Market Monthly Report | Demand for Pure Water Equipment Increased in July, With Domestic Products Remaining the Mainstream in the Market

According to incomplete statistics, there were 88 successful bids for pure water equipment on the China Government Procurement Network in July. Excluding projects with incomplete information, the total number of transactions was 120 sets/units. Of these, excluding unidentifiable products, 111 sets/units of pure water equipment had traceable brands and prices, with a total bid amount of 12,831,643.75 yuan and an average unit price of 115,600 yuan. Universities and educational institutions, as well as medical and health institutions, accounted for the majority of procurement needs this month, but research institutions outperformed in terms of purchase amount.

Overall, the pure water equipment market saw a small peak in July, with domestically produced equipment still dominating the market. The number of units/sets purchased in July exceeding 100,000 yuan was 32. In terms of brand distribution, 49 brands (with publicly available data) completed pure water equipment transactions in July, with a relatively even distribution among brands.

Sorted by the transaction price per unit, the product with the highest transaction price was Ulupure UPT.

From the perspective of pure water equipment procurement units: Universities had the highest demand in July, followed by medical and health institutions, while research institutions showed a stronger demand for high-end equipment.

Combining the data on "the percentage of pure water equipment procurement amount by type of unit in July 2025," "the percentage of pure water equipment procurement quantity by type of unit in July 2025," and "the overall bidding situation for pure water equipment in July 2025," universities procured the largest quantity of pure water equipment, reaching 47 sets/units. Medical and health institutions were not far behind, reaching 36 sets/units. However, research institutions had a higher average procurement price, and their winning bids accounted for 39.47% of the total amount. This indicates that research institutions have a stronger demand for high-end equipment.

According to incomplete statistics, in July, medical and health institutions purchased 36 sets/units of pure water equipment, accounting for 32.43% of the total purchase quantity and amounting to 3.6753 million yuan, representing 28.64% of the total winning bid amount; universities and educational institutions purchased 47 sets/units, accounting for 42.34% of the total purchase quantity and amounting to 2.8634 million yuan, representing 22.32% of the total winning bid amount; research institutions purchased 15 sets/units, accounting for 13.51% of the total purchase quantity and amounting to 5.0644 million yuan, representing 39.47% of the total winning bid amount; and government agencies purchased 13 sets/units, accounting for 11.71% of the total purchase quantity and amounting to 1.2286 million yuan, representing 9.57% of the total winning bid amount.

From the perspective of production location: Domestic brands remained the mainstream in the pure water equipment market in July.

Looking at the data on "the proportion of pure water equipment purchased by production location in July" and "the proportion of pure water equipment purchased by production location in July," domestic pure water equipment had a higher market share in both quantity and total price.

In July, 103 sets/units of domestic pure water machines were purchased, totaling 11,013,290 yuan, with an average price of 106,900 yuan per set/unit; 8 sets/units of imported pure water machines were purchased, totaling 1,818,350 yuan, with an average price of 227,300 yuan per set/unit. Compared with the previous month, the domestic pure water market even saw some improvement.

From the perspective of winning pure water brands:

A total of 49 brands (with publicly available data) completed pure water equipment transactions in July, with a relatively even distribution of products among brands. Ulupure and Merck performed particularly well.

Note 1: The data in this article comes solely from publicly available data published on the China Government Procurement Network and does not include other sources. The data is for reference only; please excuse any omissions or errors.

Note 2: The term "place of origin" in this article refers to the location (headquarters) of the instrument brand. Brands located in China are classified as domestically produced, and brands located abroad are classified as imported.