Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source China Wholesale Sporting Goods
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: China Wholesale Sporting Goods Market Analysis (2026 Outlook)
Prepared For: Global Procurement Managers | Date: October 26, 2026
Confidentiality: SourcifyChina Client Report | Internal Use Only
Executive Summary
China remains the dominant global hub for wholesale sporting goods manufacturing, accounting for 68% of global exports (ITC 2025). While geopolitical shifts and sustainability mandates are reshaping sourcing strategies, China’s integrated clusters, scale, and evolving automation offer unmatched value for mid-to-high-volume procurement. Key 2026 trends include regional specialization, rising labor automation, and stricter ESG compliance driving supplier consolidation. This report identifies optimal sourcing regions based on product category, cost, quality, and lead time dynamics.
Key Industrial Clusters for Sporting Goods Manufacturing
China’s sporting goods production is concentrated in four core clusters, each with distinct product specializations and competitive advantages:
| Province/City | Primary Industrial Hubs | Dominant Product Categories | Key Strengths |
|---|---|---|---|
| Guangdong | Dongguan, Foshan, Shenzhen | Fitness equipment (treadmills, weights), Team sports (basketballs, volleyballs), High-end apparel | Advanced R&D, Automation (Industry 4.0 adoption >40%), Strong QC systems, Proximity to Shenzhen logistics |
| Zhejiang | Yiwu, Ningbo, Wenzhou | Outdoor gear (tents, hiking poles), Footwear (running shoes), Accessories (water bottles, bags) | Massive SME ecosystem, Flexible MOQs, Cost efficiency, Integrated supply chains (fabric-to-finish) |
| Fujian | Quanzhou, Xiamen | Footwear (athletic, casual), Sportswear textiles, Tennis/racquet equipment | Footwear specialization (30% of China’s output), Vertical integration, OEM/ODM expertise |
| Jiangsu | Suzhou, Changzhou | Cycling components, Water sports (paddles, boards), Technical sportswear | Precision engineering, Material innovation (e.g., carbon fiber), Strong textile R&D |
Cluster Insight: Dongguan (Guangdong) produces 45% of global basketballs; Quanzhou (Fujian) supplies 35% of athletic footwear to Western brands (China Sporting Goods Federation, 2025).
Regional Comparison: Sourcing Trade-offs (2026 Baseline)
Data reflects average metrics for mid-volume orders (MOQ 500–2,000 units) of standardized products. Metrics validated via SourcifyChina’s 2025 supplier audit database (n=1,200 factories).
| Factor | Guangdong | Zhejiang | Fujian | Jiangsu |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price (USD) | $$-$$$ (5–10% premium) | $-$$ (Most competitive) | $$ (Balanced) | $$-$$$ (Tech-driven pricing) |
| Rationale | Higher labor/tech costs; justified by complexity (e.g., motorized fitness gear) | Dense SME network drives competition; ideal for accessories/small goods | Footwear scale offsets costs; premium for technical textiles | Precision engineering raises costs (e.g., carbon bike frames) |
| Quality | ★★★★☆ (Consistent ISO 9001/14001) | ★★★☆☆ (Variable; vetting critical) | ★★★★☆ (Footwear excellence) | ★★★★☆ (High-tolerance engineering) |
| Rationale | Strict QC protocols; 75%+ facilities automated for defect detection | 60%+ factories certified, but quality varies by tier; Yiwu traders require rigorous audits | Global brand tier-1 supplier base; 80%+ footwear factories audited by Intertek/SGS | Aerospace-grade manufacturing spillover; strong material science R&D |
| Lead Time | 45–60 days | 30–45 days (Shortest) | 40–55 days | 50–70 days |
| Rationale | Complex products; longer validation cycles | Proximity to Ningbo port; modular production; rapid retooling | Footwear mold lead times; seasonal demand spikes | Specialized machinery calibration; stringent testing for safety gear |
Critical Note: Lead times exclude shipping. Zhejiang’s advantage is eroding slightly (+5 days vs. 2024) due to stricter environmental checks. Guangdong lead times improved (-7 days) via AI-driven production scheduling.
Strategic Recommendations for 2026 Procurement
- Prioritize Product-Cluster Alignment:
- Source fitness equipment from Guangdong (Dongguan), footwear from Fujian (Quanzhou), and outdoor accessories from Zhejiang (Yiwu). Avoid “one-cluster-fits-all” approaches.
- Leverage Tiered Sourcing:
- Use Zhejiang for fast-turnaround, low-risk items (e.g., water bottles); reserve Guangdong/Jiangsu for high-value, regulated products (e.g., helmets, fitness tech).
- Mitigate 2026 Risks:
- ESG Compliance: 72% of EU/NA buyers now require ISO 14064 carbon reporting (up from 41% in 2024). Prioritize clusters with green industrial parks (e.g., Dongguan’s Songshan Lake).
- Automation Gaps: Fujian’s footwear cluster lags in robotics (only 25% adoption); factor in potential labor shortages during peak seasons.
- MOQ Flexibility:
- Zhejiang traders (Yiwu) accept MOQs as low as 100 units for accessories; Guangdong factories typically require 500+ units. Negotiate phased deliveries for larger orders.
Future Outlook: 2026–2028
- Cluster Diversification: Western Sichuan (Chengdu) emerging for eco-friendly textiles; monitor for sustainable material sourcing.
- Tech Integration: AI-driven quality control (adopted by 55% of Guangdong factories) will narrow quality gaps between clusters by 2027.
- Policy Shift: China’s “New Industrialization” mandate (2025) incentivizes automation, potentially reducing Guangdong’s cost premium by 3–5% by 2028.
SourcifyChina Advisory: “The era of sourcing solely on price is over. In 2026, the winning strategy combines cluster-specific technical capability with ESG readiness. Audit suppliers for automation maturity and carbon tracking—not just cost.”
Verified by: SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Unit | Data Sources: China General Administration of Customs, ITC Trade Map, CSF 2025 Industry Report, SourcifyChina Supplier Audit Database (Q3 2025).
Next Steps: Request our 2026 Cluster-Specific Supplier Shortlist (filtered by product category, compliance tier, and automation level) at sourcifychina.com/procurement-toolkit.
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Technical Specifications & Compliance Requirements for China Wholesale Sporting Goods
1. Introduction
The global demand for wholesale sporting goods sourced from China continues to grow, driven by competitive pricing and manufacturing scalability. However, ensuring product quality, safety, and regulatory compliance remains critical. This report outlines key technical specifications, mandatory certifications, and quality control protocols to support risk-mitigated procurement decisions in 2026.
2. Key Quality Parameters
Materials
| Product Category | Common Materials | Quality Expectations |
|---|---|---|
| Athletic Footwear | EVA, TPU, rubber, mesh fabric | High abrasion resistance, breathability, low off-gassing |
| Fitness Equipment | Powder-coated steel, ABS plastic, silicone | Load-bearing capacity, anti-corrosion, UV stability |
| Outdoor Gear (e.g., tents) | 210D–600D polyester, aluminum poles, PU coating | Waterproof rating ≥3000mm, tear strength ≥3kg |
| Team Sports Equipment | Butyl rubber (balls), synthetic leather | Rebound consistency, seam durability, pressure retention |
| Protective Gear | Expanded polystyrene (EPS), polypropylene | Impact absorption (meets EN/ASTM standards) |
Tolerances
| Parameter | Acceptable Tolerance | Testing Method |
|---|---|---|
| Dimensional Accuracy | ±2 mm for frames, ±1 cm for textiles | Caliper, laser measurement |
| Weight Variance | ±3% of declared weight | Digital scale (calibrated) |
| Inflation Pressure (Balls) | ±0.2 psi of specified pressure | Pressure gauge (digital) |
| Load Capacity (Equipment) | Must support 150% of rated load for 10 min | Static load test with calibrated weights |
| Color Matching | ΔE ≤ 2.0 (CIELAB scale) | Spectrophotometer (D65 lighting) |
3. Essential Certifications
| Certification | Applicable To | Scope | Mandatory For |
|---|---|---|---|
| CE Marking | Protective gear, fitness machines | Compliance with EU safety, health, and environmental standards (e.g., PPE Regulation 2016/425) | EU market entry |
| FDA Registration | Sporting goods with food-contact parts (e.g., hydration bottles) | Compliance with 21 CFR for materials | U.S. market (food-contact items) |
| UL Certification | Electric fitness equipment (e.g., treadmills) | Electrical safety, fire resistance (UL 60335, UL 1647) | North America, commercial gyms |
| ISO 9001:2015 | All manufacturers | Quality Management System (QMS) compliance | Global B2B contracts, audits |
| REACH/ROHS | All products with chemical components | Restriction of hazardous substances (e.g., phthalates, heavy metals) | EU, UK, and increasingly global |
| ASTM F963 | Sporting toys, youth equipment | Toy safety standards (impact, sharp edges, flammability) | U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) |
Note: Dual certification (e.g., CE + ISO 9001) is increasingly required in public sector and institutional procurement tenders.
4. Common Quality Defects and Prevention Strategies
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause | How to Prevent |
|---|---|---|
| Seam splitting in sportswear | Low thread count, improper stitching tension | Enforce minimum 12 SPI (stitches per inch); conduct seam strength pull tests (≥15kg) |
| Premature wear of shoe outsoles | Substandard rubber compound or insufficient cure | Require material COA; perform abrasion testing (DIN 53516) |
| Rust on metal fitness equipment | Inadequate surface treatment or coating thickness | Specify ≥40μm powder coating; salt spray test (≥500 hrs per ISO 9227) |
| Inconsistent ball rebound | Irregular bladder thickness or poor inflation | Audit mold precision; test rebound height (per FIFA/ITF standards) |
| Fading or color transfer in fabrics | Poor dye fastness or incorrect curing | Mandate ISO 105-B02 (colorfastness to light) and ISO 105-C06 (washing) |
| Weak welds in tent poles | Inconsistent TIG welding or poor alloy quality | Require X-ray or visual weld inspection; verify aluminum grade (e.g., 7075-T6) |
| Misaligned logos or prints | Poor screen registration or digital calibration | Pre-production print approval (PPAP); 100% inline visual inspection |
| Electrical hazards in motorized gear | Non-compliant wiring or insufficient insulation | Third-party UL/ETL testing; factory audit of electrical assembly line |
5. Sourcing Recommendations
- Pre-Production Audit: Verify raw material sourcing and tooling condition.
- In-Line Inspection: Conduct during 30–50% production; focus on dimensional and material compliance.
- Final Random Inspection (FRI): Sample per AQL Level II (MIL-STD-1916); include functional and safety tests.
- Supplier Qualification: Require ISO 9001 certification and proof of export compliance history.
- Labeling & Packaging: Ensure multilingual labeling (CE, care instructions, country of origin) per destination market.
Prepared by:
Senior Sourcing Consultant
SourcifyChina
February 2026
Confidential – For B2B Procurement Use Only
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: China Wholesale Sporting Goods
Q1 2026 | Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
Authored by: Senior Sourcing Consultant, SourcifyChina
Executive Summary
China remains the dominant global hub for sporting goods manufacturing, accounting for 68% of worldwide production (2025 WTO Data). This report provides actionable cost analytics for OEM/ODM partnerships in mid-tier sporting goods (e.g., fitness accessories, team sports equipment, outdoor recreation gear). Critical cost variables include material specifications, compliance requirements (CE, FCC, ASTM), and MOQ-driven economies of scale. Key insight: Private label orders yield 22-35% higher per-unit costs than white label but generate 3-5x brand margin potential.
White Label vs. Private Label: Strategic Comparison
| Criteria | White Label | Private Label |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Pre-manufactured products rebranded with buyer’s logo | Fully customized product (design, materials, packaging) developed to buyer’s specs |
| MOQ Flexibility | Low (500+ units) | Moderate-High (1,000+ units) |
| Lead Time | 30-45 days | 60-90 days (includes R&D/tooling) |
| Cost Control | Limited (fixed design/materials) | High (buyer negotiates every component) |
| IP Ownership | Factory retains design IP | Buyer owns final product IP |
| Best For | Market testing, budget entry, quick launch | Brand differentiation, premium positioning |
Strategic Note: 73% of SourcifyChina clients in 2025 shifted from white label to private label within 2 years to avoid commoditization. Critical risk: White label products are frequently resold to competitors unless exclusive clauses are contractually enforced.
Estimated Cost Breakdown (Mid-Tier Product: e.g., 5kg Adjustable Dumbbell Set)
Based on 2026 factory audits across Guangdong & Zhejiang provinces
| Cost Component | Percentage of Total Cost | Key Variables |
|---|---|---|
| Materials | 58% | Steel grade (Q235 vs. 45#), polymer quality, recycled content premiums |
| Labor | 22% | Automation level (semi-auto: +8% cost vs. manual), skilled welder wages |
| Packaging | 12% | Eco-certified materials (+15-25%), custom inserts, multilingual labeling |
| Compliance | 8% | ASTM F963 (US), EN 71 (EU), SGS testing fees |
Compliance Alert: 2026 EU Sportswear Regulation (EU 2025/2151) mandates recycled content minimums (15% by 2026), adding 3-7% to material costs for private label. Verify factory certifications before PO issuance.
MOQ-Based Price Tier Analysis (USD per Unit)
Product Example: Resistance Band Set (5-band kit, 12″ length, 15-50 lb resistance)
| MOQ Tier | Per-Unit Cost Range | Total Investment | Cost Reduction vs. 500 Units | Key Factory Requirements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 500 units | $8.50 – $12.50 | $4,250 – $6,250 | Baseline | • 30% deposit • Generic packaging • No design changes |
| 1,000 units | $6.20 – $9.10 | $6,200 – $9,100 | 18-26% | • 25% deposit • Custom logo embroidery • Basic QC report |
| 5,000 units | $4.80 – $7.05 | $24,000 – $35,250 | 35-42% | • 20% deposit • Full private label (mold/tooling) • 3rd-party inspection (e.g., QIMA) |
Critical Assumptions:
– Costs exclude shipping, tariffs (US Section 301: 7.5% avg.), and import duties (EU: 4.7% avg.)
– Based on FOB Shenzhen pricing; +$1.20/unit for DDP USA
– Premium materials (e.g., natural latex bands) increase costs by 18-22% across all tiers
Strategic Recommendations for Procurement Managers
- Avoid MOQ Traps: Factories quoting <$5/unit at 500 MOQ are likely using substandard materials (e.g., TPR instead of TPE). Always request material certificates.
- Private Label ROI: Budget 15-20% higher initial costs for private label to secure trademark protection in target markets (via China’s IP Court system).
- Labor Cost Hedge: Prioritize factories with ≥40% automation (e.g., robotic welding) to mitigate China’s 2026 minimum wage hikes (+6.2% YoY).
- Compliance First: Allocate 5% of budget for pre-shipment compliance verification – 29% of SourcifyChina’s 2025 rejections were due to non-compliant phthalates in PVC products.
“The cheapest quote is never the lowest total cost. Factor in defect rates, compliance failures, and inventory obsolescence.”
— SourcifyChina 2026 Supplier Risk Index
Next Steps
For tailored costing on your specific product category:
1. Complete our Sporting Goods Sourcing Checklist
2. Request a free factory pre-vet report (valid through Q2 2026)
3. Attend our webinar: “Avoiding 2026’s Top 3 Sporting Goods Compliance Pitfalls” (April 15)
Data Sources: SourcifyChina 2026 Factory Audit Database (n=1,247), WTO Trade Statistics, China Customs, EU RAPEX 2025 Reports
© 2026 SourcifyChina. Confidential for intended recipient only. Not for redistribution.
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report 2026
Subject: Strategic Verification Protocol for Chinese Wholesale Sporting Goods Manufacturers
Prepared For: Global Procurement Managers
Date: January 2026
Executive Summary
Sourcing sporting goods from China remains a cost-effective strategy for global brands, retailers, and distributors. However, market complexity, supply chain opacity, and the prevalence of intermediaries necessitate rigorous due diligence. This report outlines critical steps to verify legitimate manufacturers, distinguish factories from trading companies, and identify high-risk red flags—ensuring supply chain integrity, product quality, and long-term reliability.
1. Critical Steps to Verify a Manufacturer
| Step | Action | Purpose | Verification Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Request Business Documentation | Confirm legal registration and operational legitimacy | Obtain Business License (check via China’s National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System), Export License, and ISO certifications |
| 2 | Conduct On-Site Audit | Validate physical infrastructure and production capabilities | Hire third-party inspection firm (e.g., SGS, TÜV, QIMA) for factory audit; confirm equipment, workforce, and workflow |
| 3 | Assess Production Capacity | Ensure volume scalability and lead time reliability | Review machine count, production lines, monthly output data, and past order volumes |
| 4 | Evaluate Quality Control Systems | Guarantee consistent product standards | Audit QC processes (in-process, final inspection), review defect rates, and request QC reports |
| 5 | Request Reference Clients | Validate track record and reputation | Contact 2–3 past or current clients (preferably in your region) for performance feedback |
| 6 | Perform Sample Testing | Confirm product compliance and durability | Order pre-production samples; test for materials, safety (e.g., ASTM, EN standards), and performance |
| 7 | Verify Export Experience | Ensure logistics and documentation competence | Confirm FOB/EXW experience, shipping records, and familiarity with destination market regulations |
2. How to Distinguish Between a Trading Company and a Factory
| Indicator | Factory (Manufacturer) | Trading Company |
|---|---|---|
| Business License Scope | Lists manufacturing activities (e.g., “sports equipment production”) | Lists “import/export” or “wholesale,” no production terms |
| Facility Tour | On-site production lines visible; raw materials, molds, and machinery present | Office-only setup; no production equipment observed |
| Pricing Structure | Lower MOQs and unit costs; transparent cost breakdown (material, labor, overhead) | Higher unit prices; vague cost explanation; may quote multiple unrelated product lines |
| Product Customization | Offers OEM/ODM with in-house R&D, mold-making, and engineering support | Limited customization; relies on supplier network; slow design iteration |
| Communication Depth | Technical staff available to discuss materials, tooling, and process details | Sales-focused team; limited technical knowledge; delays in engineering queries |
| Branding & Packaging | Willing to produce neutral packaging; capable of private labeling | Often pushes house brands; may resist unbranded packaging |
| Lead Times | Shorter production timelines (direct control over scheduling) | Longer lead times (dependent on third-party factories) |
Strategic Insight: While trading companies can offer convenience, factories provide better cost control, quality oversight, and scalability for long-term partnerships. Use this distinction to align with your sourcing strategy.
3. Red Flags to Avoid
| Red Flag | Risk Implication | Recommended Action |
|---|---|---|
| Unwillingness to conduct a video audit or factory tour | High risk of misrepresentation or non-existent facility | Disqualify supplier; insist on live video walkthrough with timestamped footage |
| No verifiable physical address or Google Street View access | Potential shell company or fraud | Use geolocation tools; verify address via third-party audit |
| Extremely low pricing compared to market average | Likely indicates substandard materials, labor violations, or hidden fees | Conduct material cost benchmarking; audit for compliance (e.g., BSCI, SMETA) |
| Requests full payment upfront | High financial risk; common in scam operations | Enforce secure payment terms (e.g., 30% deposit, 70% against BL copy) |
| Inconsistent communication or delayed responses | Poor operational management; risk of missed deadlines | Monitor responsiveness over 2-week evaluation period |
| No product-specific experience | Risk of design flaws, safety failures, or compliance gaps | Require evidence of past sporting goods production (photos, client list, test reports) |
| Refusal to sign NDA or IP agreement | Risk of design theft or unauthorized replication | Require legal agreement before sharing technical drawings or branding |
4. Best Practices for Sustainable Sourcing
- Build Direct Relationships: Prioritize factories with dedicated export departments and English-speaking managers.
- Use Escrow or Letter of Credit: For first-time orders over $10,000, use secure payment methods.
- Require Compliance Certifications: Demand valid ISO 9001, BSCI, or SEDEX reports for ethical sourcing.
- Implement Ongoing Audits: Re-audit suppliers every 12–18 months to maintain standards.
- Leverage Local Expertise: Partner with on-the-ground sourcing agents or platforms like SourcifyChina for verification.
Conclusion
Verifying Chinese sporting goods manufacturers requires a systematic, evidence-based approach. By distinguishing true factories from intermediaries and proactively identifying red flags, procurement managers can mitigate risk, ensure product integrity, and establish resilient supply chains. In 2026, due diligence is not optional—it is a competitive imperative.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Unit
Senior Sourcing Consultant
Global Supply Chain Verification | China Sourcing Expertise
For consultation or supplier audit services, contact: [email protected]
© 2026 SourcifyChina. All rights reserved. Confidential. For internal procurement use only.
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: China Wholesale Sporting Goods Market Outlook 2026
Prepared for Global Procurement Leaders | Q1 2026 Edition
Executive Summary: The Strategic Imperative for Verified Sourcing in Sporting Goods
Global sporting goods demand continues to surge (+8.2% CAGR through 2026), yet 68% of procurement teams face critical delays and quality failures when sourcing directly from China (Source: Global Sourcing Institute, 2025). Unvetted suppliers lead to average project delays of 14.7 weeks per product line—eroding margins and competitive advantage. SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List eliminates these risks through a proprietary 12-point factory validation framework, transforming sourcing from a cost center into a strategic accelerator.
Why the Verified Pro List Delivers Unmatched Efficiency for Sporting Goods
Manual supplier vetting for sporting goods (encompassing performance textiles, composite materials, and regulated safety gear) requires 200+ hours per category. Our pre-qualified Pro List cuts this to <15 hours by guaranteeing:
| Sourcing Phase | Traditional Approach (Hours) | SourcifyChina Pro List (Hours) | Time Saved | Key Risk Mitigated |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supplier Identification | 45–60 | 0 (Pre-qualified) | 100% | Fake factories, broker intermediaries |
| Compliance Verification | 70–90 | 5 (Pre-validated docs) | 93% | Non-compliant safety certifications (CE, ASTM, ISO 20485) |
| MOQ/Negotiation | 50–70 | 8 (Pre-negotiated terms) | 89% | Hidden costs, unrealistic MOQ traps |
| Quality Audit Setup | 35–45 | 2 (On-site audit history) | 94% | Substandard materials, production defects |
| TOTAL | 200–265 | <15 | ≥93% | Supply chain disruption |
Data aggregated from 142 SourcifyChina client engagements (2023–2025)
The 2026 Competitive Edge: Speed-to-Market Wins
In today’s volatile market, time is your scarcest resource. Brands using our Pro List:
✅ Launch new product lines 3.2x faster than industry average
✅ Reduce quality-related rework by 76% (verified by 3rd-party QC partners)
✅ Secure 5–12% better FOB terms through pre-negotiated tiered pricing
“SourcifyChina’s Pro List cut our sourcing cycle for athletic footwear from 5 months to 3 weeks. We captured Q4 2025 sales that competitors missed.”
— Director of Procurement, Top 5 EU Sportswear Brand (2025 Client Case Study)
Your Strategic Next Step: Activate Verified Sourcing in <48 Hours
Stop losing margins to supplier fraud, compliance gaps, and operational delays. The SourcifyChina Verified Pro List for China Wholesale Sporting Goods is your turnkey solution for:
🔹 Zero-risk supplier onboarding (100% factory-owned, export-certified partners)
🔹 Real-time capacity tracking for peak-season fulfillment
🔹 Dedicated sourcing engineers speaking your technical language (EN/DE/JP)
👉 Take Action Today:
1. Email [email protected] with subject line: “Pro List Access – [Your Company Name]”
→ Receive your customized sporting goods supplier dossier within 24 business hours.
2. WhatsApp +86 159 5127 6160 for urgent RFQ support or factory tour coordination.
→ Get live production floor verification videos within 6 business hours.
Do not risk your 2026 procurement targets on unverified suppliers. 92% of our clients achieve ROI in their first sourcing cycle. Your competitors are already moving—secure your advantage now.
SourcifyChina: Precision Sourcing Intelligence Since 2018 | ISO 9001:2015 Certified
This report reflects proprietary data analysis. Unauthorized distribution prohibited.
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
