Remittance corridor · World Bank RPW · 2025Q3

South Korea → China

Provider panel is high-tercile (11 RPW providers) on South Korea → China - denser competition than the bulk of the corridor book.

5.8%
Average cost
3.1%
Cheapest · Industrial Bank of Korea
11
Providers tracked

How the 5.8% average cost breaks down

World Bank RPW splits total remittance cost into the provider's transaction fee and the exchange-rate margin applied to the transfer. Same 2025Q3 figures as the detail table below.

Provider-panel tercile vs fleet

RPW lists 11 providers on this corridor - above the fleet panel tercile (~9). Average cost is 5.8%.

#212 of 348
cheapest-cost corpus rank
5.8%
average cost of a $200 transfer
-1.4pp
vs the 7.3% average of 348 corridors
+2.8pp
gap to the UN 3% target

Compared against the 348 corridors in the 2025Q3 release, not a generic headline figure.

D
Corridor Value Score
46/100
South Korea to China

Based on average cost, delivery speed, FX margin, provider competition, and cost trend from World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide data, benchmarked against all 348 tracked corridors - not a quote or a prediction of what you will pay.

Cost D
5.84%
Average total cost, sending $200-equivalent
Speed F
1.9 days
Average delivery time, latest quarter
FX transparency B
0.98%
Exchange-rate margin above the mid-market rate
Competition A-
11 providers
Number of providers actively quoting this corridor
Cost trend D
-0.03pp
Change in average cost vs. the prior quarter
View saved corridors

Subscribe to this corridor's cost changes (RSS) — one item per World Bank RPW release, no account or email required.

Where this corridor sits by provider panel size

South Korea → China has 11 World Bank RPW providers among 377 tracked corridors (inventory signal, not a cost-quality ranking). Orthogonal to the cost comparison below.

South Korea → China vs all corridors by provider count

Where this corridor's RPW provider panel sits among every tracked route

11 74th of 377 higher than 303 of 377 corridors

Corridors, banded by RPW provider inventory

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more corridors. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

Source World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide · 2026-08-10

How South Korea → China compares

Average cost of a $200 transfer, percent, lower is cheaper

South Korea → China5.84%Cheapest provider3.08%348-corridor average (2025Q3)7.25%World Bank global average6.4%UN SDG 10.c target3%

Source: World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide (RPW); UN SDG 10.c As of 2025Q3

SDG 10.c progress (target: 3%) 76.3%
Cheapest

5.84% average - 2.8pp above target

Cost trend: South Korea → China

Average and cheapest cost of a $200 transfer over time, percent

0%2%4%6%8%10% 2011Q12013Q42015Q32017Q22019Q12020Q42022Q32024Q22025Q3 5.84%3.08% CheapestAverage

Source: World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide (RPW) As of 2025Q3

Sending Country

South Korea
East Asia & Pacific
5.49%
Avg outbound cost
$14.3B
Total remittances sent
All corridors from South Korea →

Receiving Country

China
East Asia & Pacific
7.91%
Avg inbound cost
$30.0B
Total remittances received
All corridors to China →

Nearby Corridors from South Korea

South Korea's outbound coverage in our data is limited to a handful of corridors; here is how the other compare.

#DestinationAvg costCheapest
1Vietnam5.1%2.0%

World Bank RPW fee spread

Release 2025Q3 KR→CN

5.8% avg · 3.1% floor · 2.76pp spread on $200

  • AVG 5.8%
  • CHEAP 3.1%
  • SPREAD 2.76pp
  • SDG +2.8pp
  • RANK #212 of 348
  • REL 2025Q3
  • PANEL 11
United Kingdom→Albania5.84%Canada→China5.83%Italy→China5.85%South Korea→China (this)5.84%
Cross-sender corridors nearest South Korea → China by average RPW cost (2025Q3)

Fee spread manifest for South Korea → China: entity-varying RPW stamps plus cross-sender ABS(avg_cost) peers from the current release. Compare corridors side-by-side →

Dense provider panel on South Korea → China

RPW records 11 providers on South Korea → China - above the fleet panel tercile (~9). Average cost is 5.84% on $200 sends.

That cheapest figure comes from the World Bank's mystery-shopping survey: trained researchers pose as customers and obtain real quotes for a standardized $200 transfer, across the 11 banks, money transfer operators, post offices and mobile-money providers RPW tracks on this corridor. It is a snapshot from that survey quarter, not a live guarantee -- confirm the current rate directly with the provider before sending.

Costs on this route have stayed essentially flat, moving 0.03 percentage points over the tracked period, unusual stability against the broader downward trend seen on most corridors. Across 54 quarters on record, average cost ranged 2.8%–8.9%, with 2 quarters at or under the UN 3% target. It sits 2.8 pp above the UN SDG 10.c 3% target.

About South Korea → China data

PlainRemit compares international money-transfer costs across tracked corridors so you can see which routes and providers charge the least before you send money abroad. This corridor's figures are computed directly from the World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide (RPW) quarterly survey, a mystery-shopping panel of actual transfer quotes for a standardized $200 transfer.

Average 5.84%; cheapest observed 3.08% via Industrial Bank of Korea; 11 providers tracked across 54 RPW quarters; vintage 2026-08-10.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much does it cost to send money from South Korea to China?

Average 5.84% of the transfer amount (World Bank RPW, 2025Q3). Cheapest observed: 3.08% via Industrial Bank of Korea.

What is the cheapest way to send money from South Korea to China?

Lowest RPW survey quote: 3.08% (Industrial Bank of Korea). Panel is high-tercile with 11 providers tracked.

Is the South Korea to China corridor meeting the UN SDG cost target?

Not yet: 5.8% is 2.8pp above the UN SDG 10.c 3% target.

Where does South Korea → China sit among tracked remittance corridors?

According to World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide average cost among 348 tracked corridors on PlainRemit, South Korea → China ranks #212 of 348 (cheapest = #1). Ordinal uses latest_avg_cost ASC matching /rankings/cheapest. See /methodology#corpus-placement.

Source: World Bank, Remittance Prices Worldwide (RPW) Database (2011-2025). See our methodology for details.

Disclaimer: PlainRemit is for general informational purposes only, not financial, tax, or investment advice. PlainRemit is independent and not affiliated with or endorsed by the World Bank.