Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source Activewear Supplier China
SourcifyChina B2B Sourcing Intelligence Report: China Activewear Manufacturing Landscape 2026
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers | Q1 2026 | Confidential
Executive Summary
China remains the dominant global hub for activewear manufacturing, controlling 68% of the $320B global athletic apparel market (SourcifyChina Market Analytics, 2026). While rising labor costs (+8.2% YoY) and ESG compliance demands reshape the landscape, strategic regional specialization offers procurement managers significant optimization opportunities. This report identifies critical industrial clusters, quantifies regional trade-offs, and provides actionable sourcing protocols for 2026. Key insight: Premium Western brands now source 42% of technical activewear from Guangdong, while fast-fashion retailers leverage Zhejiang’s integrated supply chains for sub-45-day lead times.
Key Industrial Clusters for Activewear Manufacturing
China’s activewear production is concentrated in three primary clusters, each with distinct capabilities:
| Cluster | Core Cities | Specialization | Key Strengths | Target Client Profile |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pearl River Delta | Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Dongguan, Foshan | Premium technical fabrics, seamless knitting, smart textiles, R&D-intensive designs | Highest quality control (AQL 1.0 standard), fastest prototyping (<14 days), strong compliance tracking | Luxury brands, Performance sportswear (Nike, Lululemon tier) |
| Yangtze River Delta | Ningbo, Hangzhou, Suzhou, Shanghai | High-volume production, cost-optimized basics, recycled materials, full-package solutions | Most integrated supply chain (fabric → trim → logistics), lowest MOQ flexibility (500 units), fastest bulk lead times | Fast-fashion (Zara, H&M), Mid-tier activewear brands |
| Fujian Cluster | Jinjiang, Quanzhou, Xiamen | Mid-range performance wear, knit-focused production, sustainable fabric innovation | Rapid scaling capacity (+30% 2025-26), emerging eco-certifications (GRS, BCI), competitive labor costs | DTC brands, Eco-conscious retailers, Private label |
Note: Jiangsu Province (Suzhou/Changshu) is emerging for high-end technical fabric production but lacks full garment assembly scale. Avoid fragmented clusters like Fujian’s Quanzhou for complex cut-and-sew.
Regional Comparison: Critical Sourcing Metrics (2026 Baseline)
Data reflects FOB pricing for 10,000-unit orders of mid-weight polyester-spandex leggings (250gsm), standard AQL 2.5 inspection.
| Parameter | Pearl River Delta (Guangdong) | Yangtze River Delta (Zhejiang/Jiangsu) | Fujian Cluster | Strategic Implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price (USD/unit) | $4.80 – $6.20 | $3.90 – $5.10 | $4.20 – $5.50 | Zhejiang offers 18-22% cost advantage for standardized items; Guangdong premium justified for technical specs. |
| Quality Tier | ★★★★☆ (Premium) | ★★★☆☆ (Standard) | ★★★☆☆ (Good) | Guangdong: 95%+ factories certified to ISO 9001 & OEKO-TEX; Zhejiang: 70% compliance with basic BSCI audits. |
| Lead Time (Days) | 45-60 | 35-45 | 40-55 | Zhejiang’s integrated clusters enable fastest bulk production; Guangdong adds 7-10 days for complex tech features. |
| MOQ Flexibility | 1,000+ units/style | 500-800 units/style | 800-1,200 units/style | Zhejiang critical for test runs; Guangdong less flexible for small batches. |
| Fabric Sourcing | On-site mills (premium tech) | 1-2 day fabric access (Ningbo Port) | 3-5 day fabric access | Zhejiang’s proximity to Ningbo Port cuts fabric delays by 50% vs. Fujian. |
Critical 2026 Sourcing Considerations
- Compliance Risk Premium:
- Guangdong factories charge +7-10% for full SMETA 6.0 + Carbon Neutral certification (mandatory for EU/NA brands in 2026).
-
Action: Budget compliance costs upfront; Fujian factories face 22% audit failure rates on chemical management (SourcifyChina Audit Database).
-
Supply Chain Vulnerability:
- Yangtze Delta faces port congestion (Ningbo Port avg. 4.2-day delay); Pearl River Delta benefits from Shenzhen Shekou’s dedicated apparel lanes.
-
Action: For Q4 deliveries, prioritize Guangdong to avoid Ningbo holiday bottlenecks.
-
Innovation Gap:
- 63% of Guangdong factories offer bio-based fabrics (e.g., Sorona, SeaQual); Zhejiang lags at 28% (2026 China Textile Institute Data).
- Action: Source R&D projects from Guangdong; use Zhejiang for established SKUs.
SourcifyChina Strategic Recommendations
✅ For Premium/Technical Activewear:
– Source from: Guangdong (Dongguan/Shenzhen)
– Why:* Unmatched quality control for moisture-wicking, 4-way stretch, and UV-protection finishes. Expect +15% cost but 30% fewer post-shipment defects.
✅ For Volume-Driven Fast Fashion:
– Source from: Zhejiang (Ningbo/Hangzhou)
– Why:* Leverage 120+ integrated mills for sub-50-day total lead times. Ideal for cotton-blend basics where price sensitivity > innovation.
⚠️ High-Risk Avoidance:
– Do not source cut-and-sew from Fujian for complex designs (e.g., bonded seams, laser-cut details) – 34% defect rate on technical garments (2025 client data).
Next Steps for Procurement Managers
- Cluster-Specific Vetting: Request factory audit reports filtered by province-specific compliance standards (e.g., Zhejiang factories require port clearance documentation).
- MOQ Negotiation: Target Zhejiang for <1,000-unit orders; use Guangdong only for orders >3,000 units to offset premiums.
- 2026 Compliance Checklist: Verify factories have GB/T 31127-2025 (new Chinese eco-activewear standard) – non-compliant suppliers face 20% export delays.
“The era of ‘China = low cost’ is over. Winning in 2026 requires surgical precision in cluster selection – balancing innovation, compliance, and velocity.”
— SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Unit
Data Sources: SourcifyChina Factory Audit Database (Q4 2025), China National Textile & Apparel Council (CNTAC), World Bank Logistics Performance Index 2026.
Confidential – For Client Use Only | © 2026 SourcifyChina. All Rights Reserved.
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
SourcifyChina Sourcing Report 2026
Subject: Technical & Compliance Guidelines for Activewear Suppliers in China
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
Executive Summary
China remains a dominant hub for activewear manufacturing, offering scalable production, competitive pricing, and evolving technical capabilities. However, quality consistency, compliance adherence, and supply chain transparency remain critical challenges. This report outlines essential technical specifications, compliance benchmarks, and risk mitigation strategies for sourcing high-performance activewear from Chinese suppliers.
1. Technical Specifications: Key Quality Parameters
1.1 Materials
Activewear performance is heavily material-dependent. Key parameters include:
| Parameter | Specification | Recommended Standards |
|---|---|---|
| Fabric Composition | Minimum 80% polyester/spandex blend; 88/12 or 92/8 for optimal stretch & recovery | AATCC TM118, ISO 1833 |
| Weight (GSM) | 180–240 gsm for mid-weight performance wear | ISO 3801 |
| Moisture Wicking | ≥ 100 mm water rise in 10 min (vertical wicking test) | AATCC TM195 |
| UV Protection (UPF) | UPF 30–50+ for outdoor activewear | AS/NZS 4399:2017 |
| Elastic Recovery | ≥ 95% recovery after 100 stretch cycles | ASTM D2594 |
| Pilling Resistance | Minimum 3–4 on Martindale or ASTM D4966 scale | ISO 12945-2 |
1.2 Tolerances
Precision in fit and dimensions ensures product consistency:
| Dimension | Acceptable Tolerance | Testing Method |
|---|---|---|
| Garment Length | ±1.0 cm | ISO 3759 |
| Chest/Girth | ±1.5 cm | ISO 3759 |
| Sleeve Length | ±0.8 cm | ISO 3759 |
| Waistband Elastic Tension | ±10% of specified force | ASTM D6614 |
| Seam Strength | ≥ 8 lbs (35.6 N) for side seams | ASTM D1683 |
2. Essential Certifications
Global market access requires adherence to international standards. Suppliers must hold or provide documentation for:
| Certification | Scope | Relevance for Activewear |
|---|---|---|
| ISO 9001:2015 | Quality Management System | Mandatory for process consistency and defect control |
| OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 | Harmful Substance Testing | Ensures textiles are free from toxic dyes, formaldehyde, heavy metals |
| REACH (EC 1907/2006) | Chemical Safety (EU) | Compliance for phthalates, AZO dyes, and restricted substances |
| CA65 (Prop 65) | California Safe Drinking Water Act | Required for U.S. market; warns of carcinogens |
| BSCI / SMETA | Social Compliance Audit | Ethical labor practices; often required by EU/US brands |
| ISO 14001 | Environmental Management | Growing importance for ESG reporting and brand compliance |
Note: CE marking does not apply directly to general activewear unless integrated with PPE (e.g., high-visibility sportswear). UL and FDA are not typically applicable unless product includes electronic components (e.g., smart garments) or medical claims.
3. Common Quality Defects and Prevention Strategies
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause | Prevention Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Color Variation (Shading) | Inconsistent dye lots or temperature control | Enforce batch testing (AATCC TM179); approve lab dips and strike-offs |
| Seam Slippage | Poor thread quality or incorrect stitch density | Specify minimum 12 stitches per inch (SPI); use bonded or overlock + chainstitch for stress points |
| Puckering at Seams | Excessive thread tension or incorrect needle size | Calibrate machines regularly; use appropriate needle type (e.g., ballpoint for knits) |
| Fabric Pilling | Low fiber quality or inadequate finishing | Source high-tenacity polyester; require enzyme washing or anti-pilling treatment |
| Dimensional Shrinkage >5% | Inadequate pre-shrinking | Mandate mechanical pre-shrinking; conduct post-wash testing (AATCC TM135) |
| Misaligned Prints/Logos | Poor screen registration or fabric tension | Conduct print alignment audits; use digital printing for precision |
| Odor Retention | Residual chemicals or poor antimicrobial treatment | Require OEKO-TEX certification; conduct sniff tests post-production |
| Zipper Failure (Split Teeth, Stuck Slider) | Low-quality zippers or improper attachment | Source YKK or equivalent; conduct zipper strength test (ASTM D5429) |
4. Sourcing Recommendations
- Audit Suppliers: Conduct on-site quality audits using ISO-based checklists.
- Implement AQL Standards: Enforce AQL 2.5 (major defects) and AQL 4.0 (minor defects) during final inspections.
- Require Lab Test Reports: Insist on third-party lab reports (SGS, Intertek, TÜV) for every production batch.
- Secure PPAP Documentation: For private-label or technical lines, require Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) Level 3.
- Use Tech Packs: Provide detailed tech packs with measurements, material specs, BOM, and artwork files.
Prepared by: SourcifyChina – Senior Sourcing Consultants
Q1 2026 | For Internal Use by Procurement Teams Only
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: China Activewear Manufacturing Outlook 2026
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
Date: October 26, 2025 | Report ID: SC-ACV-2026-001
Executive Summary
China retains its position as the dominant global hub for activewear manufacturing, offering 20-35% cost advantages over Southeast Asian alternatives for mid-to-high-volume orders. However, rising labor costs (+5.2% YoY), material volatility, and stringent compliance requirements necessitate strategic supplier selection. This report provides actionable cost benchmarks and clarifies critical sourcing models (White Label vs. Private Label) to optimize total landed cost and risk mitigation.
1. White Label vs. Private Label: Strategic Differentiation
Critical for brand positioning and cost control. Misclassification leads to quality disputes and IP risks.
| Criteria | White Label | Private Label |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Generic product sold under buyer’s brand; no design input. Factory owns specs. | Buyer controls design, materials, and branding; factory executes to buyer’s specs. |
| MOQ Flexibility | Low (500-1,000 units) – uses existing molds/tools | Moderate-High (1,000-5,000+ units) – requires new tooling |
| Lead Time | 30-45 days (off-the-shelf) | 60-90 days (custom development) |
| Quality Control Risk | High (factory sets QC standards) | Medium (buyer enforces QC protocols) |
| IP Protection | Factory retains design rights | Buyer owns all specifications & branding |
| Best For | Test markets, urgent replenishment | Brand differentiation, premium positioning |
Key Insight: 68% of SourcifyChina clients transitioning from White Label to Private Label report +22% average margin due to reduced discounting pressure. Avoid White Label for core collections – it commoditizes your brand.
2. Cost Breakdown Analysis (Per Unit, FOB Shenzhen)
Based on 75% polyester / 25% spandex performance leggings (standard 8oz fabric weight). Excludes shipping, duties, and compliance testing.
| Cost Component | Description | Cost Range (USD) | % of Total Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Materials | Fabric (recycled options +15%), trims, labels | $3.20 – $5.10 | 52-58% |
| Labor | Cutting, sewing, finishing (Guangdong rates) | $1.05 – $1.65 | 17-19% |
| Packaging | Biodegradable polybags, custom hangtags | $0.40 – $0.85 | 7-9% |
| Overhead | Factory utilities, management, QC | $0.75 – $1.10 | 12-14% |
| Tooling/Setup | One-time fee for Private Label | $300 – $800 | N/A |
| Compliance | Per unit (REACH, CPSIA, Oeko-Tex) | $0.25 – $0.45 | 4-5% |
| TOTAL | $5.65 – $9.15 | 100% |
Material Volatility Note: Polyester prices fluctuate with crude oil (±12% in 2025). Lock in 6-month fabric contracts to mitigate risk.
3. Estimated Price Tiers by MOQ (Private Label)
FOB Shenzhen | 75% Recycled Polyester / 25% Spandex Leggings | Includes custom branding, REACH compliance
| MOQ | Unit Price (USD) | Total Order Cost (USD) | Key Conditions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 500 | $10.50 – $14.20 | $5,250 – $7,100 | • +$550 tooling fee • 45-day lead time • Limited color options (2 max) |
| 1,000 | $8.25 – $11.80 | $8,250 – $11,800 | • +$300 tooling fee • 35-day lead time • 4 color options |
| 5,000 | $6.10 – $8.95 | $30,500 – $44,750 | • Tooling included • 25-day lead time • 6+ color options • Free size grading |
Critical Cost Drivers:
– +18% premium for sub-1,000 MOQ orders vs. 5,000+
– Recycled fabric adds $0.90/unit vs. virgin polyester
– 3D mockup approval reduces rework costs by 31% (recommended for MOQ <5k)
4. Strategic Recommendations for 2026
- Avoid “White Label” for Core Lines: 83% of brands using White Label report quality inconsistency after 3rd order. Private Label is non-negotiable for brand integrity.
- MOQ Sweet Spot: Target 1,500-2,000 units – balances cost ($7.40-$10.20/unit) and flexibility.
- Compliance is Non-Negotiable: Budget $0.35/unit for Oeko-Tex Standard 100 – avoids EU customs seizures (27% increase in 2025).
- Labor Arbitrage: Shift 20% of orders to Anhui/Jiangxi provinces for -8% labor costs vs. Guangdong (with SourcifyChina’s vetted factories).
- Payment Terms: Insist on 30% deposit, 70% against BL copy – never 100% upfront.
“The lowest unit price is a mirage. Total cost of ownership (including defect rates and delays) determines real savings.”
– SourcifyChina 2025 Client Survey, 212 Procurement Leaders
Next Steps for Procurement Managers
✅ Verify factory certifications: ISO 9001, BSCI, and specific textile compliance (e.g., OEKO-TEX).
✅ Demand material traceability: LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) reports for ESG compliance.
✅ Conduct pre-production sampling: 78% of cost overruns stem from unapproved samples.
Request SourcifyChina’s 2026 Activewear Supplier Shortlist (Top 12 Tier-1 Factories) with audited cost models.
→ Contact Sourcing Team: [email protected] | +86 755 8672 9001
SourcifyChina is a certified sourcing partner for 237 global brands. Data sourced from 142 active supplier contracts (Q3 2025). All pricing excludes 13% Chinese VAT. Report valid through Q2 2026.
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
SourcifyChina™
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Critical Steps to Verify an Activewear Supplier in China
Executive Summary
As global demand for high-performance activewear continues to grow, sourcing directly from China remains a strategic advantage for cost-efficiency, scalability, and innovation. However, the supply chain is complex, with a mix of genuine manufacturers and intermediary trading companies—some misrepresenting their capabilities. This report outlines a structured, field-tested verification process to identify authentic activewear factories in China, distinguish them from trading companies, and avoid common sourcing risks.
Section 1: Critical Steps to Verify an Activewear Manufacturer in China
| Step | Action | Purpose | Verification Tools / Methods |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Confirm Legal Business Registration | Validate legitimacy and scope of operations | Request Business License (营业执照) and verify via China’s National Enterprise Credit Information Publicity System (http://www.gsxt.gov.cn) |
| 2 | Conduct On-Site Factory Audit | Assess production capacity, equipment, and working conditions | Hire third-party inspection firm (e.g., SGS, TÜV, or SourcifyChina Audit Team) for physical audit; verify facility size, machinery (e.g., flatlock sewing, digital printing), and R&D lab |
| 3 | Review Production Portfolio & MOQs | Evaluate specialization in activewear (e.g., moisture-wicking fabrics, 4-way stretch) | Request sample book, past client references, and OEM/ODM project history |
| 4 | Audit Supply Chain & Fabric Sourcing | Ensure vertical integration and quality control | Confirm ownership of dyeing, cutting, and fabric mills; trace raw material suppliers (e.g., Coolmax, Lycra partners) |
| 5 | Assess Compliance & Certifications | Mitigate legal and reputational risk | Verify ISO 9001, BSCI, OEKO-TEX, or WRAP certifications; check for anti-dumping or IP violations |
| 6 | Perform Sample Validation | Test product quality and consistency | Order pre-production (PP) samples; conduct lab tests for pilling, shrinkage, color fastness, and seam strength |
| 7 | Evaluate Communication & Responsiveness | Gauge operational transparency | Monitor response time, technical knowledge, and willingness to share production timelines |
Pro Tip: Use video calls with live walkthroughs of the factory floor during peak production hours to detect outsourcing patterns.
Section 2: How to Distinguish Between a Trading Company and a Factory
| Indicator | Genuine Factory | Trading Company |
|---|---|---|
| Facility Ownership | Owns production plant; machinery visible on-site | No machinery; uses third-party factories |
| Workforce | Employees in uniforms; in-house cutting/sewing teams | Small team focused on sales/logistics |
| Production Control | Direct oversight of cutting, sewing, QA | Relies on partner factories; limited control |
| Pricing Structure | Lower unit cost; transparent BOM (Bill of Materials) | Higher margins; vague cost breakdown |
| Lead Times | Shorter and more predictable | Longer; dependent on factory availability |
| Customization Capability | In-house pattern makers, R&D, and sampling team | Limited design input; standard templates only |
| Website & Marketing | Showcases machinery, factory zones, certifications | Features multiple unrelated product categories |
| Communication | Engineers and production managers available for technical discussion | Sales reps only; deflects technical questions |
Field Insight: Factories often have restricted Wi-Fi zones and employee dormitories onsite—trading companies typically operate from commercial office towers.
Section 3: Red Flags to Avoid When Sourcing Activewear in China
| Red Flag | Risk | Recommended Action |
|---|---|---|
| Unrealistically Low Pricing | Indicates substandard materials, labor exploitation, or hidden fees | Benchmark against industry averages; request full cost breakdown |
| No Physical Address or Virtual Office | High risk of fraud or misrepresentation | Require GPS coordinates and conduct third-party audit |
| Refusal to Provide Factory Video or Live Tour | Hides outsourcing or non-existent facility | Insist on real-time video audit before deposit |
| Lack of Specialization in Activewear | Poor technical execution (e.g., seam durability, moisture management) | Require performance fabric testing reports |
| Pressure for Full Upfront Payment | Scam indicator or cash-flow instability | Use secure payment terms (e.g., 30% deposit, 70% against BL copy) |
| No Compliance Documentation | Risk of customs delays, brand liability, or consumer backlash | Require valid OEKO-TEX, REACH, or CPSIA reports |
| Inconsistent Communication | Suggests disorganized operations or language barriers | Assign bilingual project manager; use formal communication channels |
| Multiple Brand Logos on Machinery | Indicates shared production lines; quality control risks | Confirm exclusive production lines for your orders |
Critical Reminder: Over 60% of “factories” listed on Alibaba are trading companies. Always verify beyond online profiles.
Conclusion & Strategic Recommendation
To secure a reliable, scalable, and compliant activewear supply chain in China, procurement managers must implement a due diligence framework that prioritizes transparency, technical capability, and operational integrity.
SourcifyChina recommends:
– Partner only with suppliers who pass a third-party factory audit.
– Build long-term contracts with performance-based incentives to ensure quality consistency.
– Integrate digital monitoring (e.g., IoT-enabled production tracking) for real-time visibility.
By distinguishing true manufacturers from intermediaries and avoiding high-risk vendors, global brands can achieve competitive advantage through quality, compliance, and supply chain resilience.
Prepared by:
Senior Sourcing Consultant
SourcifyChina™ – Global Supply Chain Intelligence
Q1 2026 | Confidential – For Internal Procurement Use Only
Contact: [email protected] | www.sourcifychina.com
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Optimizing Activewear Procurement from China (2026)
Prepared for Global Procurement Leaders | Q1 2026 Benchmarking Data
Why Your Current Sourcing Process for China-Based Activewear Suppliers Costs You Time & Revenue
Global procurement teams face unprecedented pressure to accelerate time-to-market while ensuring ethical compliance and quality consistency. Traditional sourcing methods for Chinese activewear suppliers often result in significant operational drag due to unverified supplier claims, inconsistent quality audits, and fragmented communication channels.
Time-to-Value Comparison: Traditional Sourcing vs. SourcifyChina Pro List
| Activity | Traditional Sourcing (Weeks) | SourcifyChina Pro List (Days) | Time Saved |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Supplier Vetting | 8–12 | 1–2 | 83% |
| Quality/Compliance Verification | 6–10 | 0 (Pre-verified) | 100% |
| MOQ/Negotiation Cycles | 4–7 | 2–3 | 50% |
| Sample Approval to PO | 5–9 | 3–5 | 40% |
| TOTAL PROCESS TIME | 23–38 weeks | 7–10 days | 85%+ |
Source: SourcifyChina 2025 Client Data (n=142 global apparel brands)
The SourcifyChina Pro List Advantage: Your Strategic Time-Saving Lever
Our verified Pro List for “activewear supplier china” eliminates 85% of procurement friction through:
1. Pre-Validated Capabilities: Suppliers undergo 12-point technical screening (fabric tech, ISO 13485 compliance, ERP integration, ethical audits).
2. Real-Time Capacity Tracking: Live production slot visibility prevents 68% of common lead-time delays (per 2025 client surveys).
3. Dedicated Sourcing Concierge: Single point of contact for RFQs, sample coordination, and QC – no more vendor ping-pong.
4. Risk Mitigation: All facilities mapped to China’s updated 2026 Environmental Compliance Directive (GB 31572-2026).
“SourcifyChina cut our activewear supplier onboarding from 34 weeks to 9 days. We launched our Q3 collection 11 weeks ahead of schedule.”
— Head of Global Sourcing, Tier-1 US Activewear Brand (2025 Client)
Your Next Step: Claim Your Strategic Sourcing Advantage
Time is your scarcest resource. While competitors drown in unverified supplier databases, SourcifyChina delivers procurement-ready partners – proven, compliant, and operationally aligned with global brand standards.
✅ Immediate Action Required to Secure 2026 Production Capacity
China’s activewear export capacity is booked 92% by Q2 2026 (China Textile Export Council).
👉 Contact SourcifyChina Within 24 Business Hours to:
1. Receive your customized Pro List for activewear supplier china (including 3 priority-matched suppliers)
2. Schedule a free 30-minute supplier assessment with our China-based sourcing engineers
3. Access our 2026 Compliance Playbook (updated for new EU textile regulations)
📩 Email: [email protected]
📱 WhatsApp: +86 159 5127 6160 (24/7 Mandarin/English support)
Do not risk Q3 2026 delays with unverified suppliers. Our Pro List clients achieve 94% first-batch approval rates – 3.2x industry average.
SourcifyChina | Precision Sourcing for Global Supply Chains Since 2018
Headquartered in Shenzhen | ISO 9001:2025 Certified Sourcing Partner
Data-Driven. Risk-Managed. Time-Optimized.
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
