Huawei Technologies
One organisation’s compute: who controls it, and what its filings disclose.
No control relation for Huawei Technologies in the public record as gathered
Every claim below carries the document it came from, who disclosed it, and the date that disclosure speaks to. Where the record holds nothing, the page states whether the public record was searched and what was searched — an unsearched layer and an empty one are different facts.
Control
Control here means holding title to a facility, operating one, or holding capacity by contract. This record holds none of the three for this organisation; what was searched is stated below.
US-visible counterparty disclosures searched by EDGAR full-text on 2026-08-19: “Huawei data center”, “hosting agreement with Huawei”, “lease with Huawei” and “colocation Huawei” each return no filing. “Huawei Cloud” returns 44 filings by 19 registrants; the two data-centre operators among them, GDS Holdings and VNET Group, name Huawei Cloud in market-landscape lists of Chinese public-cloud providers and in a risk factor about US sanctions — never as a party to a lease, hosting agreement or other facility instrument. The facility records held here for this organization therefore come from the company’s own published statements rather than from a counterparty’s filing, which is the reverse of the subjects whose compute is visible only because a listed landlord must report it.
Across the 17 organisations carrying control relations in this substrate, 8 hold contractual capacity without a single titled facility on record. That pattern is what the three-way split exists to make visible: an attribution model keyed on ownership records the 8 as holding nothing.
Constraint
What regime the organisation sits under, and whether any export-control designation in the Federal-Register-anchored list held here reaches it. A quiet result is reported as a check with its date rather than left as silence.
The organization record places this company’s headquarters in China, on the strength of the company’s own published statements cited there.
Heavily Restricted — Most advanced chips denied. H200/MI325X shifted from presumption of denial to case-by-case review (Jan 15, 2026). Blackwell-class (B200/B300) and Rubin-class strictly prohibited. Domestic production (SMIC 7nm via DUV) partially fills gap — Ascend 910C is now the primary domestic AI accelerator. BIS declared Huawei Ascend deployment violates export rules (May 2025). Classification derived from the underlying rules, as of Jul 17, 2026.
- Subject to Oct 2022 (87 FR 62186), Oct 2023 (88 FR 73458), Dec 2024 rules
- H200/MI325X: shifted from presumption of denial to case-by-case Jan 15, 2026 (conditions: ≤50% volume, compliance cert, 3rd-party testing)
- Blackwell-class (B200/B300/GB200): fully restricted — exceeds TPP 21,000 and DRAM BW 6,500 GB/s thresholds
- Rubin-class (R100/R200): will exceed all thresholds — strictly prohibited
This organization is among the 50 organizations the cross-reference resolves to entries on the Federal-Register-anchored lists, carrying 8 designations — see the export-controls instrument for the underlying records and their match confidence.
The two counts answer different questions and are not a ratio: the first counts organizations the cross-reference links at all, the second counts entries linked to this one. The lists themselves last moved on Nov 10, 2025, so this reading reflects the record as it then stood — membership moves in both directions.
Disclosure posture
What the organisation itself has put on the record with the registries that ask, and which registries reach it at all. Each regime asks a different question of a different population, so each finding carries what that regime counts; nothing here is divided by anything else.
The organization holds legal entity identifier 300300G4NLFHF8PDPY52.
Registration of the entity itself in the global LEI system.
Declares a parent that does not consolidate — The organization has declared that a parent exists but does not consolidate it under the applicable accounting standard, so the consolidation regime records no parent even though one exists.
What the registrant itself declared to the LEI registry about its consolidating parent, per parent category.
Registry reason code: NON_CONSOLIDATING · as of Aug 8, 2026 · registry record ↗
No active consolidation record in the registry extract held here names this identifier as parent.
Entities holding identifiers of their own that report being consolidated into this organization’s audited accounts.
as of Aug 8, 2026 · registry record ↗
No SEC registrant record is attributed to this organization: it does not file its own periodic reports, so the SEC disclosure regime reaches it only through counterparties that do.
Whether the entity itself files with the SEC as a registrant.
Capacity
Facilities this organisation is linked to in the substrate. Every capacity figure is cited per record to the catalog that published it — frontier sites come from Epoch AI’s data-center catalog — and where a catalog records who owns the AI hardware at a site, that is rendered as what it is, hardware ownership per that source, and not as facility ownership or operation.
| Status | Facilities | Capacity where recorded |
|---|---|---|
| operational | 4 | 242 MW across the 1 of 4 with a figure, an estimate |
The 4 facilities the sums above are drawn from
| Facility | Status | Capacity |
|---|---|---|
| Huawei Horinger | operational | 242 MW (est.) |
| Huawei Dongguan Cloud Data Center (Songshan Lake) | operational | not recorded |
| Huawei Cloud Gui'an Data Center | operational | not recorded |
| Huawei Cloud Ulanqab Data Center | operational | not recorded |
1 of the 4 linked facilities are in Epoch’s frontier catalog, carrying 242 MW between them. Sums cover only the facilities with a recorded figure; the count of those is printed beside each row of the table above, because a megawatt total whose denominator is invisible reads as a census when it is a partial sum.
Supply
This layer publishes what is known about the completeness of the supply picture, not the picture itself.
This layer is informed by subscription corporate-data sources covering the tracked supply graph — sources that cannot be republished, so what renders is the epistemic state they support: position in a distribution, a corroboration class, whether a contradiction was found. Never a relationship, a counterparty or a count from those sources directly.
This organization’s supply-relationship count sits above the 95th percentile of the 5,086 organizations in the tracked supply graph. The underlying counts and distribution ride subscription-licensed rows and are not published; the percentile band is the disclosure (see the sourcing note below).
The control ledger names no counterparty pairs to check against the supply corpus, so no corroboration class is derivable.
No contradiction between the subscription-licensed corpus and the public-record claims rendered on this page was found in the review of Aug 12, 2026. Where such a contradiction is found, the public claim renders here with a flag that conflicting subscription evidence exists — the flag is the maximum disclosure.
Working detail — grades, sources, and what is withheld
1 · How claims are graded
No confidence value is stored anywhere. Each grade is derived when the page renders from three recorded facts — the authority tier of the source, who disclosed it, and whether the value is flagged as an estimate — so a grade cannot disagree with the claim it sits beside.
Attested Stated in a primary or research-grade record by the subject, a counterparty to the relation, or a regulator.
Reported Carried by press or third-party reporting rather than a party’s own record.
Inferred Derived or estimated — including ceilings a party states as “up to” figures.
An estimate outranks its source: a ceiling stated in a counterparty’s own press release (“up to 5 GW”) grades inferred, because the number is a bound and not a measurement.
2 · Where each layer reads
Control. control_relations only — never a facility’s owner or operator column. Those columns carry, for catalog rows, a copy of the hardware-owner field whose own published definition disclaims facility ownership and operation, so they were retired as attribution sources.
Constraint. Export-control designations anchored to Federal Register citations, the platform’s designation-to-organisation cross-reference, and rule-derived country access classifications.
Disclosure posture. The Global LEI Foundation golden copy — registration, parent-reporting declarations, and consolidation records — read by the organisation’s own identifier, plus its SEC registrant record where one exists.
Capacity. The facilities substrate, with Epoch AI cited per record for catalog rows.
3 · How absence is recorded
Three states, kept apart everywhere on this page. Rows: the record holds claims. Searched, nothing admissible: a search was run, its method and date are printed, and what it found could not be reduced to a citable primary. Not swept: no search is on file.
Collapsing the last two would let a budget limit read as a finding about the world. A lead that cannot be traced to a document is recorded as a lead, never as a row.
4 · What is not published, and why
Some records here were established with reference to subscription corporate-data sources that cannot be republished. Where that applies, the published record cites the public primary that establishes it; the subscription source informed only which records to seek and how complete we believe the result to be. No subscription-sourced record, identifier or value is served by this site.
That is why the supply layer publishes a percentile band rather than a count, and a corroboration class rather than a list. Those forms cannot be inverted back into the underlying rows, which is the property that makes them publishable at all.
Everywhere else on this page, a derived figure prints the operands it was computed from.
The four records in this instrument were chosen to span the cases the substrate has to handle: compute held only by contract, compute held by title, compute held by operation, and an organisation the public record barely reaches. Other organisations have directory entries; a record like this one exists where the control layer has been swept.