Why did major US-traded stocks like Alibaba, XPeng, and Samsonite tumble on April 7, 2025?

U.S.-traded equities saw widespread selling pressure on April 7, 2025, as escalating trade tensions, economic uncertainty, and investor risk aversion converged to trigger a sharp correction. While the broader indices showed mixed movement, with the Nasdaq inching upward and the Dow Jones Industrial Average retreating by nearly 350 points, the spotlight fell squarely on a list of high-profile losers that reflected deeper structural anxieties.

Companies with international operations, China-based exposure, or consumer discretionary ties were hit hardest. The top decliners—led by Alibaba Group Holding Limited, XPeng Inc., The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, and Samsonite Group S.A.—demonstrated how macroeconomic disruption, coupled with sector-specific vulnerabilities, can rapidly unravel market confidence.

This sharp downturn followed an aggressive policy announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump, who unveiled a sweeping tariff package targeting a broad range of foreign imports. That surprise weekend decision reignited fears of a protracted global trade war, prompting sharp reactions across equity markets worldwide. Investors responded by pulling back from global consumer brands, technology firms, EV makers, and energy companies alike.

Which sectors were most affected by the April 7, 2025 market slide?

Stocks tied to global trade, consumer spending, and China-related revenue streams bore the brunt of Monday’s rout. Travel and lifestyle brand Samsonite Group S.A. led the percentage declines with a staggering 19.23% drop, closing at $8.40. The Luxembourg-based luggage manufacturer, heavily reliant on international travel and discretionary income, now finds itself in an environment increasingly defined by cross-border friction and inflation-driven consumer pullbacks.

Chinese multinationals listed on U.S. exchanges suffered disproportionately. HUTCHMED (China) Limited fell 15.58% to $12.14, as concerns mounted around access to U.S. capital and shifting FDA regulatory oversight. Lenovo Group Limited dropped 14.57%, and Xiaomi Corporation lost 14.43%, both hit by fears of retaliatory tariffs on electronics exports to North America. Despite Xiaomi’s stock showing strong performance year-to-date, investors grew wary of potential supply chain dislocations and pricing volatility.

In parallel, TAL Education Group, down 10.91%, and Zai Lab Limited, down 9.33%, were among the hardest-hit education and biopharma names. U.S.-China decoupling continues to cast a long shadow on such companies, particularly amid new restrictions on Chinese listings and enhanced scrutiny of foreign audit transparency standards.

How did EV makers and energy stocks react to trade tensions?

Electric vehicle manufacturers, especially those based in China, recorded sharp drops as tariff speculation disrupted growth projections. XPeng Inc. declined 8.70% to $17.74, extending its volatility streak after months of aggressive North American expansion. ADRs of BYD Company Limited experienced notable declines in both forms: BYDDY fell 8.46% to $80.70, and BYDDF dropped 8.22% to $40.52. The EV sector has long relied on globalized production models and soft commodity prices. With tariffs likely to increase battery input costs and cross-border logistics complexity, market revaluation was swift and unsparing.

Energy companies with international exposure saw valuations take a hit as well. Repsol, S.A. declined 10.50%, Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. – Petrobras lost 8.53%, and Galp Energia, SGPS, S.A. shed 8.30%. While oil prices remained relatively stable, investor confidence in emerging market energy names was undermined by speculation that U.S. refiners may soon pivot to domestic or allied sources, disrupting long-term export outlooks.

What triggered losses in major tech and digital firms?

The tech sector, particularly names with strong Asian ties, experienced steep drawdowns. Tencent Holdings Limited fell 7.76%, and Meituan dropped 7.56%. Concerns about Chinese government oversight, combined with Western regulatory hostility, have cast a pall over Chinese digital platforms. Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited was down 7.95% amid lower trading volumes and shrinking investor appetite for Hong Kong-listed equities.

WeRide Inc., an autonomous driving firm, lost 9.44%, illustrating just how quickly sentiment can turn on speculative mobility tech in risk-off environments. Meanwhile, Strategy Incorporated (known for its massive Bitcoin holdings) declined 8.67%. The company’s dual exposure to crypto volatility and high-interest-rate risk has made it a bellwether for institutional fear.

Crypto-facing firm Galaxy Digital Holdings Ltd. also dropped 8.90%, as digital asset markets remained volatile. The broader decline in digital and high-growth names signals renewed skepticism toward speculative investments during macroeconomic turbulence.

Why are consumer goods and financial services firms under pressure?

Beyond macroeconomic triggers, April 7 also highlighted vulnerabilities in consumer and finance sectors. Luckin Coffee Inc. lost 9.75%, as inflation-sensitive consumer sentiment combined with China-specific geopolitical risks to weaken investor confidence. Haier Smart Home Co., Ltd. dropped 11.59%, despite a product portfolio geared toward middle-income households—a segment now facing cost-of-living pressures globally.

PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. declined 7.49%, caught in the crossfire of rising interest rates, slowing mortgage activity, and uncertainty over credit market liquidity. The current cycle of Federal Reserve hawkishness and global macro tightening presents structural risk for financial intermediaries reliant on leverage and loan origination volume.

Hospitality and service firms were not spared. Compass Group PLC, which manages institutional catering services, fell 7.38% to $30.00. Though foodservice is seen as relatively stable, volatility in supply chain inputs and labour costs continues to challenge margins across the sector.

What are experts and financial leaders saying about market risks?

The coordinated equity selloff followed repeated warnings from leading financiers. In his 2025 annual letter to shareholders, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon flagged the risk of stagflation amid “reckless fiscal spending, deteriorating global alliances, and extreme political polarisation.” Dimon underscored how inflationary headwinds, combined with monetary policy constraints, leave little room for error.

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink added further pressure, telling analysts that the economy may already be in recession. Citing conversations with corporate CEOs, Fink noted that most anticipate a contractionary environment for the next several quarters. His concern over potential 20% further declines in equity valuations added urgency to institutional de-risking seen across Monday’s trading session.

While investors have been digesting elevated valuations since the late 2023 and 2024 bull runs, April 7 marked the first real test of market resilience in the face of aggressive trade and fiscal recalibration. With corporate earnings season approaching, expectations are now significantly lower for Q2 and Q3, particularly for sectors exposed to international volatility.

As the aftershocks of the April 7 market rout settle in, the clear message from Wall Street is caution. The convergence of tariff policy, geopolitical tensions, and domestic inflation continues to reshape expectations across every major asset class. From consumer brands like Samsonite to energy exporters like Petrobras and high-growth tech like XPeng and Tencent, the repricing of risk appears to be accelerating.

For investors, the lesson is clear: In today’s interconnected global economy, policy shifts in one country can rapidly reverberate across markets. With volatility elevated and uncertainty rising, a defensive stance may persist well into the second half of 2025.