In three years, Horizon Robotics’ market capitalization will be three times that of Momenta.

Horizon Robotics and Momenta are the top two independent intelligent driving solution providers—and both are listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. Recent financial reports and stock performance already reveal a clear trend: in three years, Momenta’s market capitalization will be significantly lower than Horizon’s. Two key metrics highlight this divergence: 1. Momenta’s R&D investment is far lower than Horizon’s: Momenta invested approximately RMB 1.163 billion, whereas Horizon invested RMB 2.755 billion—2.4 times more. After excluding relatively fixed or peripheral expenses, the gap widens further in the most critical area of competitive investment. Based on this, Horizon’s product competitiveness is expected to surpass Momenta’s in three years. 2. Although Momenta appears less loss-making—even nearing breakeven—this reflects a strategic trade-off that undermines its long-term competitiveness. While Momenta’s broad cash reserves exceed RMB 10 billion, its overall competitive strategy remains conservative. Momenta’s stock liquidity is extremely poor, posing substantial future financing pressure: 1. Horizon trades daily at HK$300–400 million, while Momenta trades at only around HK$20 million—a nearly 20-fold difference. Even Horizon’s trading volume immediately after its IPO far exceeded Momenta’s current level. 2. Large institutional investors always assess exit mechanisms when investing. A daily turnover of HK$20 million makes orderly exits nearly impossible; even a modest share sale by an early employee could trigger sharp price declines. Had Momenta been highly sought-after, its stock price should have surged dramatically given its small free float—not declined persistently. 3. This also indirectly confirms Momenta’s markedly weaker capital-markets capability compared to Horizon. Without strong financial backing, competitiveness will inevitably erode over time in an industry demanding sustained, heavy investment.

2026 Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting Live Broadcast: Buffett Steps Aside, Abel Takes Center Stage for the First Time.

The third topic discussed was the nature of partnership relationships—what they entail and how we envision their evolution. That direction remains deliberately undefined; instead, we intend to let it develop organically. Our partners share our culture and core values—so there is no doubt they will remain outstanding collaborators for many years to come. As for pursuing outright acquisitions—for instance, in insurance or other sectors—that will unfold gradually over time and will clearly be a matter for discussion between Ajit Jain and the Tokio Marine executive team. Should such opportunities arise, we would be delighted. 01:50 Question #10: Impact of tariffs on the investment portfolio? Q: Has Berkshire Hathaway considered seeking tariff relief or compensation programs for its wholly owned operating businesses facing increased import costs? How significant is this impact across the entire portfolio? Abel: The impact of tariffs across our portfolio resembles our earlier discussion about Middle East-related risks. We experienced this during the first term of the current administration and learned valuable lessons—so we’re now better prepared. Our approach is straightforward: roll up our sleeves and manage it ourselves. We’ll continue serving customers effectively and recover tariff costs either through direct customer contracts or via the products we manufacture. Our teams have handled this exceptionally well. Many details remain unsettled, and we are not actively pursuing such relief measures. BNSF CEO: Regarding compensation—no. But let me add a few words on tariff impacts: In early 2025, we observed some customers accelerating shipments ahead of tariff implementation, leading to a temporary freight-volume uptick. By late 2025, volumes stabilized; and entering 2026, our customers have largely adapted and adjusted to the tariffs. That said, uncertainty persists. From a planning perspective, this has proven highly challenging for our customers—causing some to delay capital investments in manufacturing facilities. It is precisely this tariff-related uncertainty—not the tariffs themselves—that represents the most tangible impact we observe among our customers. NetJets CEO: Let me cite Berkshire Hathaway Automotive as an example: its new-vehicle sales this year are slightly down year-on-year—partly due to tariff effects. The issue is that tariffs change daily; merely keeping track of this ‘bouncing ball’ is itself a full-time job. 01:35 Question #9: How does Berkshire’s decentralized model function—and how does BNSF maintain competitiveness? Q: Berkshire’s structure relies on decentralization: each subsidiary CEO manages independently. Which operating units require closer oversight? How do you handle underperforming managers? Given BNSF’s profitability lags behind peers, how will it sustain competitive advantage against rivals—and against emerging technologies? Abel: I emphasized three pillars: decentralization, disciplined risk management, and rigorous capital allocation. We are fortunate to have exceptional leaders and businesses—each deeply embedded with its customers. When managers think like owners, the entire conglomerate delivers outstanding results. But decentralization does not mean abdication of accountability. This autonomy carries with it profound responsibility—and the pride that comes from doing one’s job exceptionally well.