Analysis of Trip.com Group's Anti-Monopoly Investigation by the State Administration for Market Regulation Over Its 'Price Adjustment Assistant'

Based on the latest market information, I have conducted an in-depth analysis of Trip.com Group’s anti-monopoly investigation over its ‘Price Adjustment Assistant’ as follows:

On January 14, 2026, the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) officially launched an investigation against Trip.com Group Limited on suspicion of abusing its dominant market position in violation of the Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China [1]. Prior to this, Ctrip’s ‘Price Adjustment Assistant’ was exposed to automatically scan prices on competing platforms through its backend system, forcibly modify and lower hotel room rates, and adjust activity discounts without merchants’ permission, triggering widespread complaints from hotel merchants [2].

The ‘Price Adjustment Assistant’ is an automated price comparison and adjustment tool launched by Ctrip. Its operating logic is: once a hotel’s price on the Ctrip platform is higher than that on other platforms, an automatic price adjustment mechanism will be triggered, and hotels may even be forced to participate in promotional activities to further reduce prices [2]. According to merchants, this function is “like a faucet that can’t be turned off”; it is common to experience more than five automatic price adjustments in a single day. For example, an original room rate of RMB 455 was adjusted to over RMB 300, and a rate of RMB 788 was adjusted to over RMB 500 [1].

• June 2025
  : Multiple hotel merchants in Zhengzhou complained that Ctrip forced them to activate the ‘Price Adjustment Assistant’
• July 2025
  : Zhengzhou Municipal Administration for Market Regulation launched an investigation
• August 5, 2025
  : Guizhou Provincial Administration for Market Regulation held a regulatory talk with five travel-related platforms including Ctrip, Tongcheng, Douyin, Meituan, and Fliggy
• September 17, 2025
  : Zhengzhou Municipal Administration for Market Regulation held an administrative talk with Ctrip and ordered it to rectify within a time limit
• December 8, 2025
  : Yunnan Homestay Association issued the “Decision on Launching Rights Protection Work Against Unfair Competition and Monopolies in OTA Platforms”, officially declaring “war” on Ctrip
• January 14, 2026
  : SAMR officially launched the investigation [1][2]

According to a 2024 industry report by BOCOM International, the Trip.com Group ecosystem accounts for nearly 70% of the GMV market share, with the core Ctrip brand holding 56% alone; Meituan Hotel & Travel accounts for approximately 13%, Fliggy 8%, and Douyin only 3% [3]. Founded in 1999, after nearly 30 years of development, Ctrip has gained absolute dominance in the hotel and travel sector, with over 400,000 hotels worldwide directly connected to its platform, including more than 90% coverage of five-star hotels [2].

Ctrip’s high-end resource barrier is its core moat. Most high-star hotels have signed “Best Available Rate (BAR) agreements” with it, ensuring Ctrip has the most stable, comprehensive, and reliable high-end room resources. Business travelers contribute more than 40% of Ctrip’s accommodation revenue; these users have low price sensitivity, high repurchase rates, and short decision-making paths, and are only willing to pay for “certainty” [3].

Currently, Ctrip’s commission rates generally range from 12% to 20%, with 15% to 20% for premium merchants, and up to 30% for some scarce resources. The display order of listed hotels is premium merchants > gold merchants > unbranded merchants. Merchants need to pay promotion fees to get better rankings, and after multiple costs are stacked, total commission expenses can be close to 40% of room rates [2]. The platform’s explicit base commission is usually between 10% and 15%, but merchants often have to pay additional implicit fees to purchase ad spaces or rankings for better traffic exposure [2].

• Plummeting Stock Price
  : As of the close of Hong Kong stock market on January 14, Trip.com Group-S (9961) saw its share price drop by 6.49%, closing at HK$569.5 per share, with a total market value of HK$372.2 billion, evaporating approximately RMB 25.3 billion in a single day [1]
• Regulatory Pressure
  : It faces the risk of administrative penalties; if found guilty of abusing its dominant market position, it may face heavy fines
• Reputational Damage
  : Its brand image has been severely damaged, and merchant trust has declined

Xing Xin, Senior Partner of Hunan Jinzhou Law Firm, stated that if merchants cannot independently set prices and activity plans based on their own operating conditions and market conditions, their profits may be damaged. “Technical or algorithmic settings cannot be used as an excuse for exemption” [1]. Fu Jian, Director of Henan Zejin Law Firm, pointed out that the current relationship between Ctrip and hotel merchants involves both cooperation and game-playing; some hotels rely on Ctrip’s traffic, which limits their bargaining power, resulting in an unbalanced cooperative relationship [2].

In December 2025, Yunnan Tourism Homestay Industry Association officially publicly declared “war” on Ctrip and launched a call for anti-monopoly evidence. The association stated that it has long received a large number of complaints from members, accusing platforms such as Ctrip of “forced exclusivity”, unilateral commission increases, traffic blocking, and other acts [2]. These rights protection actions are not impromptu, but a concentrated outbreak of long-accumulated industry conflicts.

Despite facing regulatory pressure, Trip.com Group’s moat is difficult to upend in the short term:

• User Habit Barrier
  : Consumers have formed inertial dependence on the travel decision-making path provided by Ctrip
• Supply Chain Advantage
  : Over 90% coverage of high-star hotels, with high loyalty among business travelers
• Technology and Service Experience
  : Airline direct sales cannot match Ctrip’s technology and service experience
• Two-Sided Network Effect
  : The scale effect on both supply and demand sides forms a strong moat [3]

Zhan Junhao, a well-known crisis public relations expert, believes that Trip.com Group should transform regulatory pressure into innovation motivation, and platform giants must adhere to the bottom line that “compliance is the prerequisite for innovation”. Bai Wenxi, Vice Chairman of the China Enterprise Capital Union, pointed out that if Trip.com Group fails to quickly establish a transparent and auditable pricing mechanism, its profit model and market valuation will face systemic challenges [2].

However, the hotel booking industry has strong user habit and supply chain barriers, so changes to the landscape may be slow. Emerging platforms need to continue investing in service guarantees and supply chain construction to form real competitiveness [2].

• Trip.com Group will cooperate with the regulatory investigation, and is expected to rectify tools such as the ‘Price Adjustment Assistant’
• Merchants’ independent pricing power is expected to be partially restored
• The platform’s commission structure may face adjustment pressure
• Other platforms will accelerate market share grabs, but will find it difficult to shake Trip.com Group’s dominant position

• Normalized Regulation
  : Anti-monopoly regulation of platform economy will become the norm, marking the start of an era of “strong regulation” for the industry
• Restructured Competitive Landscape
  : Platforms such as Meituan and Douyin are expected to gradually increase their market share, but the process will be slow
• Business Model Transformation
  : Trip.com Group needs to shift from “traffic control” to “service empowerment” to rebuild merchant trust
• Consumer Benefits
  : Multi-platform price comparison will become the norm, information transparency will improve, and consumers will have more choices [3]

Hotel merchants hope for more than just disabling the ‘Price Adjustment Assistant’ and canceling ‘forced exclusivity’; they hope the entire hotel and travel industry will return to rationality — returning pricing power to merchants and choice to consumers [2]. This requires joint efforts from platforms, merchants, and regulators to promote the healthy development of the industry.

The investigation into Trip.com Group marks a new stage of development for China’s online travel industry. Although its 56% market share and deep supply chain barriers mean it will not be upended in the short term, this incident will accelerate the evolution of the industry’s competitive landscape. Trip.com Group needs to prove that it is not just a “money-making machine”, but a travel partner worthy of long-term trust. In the future, whoever can balance “efficiency” and “fairness”, “scale” and “experience” will occupy a favorable position in the new industry landscape.

[1] The Paper - Trip.com Group Investigated by SAMR for Suspected Monopoly (https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_32383308)
[2] Sina Finance - Trip.com Group Investigated for Suspected Monopoly! Market Value Evaporated Approximately HK$25.3 Billion in a Single Day (https://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/roll/2026-01-14/doc-inhhhtem8217715.shtml)
[3] NetEase News - Does Trip.com Group Really Have No Competitors? (https://www.163.com/dy/article/KJ3DOCK105509VFK.html)