Long-Term Allocation Value Assessment of Hong Kong Stocks' Oil and Gas & Internet Industries: In-Depth Analysis of CNOOC (0883.HK) and Tencent Holdings (0700.HK)

Based on your provided investment background (portfolio return rate of approximately 22% in 2025, mainly concentrated in China National Offshore Oil Corporation and Tencent Holdings), I will systematically evaluate the two industries and two companies based on available tool data and web search information, and discuss the supportability and potential risks of the “continuous heavy position” strategy. The following content strictly labels data sources, distinguishing between “brokerage API data [0]” and “web search [1][2]”, etc.

• Valuation and Returns: CNOOC’s P/E ratio is approximately 6.93x, significantly lower than Tencent’s (about 21.80x), with relative valuation advantages in the energy sector [0]. The oil and gas industry has defensive attributes against inflation and resource security backgrounds (tool data does not provide macro indicators; this is a qualitative framework).
• Market Expectations and Risk Reminders: Some investors express concerns about crude oil price trends and short-term oil price fluctuations (e.g., some investors note “crude oil trends in 2026 may fluctuate between $50-$65 per barrel”) [1]. The tool does not provide historical oil price sequences or quantitative data on oil price sensitivity, so correlation calculations cannot be performed.
• Policy and Resource Endowment: Search data shows that CNOOC has outstanding advantages in deepwater development, cost control, and resource exploration, and benefits from policy dividends such as energy security and deep-sea subsidies [1]. However, the tool does not provide original policy documents or quantitative subsidy data.

• Changes in Regulatory Environment: Authoritative media emphasize “adhering to the balance of development and standardization” to promote the healthy development of the platform economy on the track of rule of law and marketization [2]. At the same time, search results show that AI applications (such as the “Qianwen” App) are accelerating their implementation, driving industry competition to evolve towards “scenarioization and user experience” [2]. However, the tool does not provide regulatory scores or policy event time series.
• Growth Potential and Competition: AI, local life and other tracks are reshaping the industry pattern; search results show changes in related products and market shares [2]. The tool does not provide company-level product matrices and market share data.
• Capital Attributes and Valuation Repair: The tool does not provide data such as southbound fund or Hong Kong Stock Connect industry position ratios, so it cannot quantify the marginal impact of capital flows on valuation; this is only a qualitative reminder.

• Defensive and Dividend Preference: If focusing on cash flow and defensiveness, consider maintaining a higher weight on the oil and gas sector, and track future dividend and capital expenditure rhythms (need to obtain dividend yield, dividend history and other data).
• Growth and Structural Optimization: If seeking growth and policy dividend realization, pay attention to the progress of AI implementation and regulatory normalization of internet leaders (need to continuously track announcements and regulatory disclosures).
• Portfolio Rebalancing: It is recommended to regularly review industry and position concentration under the heavy position strategy to reduce non-systematic risks (such as industry, region, policy concentration).

• CNOOC: Net profit margin of approximately 31.83%, operating profit margin of approximately 44.59%, ROE of approximately 16.65%, low asset-liability ratio, strong free cash flow, financial health assessment as “low risk” and conservative accounting style [0]. Tencent Holdings: Net profit margin of approximately 29.93%, operating profit margin of approximately 31.84%, ROE of approximately 20.29%, financial health assessment also as “low risk” and conservative accounting style [0].
• Liquidity: CNOOC’s current/quick ratios are 2.36/2.32 respectively, Tencent’s are 1.36/1.35 [0], indicating that CNOOC has a thicker short-term liquidity safety cushion.

• Valuation Multiples: CNOOC’s P/E is approximately 6.93x, P/B is approximately 1.13x; Tencent’s P/E is approximately 21.80x, P/B is approximately 3.81x [0]. The tool does not provide analyst target price details and institution names, only provides “analyst consensus” rating distribution (e.g., CNOOC “HOLD”, Tencent “BUY”) [0].
• Historical Price Performance (2020-01-01 to 2025-12-30): CNOOC’s cumulative return is approximately 58.77%, Tencent’s is approximately 72.18% [0]; their volatility (daily standard deviation) is close (CNOOC approximately 2.19%, Tencent approximately 2.48%) [0].

• CNOOC: Recent closing price of approximately HK$20.64, trend judged as “sideways/no clear trend”, support at approximately HK$20.41, resistance at approximately HK$21.00; MACD signal is neutral, KDJ is bullish, Beta is approximately 0.33 (relative to Hang Seng Index) [0].
• Tencent Holdings: Recent closing price of approximately HK$596.50, trend also judged as “sideways/no clear trend”, support at approximately HK$590.52, resistance at approximately HK$607.42; MACD is bullish, KDJ is bearish, Beta is approximately 0.85 (relative to Hang Seng Index) [0].
• Note: Technical indicators are only for short-term reference and should not replace fundamental and long-term logic.

• CNOOC (current price approximately HK$20.64): Conservative scenario fair value approximately HK$473.91, baseline approximately HK$584.71, optimistic approximately HK$1223.76; probability-weighted value approximately HK$760.79 [0].
• Tencent Holdings (current price approximately HK$596.50): Conservative scenario approximately HK$500.57, baseline approximately HK$635.97, optimistic approximately HK$994.98; probability-weighted value approximately HK$710.51 [0].
• Explanation: DCF results are highly dependent on growth and discount assumptions; the tool does not provide consensus expectations or target price details of comparable Chinese concept stocks/industries, so it is recommended to combine multi-dimensional information for judgment.

• Figure 1 (Comprehensive Comparison): Side-by-side comparison of indicators such as valuation multiples, profitability, cumulative returns in different periods, risk and liquidity, market capitalization scale. Data sources and time ranges are based on the above tool data and time intervals.
• Figure 2 (CNOOC Technical Chart): K-line and indicator chart generated based on the period from 2024-01-01 to 2025-12-30, reflecting trends and key price levels [0].
• Figure 3 (Tencent Holdings Technical Chart): K-line and indicator chart for the same period, reflecting trends and key price levels [0].

• Financial Stability: Both companies have low-risk financial health, abundant cash flow, and conservative accounting styles [0].
• Industry Status and Moat: CNOOC has comparative advantages in deepwater development and cost control; search data also emphasizes its technical barriers and policy dividends [1]. Tencent occupies a leading position in social and content ecology, digital payment and cloud infrastructure; search results show accelerated AI-driven scenario implementation [2].
• Stable Long-Term Returns: Both companies have recorded considerable positive returns over the past 5 years [0], indicating that long-term holding can yield considerable returns in specific cycles.
• Potential Upside Space Shown by DCF Model (Need to Note Model Assumptions and Uncertainties): The DCF scenarios provided by the tool show that both companies have large upside potential, but require macro, industry and company to continuously fulfill assumptions [0].

• Industry Concentration: Heavy positions in two industries/two companies will bear greater industry and theme risks, lacking diversification protection across industries/regions.
• Oil Price and Cyclicality: The tool does not provide oil price sequences and the sensitivity of CNOOC’s profits to oil prices; search results show investors’ concerns about the downward or range-bound fluctuation of the oil price center [1].
• Regulation and Policy: The regulatory direction of the internet industry is “balancing standardization and development” [2], but specific regulations and enforcement intensity still have uncertainties; the oil and gas industry may also be affected by energy transition and environmental protection policies in the long term.
• Valuation and Expectation Gap: If macro or industry assumptions are weaker than expected, the valuation pressure risk of high-valued internet leaders and cyclical oil and gas leaders will rise.
• Data Gaps: The tool does not provide dividend yield, dividend history and sustainability, Hong Kong Stock Connect industry position ratio, company-level product and segment business data, etc.; these are crucial for evaluating “long-term allocation value” and “dividend/growth” positioning.

• Dynamic Weight Management: On the premise of maintaining long-term exposure to high-quality leaders, moderately control the weight ceiling of a single industry/company, and combine rebalancing to deal with fluctuations.
• Balance Between Dividend and Growth: Combine your own cash flow and reinvestment needs to adjust the rhythm between oil and gas leaders with high free cash flow and potential dividend capacity and internet leaders with growth resilience (need to obtain dividend yield, dividend history and dividend policy data).
• Data and Tracking: Continuously pay attention to financial report announcements, regulatory disclosures, industry policies and macro indicators, and timely supplement key data to calibrate valuation and risk assumptions.

• The oil and gas and internet industries each have allocation value in the current environment, but need to manage weight and rhythm according to personal risk preference, investment cycle and cash flow needs.
• CNOOC and Tencent Holdings have stable fundamentals and prominent industry positions; the financial, technical and DCF data provided by the tool support them as optional targets in the long-term core pool; however, dynamic review should be maintained in terms of industry concentration, oil price cycle, regulatory evolution, etc.
• It is recommended to optimize the risk-return characteristics of the portfolio through dynamic rebalancing and necessary cross-industry/cross-region diversification while “holding heavy positions in high-quality leaders”; and continuously track key data and policies to calibrate long-term allocation assumptions.

• [0] Jinling API Data (including company overview, real-time quotes, financial analysis, DCF scenario valuation, technical analysis, historical price data, etc.).
• [1] Caifuhao “Core Competitiveness of CNOOC”, and related discussions and information on Snowball’s individual stock and announcement pages (https://caifuhao.eastmoney.com/news/20251223131940578756990; https://xueqiu.com/S/SH600938, etc.).
• [2] People.cn “Adhere to Balancing Standardization and Development, Improve the Platform Economy Governance System”; 36kr/Veekr “Revealing the Top 10 Major Events in China’s Technology Industry in 2025” (http://theory.people.com.cn/n1/2025/1229/c40531-40634401.html; https://eu.36kr.com/zh/p/3610455928193537).
• Figure 1 (Comprehensive Comparison Chart, Generated Based on Tool Data): https://gilin-data.oss-cn-beijing.aliyuncs.com/financial_charts/80808195_cnooc_tencent_comparison.png
• Figure 2 (CNOOC Technical Chart, Generated Based on Tool Technical Analysis): https://gilin-data.oss-cn-beijing.aliyuncs.com/financial_charts/c528ca63_0883_HK_kline.png
• Figure 3 (Tencent Technical Chart, Generated Based on Tool Technical Analysis): https://gilin-data.oss-cn-beijing.aliyuncs.com/financial_charts/9e411129_0700_HK_kline.png

(Note: Uncited web information and external data are not used; for further quantitative evaluation (such as dividend yield, industry correlation, volatility contribution, etc.), deepened analysis can be carried out after continuing to supplement data.)