Checked against Chinese-language sourcing · last verified 22 Aug 2026
niu-lai.net
EN

Fact check

Niu Lai's budget, and every other number people get wrong

Most English coverage of Niu Lai is built on other English coverage. We went back to the Chinese-language reporting — Caixin, The Beijing News, IT Home, Epoch Times, Xueqiu — to check the claims that keep getting repeated. Here's what checks out and what doesn't.

Short version: nobody has published an audited production budget, the figures in circulation range from $47 to $15,200 depending on which language you read, and the box office number in almost every article is a snapshot from the day it was written. Ours updates three times a day — see it live.

Eight claims, checked

The claims, checked against the sourcing

“It cost about $200 to make”

Unverified / likely wrong

This figure spread through several English entertainment sites, usually alongside “most profitable film ever made.” We could not find a Chinese source that supports it. What Chinese reporting actually says: the production company, Dalian Jingyuan Culture Film and Television Media, has roughly ¥100,000 (~US$14,000) in registered capital, and the film took about five years to make. That's a low budget by any industry standard — but it's a different order of magnitude from $200, and registered capital isn't the same thing as production spend anyway. The $200 figure looks like a compressed, unsourced number that spread because it made a better headline.

The same budget, reported five different ways

Contradictory across languages

This is the part that only shows up if you read the coverage in more than one language. Which “Niu Lai budget” a reader ended up believing depended entirely on which country's press they read — and the figures differ by a factor of more than 300.

Reported budgetWhereLanguage
US$47The Economic TimesEnglish (India)
US$200El Comercio, and much of the English aggregator pressSpanish / English
¥30,000 (~US$4,400)ITmediaJapanese
€13,000 (¥100,000)Moustique, franceinfoFrench
US$15,200InfobaeSpanish

The €13,000 / ¥100,000 figure is the only one traceable to a real document — it is the production company's registered capital, which French outlets converted into euros and others reprinted as a production budget. Registered capital is not a budget. No audited production cost has been published in any language.

“It's the most profitable movie ever made”

Unsupported

No official financial disclosure supports this. It's a natural companion claim to the “$200 budget” figure above — if you accept an artificially low cost, almost any box office looks like an absurd return. Niu Lai's return on investment is genuinely remarkable by industry standards; “most profitable film ever” is marketing language, not an audited fact.

There is a real record to measure it against, though: Guinness lists Paranormal Activity's 19,850% return as the largest film budget-to-box-office ratio. We ran Niu Lai's live box office against all five reported budgets, on gross and on the filmmakers' actual share — it clears the record on gross every time, and falls short on two of them once you count what the filmmakers keep. The full working →

“It's AI-generated”

False

Two people — director Xin Yumeng and his mother, writer/composer Sun Lifang — made it by hand over roughly five years, using second-hand equipment and SketchUp, an architectural modelling tool, rather than an animation suite or any generative AI. Its rough look is the signature of amateur technique and a tiny budget, which is exactly why English-language coverage seized on it as an “anti-AI” symbol — see why that narrative took hold.

Box office figures vary wildly between sources

Explained, not contradictory

You'll see anything from ¥24 million to ¥41 million quoted as “the” box office total. Both can be right: Chinese and English outlets pull from different real-time tracking platforms (Maoyan Pro, Beacon/灯塔) at different snapshot times during a run that moved by millions of yuan per day. This is normal for a fast-moving release, not evidence anyone is lying. The fix isn't a better snapshot, it's not using snapshots: we pull the cumulative total straight from Maoyan Pro three times a day, so this page can tell you what it stands at right now — ¥45.2M ≈ $6.7M, refreshed three times a day (). See the full dated breakdown →

“It was made as a joke / a deliberate troll”

False

Nothing in the reporting on Xin Yumeng and Sun Lifang suggests they set out to make something intentionally bad. It reads as a sincere five-year passion project by two people without professional training, released with an almost total absence of marketing. The internet's reaction — not the film's intent — is where the comedy comes from.

“Niu Lai” caused a real stock market move

True, but not fundamentally connected

This one checks out, and most English coverage misses it entirely. “牛来” (Niu Lai) is a near-homophone for “牛市来” — “the bull market is coming.” Some Chinese retail investors bought movie tickets as a superstitious good-luck ritual, and stocks containing the character 牛 (bull/cow) briefly spiked — Luoniu Mountain hit its daily limit, Jinniu Chemical rose over 8%, Tongniu Information rose nearly 4%. None of those companies has any actual business connection to the film; this was pure pun-driven trading sentiment, a recognised pattern in Chinese retail markets.

“There's an official Niu Lai coin / token”

No

Searches for a “Niu Lai coin” started showing up in Hong Kong within days of the film going viral — which is what happens to any meme with a stock-market pun attached. To be explicit: there is no official Niu Lai cryptocurrency, token, NFT or fan-investment scheme. The filmmakers are a mother and son who sold cinema tickets. Anything trading under that name was made by someone else.

Why this page exists

A story this viral accumulates rounding errors fast — each retelling compresses a number a little further because a cleaner number travels better. None of this is a conspiracy; it's just how virality works. We'll keep updating this page as better sourcing surfaces. If you have a correction with a citation, we want to hear it.