further, and arrivals from the Middle East remained extremely low. Supported by weak supply and strong demand fundamentals, sulfur prices reached historical extremes in mid-June. However, extremely high prices clearly backfired on downstream demand. The phosphate fertilizer industry, constrained by supply protection policies and unable to freely cut production, fell into deep losses. Titanium dioxide and other producers were forced to sharply reduce loads due to excessive raw material costs, and industrial demand contracted significantly.

In mid-to-late June, news of resumed navigation through the Strait of Hormuz became the turning point for the market. Expectations for later supply recovery shifted rapidly, earlier bullish sentiment quickly collapsed, and prices fell sharply from historical highs.

14 Sulfur Port Inventory Analysis in H1 2026

In the first half of 2026, domestic sulfur port inventories followed a continuously declining path and repeatedly hit new lows, becoming the core fundamental factor supporting the surge in sulfur prices.

Overall, port inventories moved from normal levels at the beginning of the year through an almost uninterrupted destocking process and had fallen to the lowest level in nearly ten years by the end of June.

This extreme inventory trend was rooted in an unprecedented cliff-like contraction on the import side. Affected by disruptions to shipping routes through the Strait caused by geopolitical conflict, supply from the Middle East, China’s main sulfur import source, was severely obstructed. At the same time, global sulfur resources were tight overall, and overseas suppliers preferred to allocate limited cargoes to other markets offering higher prices, making it difficult for China to secure sufficient alternative supply in the short term. The sharp decline in imports directly caused port arrivals to remain at extremely low levels.

15 China Sulfur Output Analysis in H1 2026

In the first half of 2026, domestic sulfur output showed a pattern of stability first, followed by decline, with limited total growth.

In the first quarter, output was generally stable with limited fluctuations. At the beginning of the year, refinery production operated normally, and domestic sulfur output in January and February was basically flat from the same period last year. Entering March, refineries entered the spring concentrated maintenance period, industry operating rates declined, and output fell slightly month-on-month. Overall, first-quarter output fluctuated slightly but did not show a clear supply gap.

In the second quarter, output was initially stable and then declined, with a clear contraction in June. From April to May, domestic sulfur output was generally stable, and May output still increased slightly year-on-year. However, entering June, the situation changed significantly. Affected by persistently high crude oil prices, refinery margins came under pressure, main refinery atmospheric and vacuum distillation unit loads remained low, and local refinery operating loads were also low, clearly suppressing by-product sulfur output. At the same time, some enterprises entered planned maintenance cycles, and more enterprises reduced production or underwent maintenance. Under the combined effect of multiple factors, domestic sulfur output declined noticeably month-on-month in June.

16 China Sulfur Import Volume Analysis in H1 2026

In the first half of 2026, domestic sulfur imports shrank month by month, with the decline continuing to widen. Import volumes were nearly halved, becoming the core fundamental factor driving the surge in sulfur prices.

In the first quarter, the decline widened month by month. Imports were already weak at the beginning of the year, with each month showing a significant year-on-year decline, and cumulative first-quarter imports falling sharply year-on-year. Global sulfur supply continued to shrink, international prices kept rising, and China, as the world’s largest importer, faced greater procurement difficulty. As the core supply source, fluctuations in Middle Eastern supply directly determined China’s import scale.

In the second quarter, geopolitical conflict triggered a cliff-like collapse in imports. Disruptions to navigation through the Strait of Hormuz nearly halted Middle Eastern sulfur exports. Together with the extension of Russia’s export ban, imports plunged to multi-year lows, and the share of Middle Eastern cargoes contracted sharply. Amid global resource tightness, overseas suppliers prioritized shipments to higher-priced markets, and China struggled to find alternative supply in the short term. High prices further suppressed downstream purchasing willingness, and cumulative imports in the first half declined sharply year-on-year.

In June, expectations improved, but actual arrivals remained low. In mid-to-late June, news of the Strait reopening shifted market expectations toward optimism, but actual vessel arrivals remained scarce. Even as shipping gradually recovered, it would still take time to digest sulfur cargoes loaded but stranded in the Persian Gulf during the conflict. A full recovery of Middle Eastern supply will still require a process.

Overall, China’s long-term high dependence on sulfur imports and the critical share of Middle Eastern cargoes exposed structural weaknesses under the combined pressure of geopolitical conflict, global resource competition and high-price procurement suppression. The sharp contraction in imports, together with continued port inventory drawdowns, became the core driver behind repeated record highs in sulfur prices throughout the first half.

17 Sulfur Market Outlook for H2 2026

In the first half of 2026, the sulfur market experienced a strong rally under extreme supply shocks. Entering the second half, the market’s driving logic is shifting from supply-led to supply-demand competition, and the market is expected to move from the previous one-sided rise into a more complex pattern of high-level volatility with pressure on the price center.

On the supply side, the turning point from tightness to loosening is approaching. After the ceasefire in the Middle East geopolitical conflict, a large volume of previously delayed cargoes is expected to arrive at ports from mid-to-late July through August. Port inventories will gradually recover from extremely low levels, and the long-standing supply bottleneck will ease significantly. However, repairs to Middle Eastern units will still take time, and Indonesia’s wet-process nickel refining will continue to divert sulfur resources. The pace of import recovery remains uncertain, and localized tightness may persist in the short term.

On the demand side, clear negative feedback has already emerged. Uncontrolled high prices in the first half significantly suppressed downstream sectors such as phosphate fertilizer, sulfuric acid production and titanium dioxide. Many small and medium-sized enterprises reduced or suspended production, and overall industrial demand contracted sharply. Only the new energy sector maintained stable demand. Demand contraction will become the core resistance limiting further sulfur price upside.

Overall, extremely low inventories and concentrated market supply may still support prices in the short term, and some localized price gains remain possible. However, as concentrated arrivals are released and demand recovery remains weak, the balance between bullish and bearish forces will gradually shift. Upside resistance will increase significantly, and the market is more likely to come under pressure amid volatility. Enterprises along the industrial chain should focus on supply chain diversification and alternative process layouts to cope with long-term structural adjustments.