Exactly. Two groups of engineers competing for the same pot. I just feel, from parent AVIC bean counter's point of view, only one will eventually win and I think the 'natural' winner is CJ-1000A. Not a huge loss for XAC as they have the WS-20 program and not much effort is wasted. Just rename AEF-1300 as WS-20B (that may already be the case so just no extra pocket money to build another XAEC hotel in Shenyang).
If that picture of CJ-1000A on a Y-20 is real, I am guessing AECC poured enough resources into CJ-1000A and it caught up or ahead of the AEF-1300 development which is excellent news for all. Has there ever been a picture of a working AEF-1300. CAAC is very protective of its reputation and is very strict. ARJ-21 (EASA only) and MA-60 (neither EASA nor FAA) had similar issues with CAAC. C919 is the first with all paperwork done properly.
I remember when AECC was first created, Aviation Week magazine had an article comparing the number of engineers at GE/RR vs AECC and commented that it was a good start but China still wasn't putting nearly enough money into engine development to be competitive. I don't remember the numbers but the gap was huge (1/5?). AECC does sounds much more confident these days.
CJ-1000A has blades, compressor, and other major parts from foreign sources, mostly European. It is not suitable for military use.
On the other hand, the two projects have different goals, therefore will have different priorities, resulting in different designs.