The short answer
Per customs statistics compiled in the Firsd Tea October 2025 report, China exported roughly 374,100 tonnes of tea in 2024 for about USD 1.42 billion, and green tea made up around 80 percent of that volume. Divide value by weight and the average exported kilogram sits near USD 3.5. Those three figures - volume, value, mix - describe a trade that moves enormous tonnage of bulk green tea at the bottom while a much smaller identity-driven trade above it carries the quality conversation. For a buyer, working out which layer your inquiry belongs to is the first sourcing decision, and it matters more than any price list.
Volume, value, mix: how to read each
| Indicator | 2024 figure (attributed) | How a buyer should read it |
|---|---|---|
| Export volume | About 374,100 tonnes | China stays a first-move source for nearly every tea category and every format |
| Export value | About USD 1.42 billion | Value trails tonnage: the bulk layer is thin-margined by design |
| Average unit value | Near USD 3.5 per kg | A commodity yardstick, not a price list; above-average lots are priced per specification |
| Green tea share | About 80 percent of volume | Green anchors the trade; blacks, oolongs, whites and puer ride smaller, more specific channels |
Attribution note: these are customs/statistics figures as compiled in the Firsd Tea October 2025 report. Other databases slice the HS range differently and land on slightly different totals, so the desk treats them as context rather than as a quotation. What survives any slicing is the shape: heavy tonnage, modest unit value, green tea as the backbone.
What the mix says about the product ladder
The 80 percent green share is not a verdict on what China grows best - it is a description of what moves in the greatest volume at the thinnest margin. Bulk green parcels, often blended across regions and graded for machine bagging, are the volume engine of the export trade. Climb one rung and the tea changes character: West Lake Longjing, Biluochun, Anji white (a green tea by processing) and Huangshan Maofeng sell on origin identity and harvest timing. Climb again and the categories diversify: Tieguanyin and rock oolongs from Fujian, Dancong from Chaozhou, Silver Needle and White Peony from Fuding and Zhenghe, Keemun and Yunnan blacks, puer from Xishuangbanna, Lincang and Pu'er city. None of those travel as anonymous tonnage; each sells with a lot record, a harvest window and a cup that has to match last season's. That is the ladder a buyer is really shopping on, whether or not the statistics label it. The two layers are also bought differently: one negotiates tonnage, the other approves references - and confusing the two processes is where most first orders go wrong.
Where your order sits on that ladder
A practical test: if your inquiry can be answered with a single price per kilogram and no follow-up questions, you are shopping the bulk layer - and you will get bulk-layer consistency, which is fine for some uses. If your inquiry needs a specification - category, origin down to county or village, harvest window, leaf grade, liquor color aim, moisture, packing format, label language and documents - you are shopping the layer where desks like this one work. There, the desk coordinates partner gardens and packing facilities, cups samples against written references, retains a sample of every production batch, and issues lab panels per lot. The difference is not romance; it is repeatability. A bulk parcel can vary container to container and still fill its role; a branded program cannot, which is why the paperwork is part of the product.
The layer also decides what the desk can promise. A bulk replacement can often be quoted and shipped quickly, because the material exists in moving inventory; an identity program runs on the season, because the lot that matches your reference has a harvest window and a finite size. Neither is better - they are different purchases with different calendars, different documents and different definitions of a good price. Naming the layer at the first exchange saves both sides a round of misfit quotations.
Planning implications buyers can act on
The statistics also hint at the calendar. Much of the export tonnage is spring-harvest green tea, so the season compresses orders into a narrow window: spring picking defines the year's lots, and arrival pressure builds through April and May. Reference planning ranges, confirmed in writing per order: stock lines produce in 10-15 working days, private label runs take 20-35 days, and new blends or new packing molds 35-60 days; sea freight adds roughly 15-25 days to the US West Coast or 30-45 days to Europe. Minimum order volumes run from 50-100 kg per SKU for bulk refined tea to 100-300 kg or 5,000-20,000 packs per SKU for private label, depending on format. One more consequence of the mix is concentration in the calendar: because so much exported volume is spring-harvest green tea, order books, packing lines and port space all crowd into the same months. Buyers who move early in the cycle get first pick of both leaf and schedule; buyers who arrive late compete for whatever lots and vessel space remain. Full reference ranges sit on the MOQ and lead-time page, and the origin map behind all of it is on the origin network page.
From statistics to a first order
For a buyer reading the export numbers and wondering where to start:
- Decide the layer: commodity replacement at volume, or an identity program with consistency requirements.
- Ask for an origin map by category rather than one mega-catalog; a desk that names counties and harvest windows is a desk worth testing.
- Write the specification before asking for prices, then sample against a reference and cup blind.
- Plan the calendar backward from your shelf date, including the spring window and sea transit.
When the plan exists on paper, send it through the quote form and get the sample schedule and document list back in writing. The wider sourcing method is covered in the China sourcing note, and the seasonal mechanics behind the spring window in the harvest timing note.