As for the similarities and differences between the capital circulation theories of Das Kapital and Tableau Economique, there have been two views in the academic circle, namely, "the theory of similarity" and "the theory of transcendence". However, there are obvious defects in these two views: "the theory of similarity" emphasizes more the similarities between Marx’s and Quesnay’s capital cycle theories in "research methods", "internal logic" and "practical applications", while ignoring the theoretical views formed by Marx’s criticism of Quesnay; "the theory of transcendence" emphasizes more on the differences between the two scholars’ academic positions, as well as the resulting differences in the capital cycle theory. The two views do not fully reflect the similarities and differences between Das Kapital and Tableau Economique in the theory of capital circulation. After comparing the capital cycle theories of the two from the perspective of "main viewpoints" and "methodology", this study finds that the capital cycle theories of Das Kapital and Tableau Economique show the coexistence of "similar main viewpoints" and "different methodologies". Through in-depth analysis of this unique academic phenomenon, it is found that there are still many similarities in the main points of view of the capital cycle theory of Das Kapital and Tableau Economique when the methodology is different. The main reason is that Marx and Quesnay both experienced the link of "economic relationship" analysis when investigating the capital cycle problem. However, as Marx and Quesnay have different understandings of "general labor" and "natural order", there are fundamental differences between the two capital circulation theories. Although he has repeatedly agreed with Quesnay’s theory of capital circulation, Marx has also realized that his own theoretical views are different from those of the Tableau Economique, but due to the influence of subjective and objective factors, Marx has not fully demonstrated his theoretical differences with Quesnay on the issue of capital circulation in subsequent studies. Through the comparison of the two capital circulation theories, we can also see that the unity of "main viewpoints" and "methodology" is the attribute of Marxist economic theory. This theoretical attribute also affected Marx’s absorption and criticism of the capital cycle theory of other economic schools and economists in the same period. Mastering this theoretical attribute of Marxist economics is of great significance for absorbing the new views of contemporary economic schools on capital circulation, promoting the innovation of contemporary Chinese Marxist capital circulation theory and building a new development pattern with "domestic big circulation as the main body and domestic and international double circulation promoting each other".