When you look at the J-20, the first thing you notice is that it's heavyweight. Roughly 20.4 x 12.9, comparable in size (but not mass) to an F-15 Eagle and slightly smaller than a Flanker, J-11 or Su-27.
Going heavyweight is a choice. A heavyweight fighter, with all other factors being equal, is going to cost more than a middleweight or a light fighter. And fighters aren't like tanks, wherein the heavier your tank, the more survivable your tank is. It only takes a single missile to knock down a F-15, just as much as it takes only a single missile to knock down a F-16.
So when you go heavyweight, you take on drawbacks of cost, but to go heavyweight you also want advantages that justify this cost.
As I've said before, traditionally, a heavyweight fighter, in order to pay for itself, had to achieve good kill-loss ratios versus light and middle-weight fighters. This comes in via the BVR advantages of the heavyweight fighter.compared to the lightweight fighter, although in the 5th generation, differences in IR emissivity can cancel out this factor.
But this is crucial when you look at the J-20. If the J-20 is equal to the F-35 in terms of cost, it becomes viable for the J-20 to counter the F-35 simply by massing the aircraft. A 1:1 kill-loss exchange rate doesn't matter, because eventually the opponent runs out of fighters, or both sides run out of aircraft.
However, if the J-20 is more expensive than the F-35 in terms of cost, it becomes imperative that the J-20 has a qualitative edge over the F-35. There are various dimensions where this is true; i.e, the J-20 will eventually have significantly better dogfighting ability than the F-35 (increased thrust, TVC, canards), and its larger radar and potentially larger IRST system gives it an edge in BVR over the F-35.
In other words, it is DESIRABLE for the J-20 to be more expensive than the F-35. Remember the old design of the J-31? That one incorporated only an EOIRST, and ditched the EODAS to achieve cost savings. If the J-20 is stuck, irredeemably, as more expensive than the F-35, the corner cutting business is NOT a valid strategy for competition. Leave that to the Russians with their Su-57, where the stealth is questionable (i.e, intended to break radar locks by missiles but not to get a detection advantage).
110 million as a target price for the J-20 is actually a very excellent price at this rate. It's 38% more expensive than the current F-35, meaning that it's not wildly more expensive, but neither is it cheap enough to push it into a plane spam category ("I'm going to fly 3,000 J-20s and outnumber your F-35s!).