The "advantages" of technical materials from agrochemical supplier (TC) and formulations are not absolute—they primarily depend on three core dimensions: application scenario (production/end-use), cost control goals, and technical capabilities. Essentially, the two have a "raw material vs. finished product" relationship: TC is a concentrated form of active ingredients, while a formulation is a ready-to-use product processed from TC. To determine which is more suitable, you must align it with your specific needs. Below is a breakdown of their differences across 6 key dimensions to clarify their respective advantage boundaries:

1. Core Differences: TC vs. Formulation

1.1 Form Usage Threshold
- Technical Material (TC): It is mostly solid (crystal/powder) or high-concentration liquid, and cannot be used directly. It requires professional processing (e.g., being made into emulsifiable concentrates, suspensions, or wettable powders) and relies on specialized equipment, resulting in an extremely high usage threshold.
- Formulation: It is already processed into ready-to-use forms (such as emulsifiable concentrates, wettable powders, or suspensions). After unpacking, it can be diluted with water or applied directly—farmers and small-scale farms can operate it easily, with a low usage threshold.

1.2 Cost Structure
- Technical Material (TC): It has a lower cost per unit of active ingredient because it excludes processing fees, adjuvant costs, and packaging costs. It is ideal for large-scale procurement followed by independent processing, and long-term bulk purchases yield significant cost advantages.
- Formulation: Its total cost is higher, as it includes expenses for TC, adjuvants, processing, packaging, and even brand premiums. However, it eliminates the costs associated with the "processing link," making it suitable for scenarios where no processing capabilities exist.

1.3 Storage Transportation
- Technical Material (TC):
- Advantage: With a high concentration of active ingredients (e.g., 95% imidacloprid TC), it has a smaller volume and lighter weight for the same amount of active ingredients—this translates to lower transportation and storage costs. For example, 1 ton of TC contains the same active ingredient as 10 tons of 10% formulation, leading to a 10-fold difference in transportation costs.
- Disadvantage: It has poor stability (prone to moisture absorption and decomposition), requiring strict temperature control and light protection. Additionally, most TC are toxic or corrosive, so storage safety requirements are high.

- Formulation:
- Advantage: It contains stabilizers and inert carriers, ensuring strong stability (e.g., suspensions can be stored at room temperature for 1–2 years). Its packaging is compliant (leak-proof and corrosion-resistant), so safety risks are low.
- Disadvantage: The concentration of active ingredients is low. For the same amount of active ingredients, it has a larger volume and heavier weight during transportation and storage, resulting in higher costs.

1.4 Safety Compliance
- Technical Material (TC): It is highly toxic (e.g., most TC have acute toxicity levels of "highly toxic" or "toxic"), volatile, or may cause skin sensitization when in contact—operational risks are high. It lacks finished product labels or registration certificates, so it can only circulate as a "production raw material" and cannot be sold directly on the market, leading to high compliance risks.
- Formulation: After being diluted and modified with adjuvants, its toxicity is reduced (e.g., a highly toxic TC may become low-toxic or micro-toxic in formulation), ensuring safe operation. It has completed end-use registration (e.g., obtaining a pesticide registration certificate) and uses compliant labels, allowing direct circulation and sales in the market with low compliance risks.

1.5 Efficacy Stability
- Technical Material (TC): Without the assistance of adjuvants, its efficacy is uncontrollable when used alone. For instance, direct application of TC can lead to leaching or volatilization, resulting in a utilization rate of only 10%–20%. To improve efficacy, subsequent formula design (e.g., adding wetting agents or spreaders) is necessary.
- Formulation: It contains wetting agents, emulsifiers, spreaders, and other additives, ensuring stable and controllable efficacy. For example, wettable powders, when mixed with water, can adhere evenly to crop leaves, increasing the utilization rate to over 50%. Its formula is also optimized for specific crops and pests, delivering more precise pest control effects.

1.6 Applicable Scenarios
- Technical Material (TC):
1. Large-scale pesticide manufacturers that process TC into formulations independently.
2. Large-scale farms or planting bases that build their own processing workshops to reduce long-term costs.
3. Export businesses that sell TC as raw materials to meet the processing needs of foreign enterprises.

- Formulation:
1. Small and medium-sized farmers or family farms that lack processing capabilities and need to use products directly.
2. End-use agricultural material stores that sell ready-to-use products to meet retail demand.
3. Enterprises without registration capabilities that purchase formulations for OEM branding (avoiding the high costs of TC registration).

2. Key Conclusion: Which Is More Advantageous? Choose Based on Scenarios

2.1 Scenarios Where TC Is More Advantageous
If you have "processing capabilities + compliance qualifications + large-scale procurement needs", the cost and transportation advantages of TC will be maximized. Its core value lies in "cost reduction and independent control":
- Example 1: A large pesticide factory produces 10,000 tons of insecticide formulations annually. By purchasing 95% TC for independent processing, it saves over 30% on raw material costs (excluding processing fees) compared to buying finished formulations. It also has the flexibility to adjust formulas independently (e.g., increasing or decreasing adjuvants based on market demand to optimize efficacy).
- Example 2: A multinational planting group with 1 million mu (approximately 66,667 hectares) of farms in Africa built small-scale processing workshops. It purchases TC from China and processes it into emulsifiable concentrates locally—this alone cuts transportation costs by 60% compared to buying finished formulations (TC has a small volume and can be transported in bulk via containers, while finished products require multiple decentralized deliveries).

2.2 Scenarios Where Formulation Is More Advantageous
If you "lack processing capabilities + prioritize convenience + want to avoid compliance risks", the "ready-to-use" and "safe" features of formulations become their core advantages. You won’t need to bear the processing, storage, or compliance costs of TC:
- Example 1: A farmer growing 5 mu of vegetables needs to control aphids. Purchasing TC would require additional purchases of emulsifiers and solvents, plus precise proportioning (excessive concentration may burn seedlings, while insufficient concentration is ineffective)—the operation is complicated and risky. In contrast, buying 10% imidacloprid wettable powder allows immediate spraying after mixing with water; the process takes only 10 minutes, and the cost is controllable (just 10 yuan for a single application).
- Example 2: A small agricultural material store (without production qualifications) would face "illegal operation" risks if it sells TC (since TC cannot be marketed directly). However, purchasing registered formulations allows it to put products on shelves directly without compliance concerns. Additionally, farmers prefer "ready-to-use" products, ensuring stable sales for the store.

3. Hidden Risk Reminder: Don’t Overlook Shortcomings
- Hidden costs of TC: Without processing equipment (e.g., sand mills, mixers), you’ll need to invest hundreds of thousands of yuan to purchase it. Without formula expertise (e.g., knowing how to select emulsifiers to prevent delamination), the "semi-finished products" you process may be ineffective or even cause crop damage. Furthermore, TC registration takes a long time (e.g., pesticide TC registration in China takes 2–3 years and costs over 1 million yuan), which is unaffordable for most small and medium-sized enterprises.
- Selection pitfalls of formulations: Some low-quality formulations cut corners on active ingredients (e.g., labeled 10% but actually containing only 5%) or use cheap adjuvants (leading to poor efficacy and easy residue). To avoid losses from "low-price, low-quality" products, prioritize brand products with formal registration certificates and third-party test reports.

Summary: No "Absolute Advantage"—Only "Precise Adaptation"
- If you’re on the production side (factory, large-scale farm): With processing capabilities and long-term large-scale needs → choose TC (for cost reduction and independent control).
- If you’re an end user (farmer, agricultural material store): Without processing capabilities and prioritizing convenience and safety → choose formulation (for hassle-free use, compliance, and stable efficacy).

In essence, TC is a cost-oriented choice, while formulation is an efficiency-oriented choice. They are not competitors but upstream and downstream links in the pesticide industry chain: TC is processed into formulations to ultimately serve end-use agricultural production.