# Recently I've been looking at Pop Mart and Lao Pu Gold together, and it's quite interesting.

Pop Mart's 2025 revenue is 37.1 billion, +185%, net profit 13 billion, +280%+—it's no longer growth, it's a money printing machine. But the problem is also pretty straightforward—Labubu as a single IP contributes roughly 38% of revenue, meaning the company is making about a third of its money off one emotional symbol. Add on top of that 2026 guidance of only 20% growth, and the market suddenly shifts from "this thing can still fly" to "has this already peaked?" So you see a classic scene play out: profits double, but the stock price gets crushed instead.

What's really behind this is the essence of IP premium: it can expand infinitely when sentiment is good, but once everyone starts being rational, they inevitably ask—is this premium actually worth it, and can it be sustained?

Looking at Lao Pu Gold in contrast: 2025 revenue of 27.3 billion, +221%, net profit nearly 5 billion, +230%, and it's not driven by a single blockbuster hit—it's a combination of store expansion, average transaction value, and gold prices. You could say it's not as flashy, but it has one critical thing going for it—"it looks like an asset." (Assuming gold prices don't rise or fall dramatically)

Strictly speaking, this is a kind of "gold standard illusion": you're not just buying a brand, you're buying a psychological anchor of "this thing won't go to zero anyway." Even if the logic isn't perfect, in times of uncertainty, this illusion is actually quite valuable.

So right now the market is really making a simple multiple choice question:

If money is loose, I can buy blind boxes and gamble for a rare variant;
If money starts getting tight, I'd rather buy gold—at least what I pull out is still gold.

In other words, Pop Mart sells IP premium—fundamentally turning dopamine into finance; Lao Pu Gold sells "security premium"—fundamentally monetizing uncertainty.

When liquidity is abundant, people pay for the thrill; when liquidity tightens, people start paying for certainty.

So what you're seeing isn't that one company is better, but that the market is shifting preferences—from "I want to make more," to "I don't want to lose too much."