Local network results: Cainiao, JD Logistics, SF, J&T and Zongteng

Read the entity, period and result unit together

A local sorting project, a warehouse customer, a country parcel operator and a regional financial segment measure different activities. This review keeps their periods, entities and result units separate. Reported parcels, fulfilled orders, sorting capacity, revenue, adjusted EBIT and attributable net loss cannot be combined into a single measure of overseas success.

The subjects are Cainiao, JD Logistics, SF-linked businesses, J&T and Zongteng-linked networks. J&T began express operations in Indonesia in 2015 and entered China in March 2020; it should not be described as a business founded in China and later exported everywhere. GOFO is included through a disclosed investment association, without assuming full ownership or financial consolidation. These are external corporate and customer cases, not CEP Insight client results.

Brazil: Cainiao technology delivered to a local sorting customer

Cainiao’s Chinese case, dated 26 May 2025, describes an automated sorting project delivered for an unnamed cross-border express customer in Brazil. Relative to manual sorting, the vendor reports an efficiency increase of more than seven times and a 40% cost reduction. The source describes daily peak processing capacity of up to one million parcels; that is a capability figure, not an observed daily average or annual handled volume.

The client is not named, so it cannot be identified as Correios or another operator from secondary accounts. The node serves both cross-border and Brazilian domestic express flows. The disclosure does not define the efficiency measure, cost boundary, before-and-after observation periods, project revenue, profit or payback. The cooperation opportunity is a technology supplier working with a local CEP business; neither the reported project result nor its capacity establishes Cainiao’s own Brazilian delivery volume.

Latin America: Cainiao reports network parcel growth without an absolute base

In an official corporate post dated 22 October 2025, Cainiao reports triple-digit percentage growth quarter on quarter in parcel volume across its Latin American cross-border logistics network in the third quarter of 2025. This is a reported regional operating-volume change, distinct from the Brazilian technology customer’s project.

The post provides neither an absolute parcel count nor an exact percentage, daily-average definition, country split, customer split or profit. It therefore cannot establish a Brazilian or Mexican national growth rate, delivered-parcel rate or earnings contribution. For local partners, the potential work includes deconsolidation, local delivery and returns as cross-border flows enter destination networks. Commercial evaluation still requires the actual shipment base, service mix, handover responsibility and paid revenue for the specific market.

Netherlands: JD Logistics and Hunkemöller, a historical fulfilment case

JD’s 10 November 2021 case dates cooperation with Hunkemöller to June 2021. It quotes the customer as saying that the Venray warehouse was handling about one third of its online orders. JD also estimates that average daily order-production time was reduced by two thirds. That estimate concerns an order-production measure; it is not a two-thirds reduction in consumer delivery time.

Hunkemöller’s own 2021 sustainability report confirms JD fulfilment for the Netherlands, France, Belgium and Luxembourg. It lists DHL and PostNL among last-mile carriers without mapping every carrier to JD-handled orders. Neither source supplies a shipment cohort or a defined measurement window for the time estimate. The customer’s Hilversum distribution-centre figures must remain outside the JD project.

This is a 2021 arrangement. GXO’s 25 February 2026 release says it began managing Hunkemöller’s Almere logistics operation on 1 January 2026. That later disclosure prevents treating the old JD account as proof of a current exclusive relationship; it does not, by itself, establish that every JD service to the brand ended.

Malaysia: JD Logistics coordinates Anakku fulfilment and transport providers

JD’s 8 February 2023 account dates its Anakku cooperation to August 2022. It reports warehousing and fulfilment support for more than 1,000 Malaysian stores, a 30% improvement in fulfilment efficiency and fulfilment of all orders within 24 hours. JD also says it helped manage more than ten transport companies. This describes an operating customer relationship and carrier coordination, not only a warehouse opening.

The source does not define the efficiency measure, the 24-hour start and end events, order count, observation window or verification method. Fulfilment is not independently confirmed recipient delivery. The next-day option mentioned for Kuala Lumpur and surrounding areas cannot be extended to every Malaysian store or made a current nationwide SLA. The case illustrates work available to local transport partners while leaving project revenue, cost saving and profit undisclosed.

Thailand: SF-linked KEX volume and FY2025 financial results

KEX’s March 2024 shareholder notice identifies SFTH as holding 62.66% after its tender offer; this direct holding should be distinguished from the group’s earlier relationship through Kerry Logistics. The local parcel business is assessed here at KEX entity level. Its 2024 management discussion reports parcel volume down 23% year on year.

For the year ended 31 December 2025, KEX’s audited consolidated statements report sales and service income of THB5,128.945 million, versus THB9,448.922 million in 2024. Gross loss was THB1,125.510 million. Net loss attributable to owners was THB3,240.726 million, versus THB5,911.315 million. Revenue declined and the attributable loss narrowed, while the company remained loss-making.

These are full-year consolidated financial figures, not first-half results or SF Group’s own profit. Statutory net loss includes financing and tax items and cannot be relabelled as pure operating loss. The 2024 management discussion also identifies material one-off and tax effects, so the change in net loss alone is not a like-for-like efficiency measure. The case demonstrates why network scale and a strategic shareholder cannot substitute for checking local volume, revenue, gross result and accounting scope.

J&T in 2025: regional volume and adjusted profit, with different country sets

J&T’s 2025 results report 7,658.8 million parcels in Southeast Asia, up 67.8%, with segment revenue of USD4,501.804 million and adjusted EBIT of USD537.511 million. Average cost per parcel fell from USD0.57 in 2024 to USD0.48 in 2025. This segment covers Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia and Singapore. Its reported 4.3% reduction in average delivery time lacks an absolute duration, country split and comparable shipment cohort.

The same report records cooperation with Mercado Libre in Mexico and Brazil during 2025. Its New Markets segment handled 403.9 million parcels, up 43.6%, generated USD870.222 million of revenue and reported USD3.777 million of adjusted EBIT, compared with an adjusted EBIT loss of USD76.465 million in 2024. New Markets includes Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Mexico, Brazil and Egypt.

New Markets is not a Latin America-only total, and the segment’s positive adjusted EBIT does not prove that Brazil, Mexico or the Mercado Libre relationship was individually profitable. Adjusted EBIT is a non-IFRS measure, not net profit. Both regional results combine customers and service types; they cannot be assigned to Temu, SHEIN or TikTok Shop. For local CEP firms, the evidence supports examining network density, unit cost and customer mix alongside opportunities to subcontract or connect services, rather than assuming volume growth guarantees a local partner’s margin.

United States: investment-linked GOFO reports more than 100 million delivered parcels

GOFO’s company release of 13 January 2026 reports more than 100 million packages delivered in the United States during 2025. It also describes a network spanning more than 40 states, over 120 hubs and stations and more than 8,500 ZIP codes as of December 2025. The first figure is a full-year delivered-package claim; the others are network coverage counts.

GoodCang’s 25 March 2026 article identifies Zongteng as its parent and GOFO as an investment-associated business. That supports the association used here, not a claim of full ownership or consolidated financial treatment. GOFO supplies no customer allocation, independently verified delivery cohort, revenue or profit. The delivered volume cannot be assigned to Temu, SHEIN, GoodCang warehouse orders or China-origin imports. Its forward-looking 2026 fee commitment is also separate from actual 2025 operating results.

United Kingdom: YunExpress air connectivity and an airport-wide cargo result

East Midlands Airport’s 14 May 2025 account confirms the arrival of a Boeing 777 carrying goods from China, operated by Central Airlines on behalf of YunExpress on 13 May. It describes an initial twice-weekly service. The airport’s 18 August follow-up reports more than 103,000 tonnes handled across the airport in May–July 2025, up 17.4% on the same period in 2024.

That tonnage belongs to the airport’s combined operations, which include several new carriers. It is not YunExpress’s own cargo total or evidence of its route profit. A proposed rise to five weekly flights was still prospective in the August account. The records do not give a YunExpress load factor, completed-flight denominator or parcel on-time rate. The airport’s DHL, UPS and FedEx presence also does not establish direct contracts between those businesses and YunExpress. The case shows an operating gateway connection with a separately scoped partner-network outcome.

Local CEP cooperation and competition: identify the work and who earns it

CEP Insight sees distinct cooperation roles: Cainiao’s automation supplies a local operator; JD’s customer fulfilment coordinates carriers; investment-linked or owned delivery networks can buy local capacity while also competing for merchants and destinations. A shared hub, technology installation or customer listing should not be treated as proof of a direct carrier alliance or common profit result.

The practical opportunities include receiving, sorting, delivery, returns and exception resolution. The competitive challenges concern customer concentration, pricing, geographic density, collection requirements, integration cost and responsibility when events are missing or parcels are disputed. Compare the accepted and completed shipment population, paid revenue, avoidable cost and service obligation over the same period. A vendor’s reported local cost improvement, a group’s regional adjusted EBIT and a partner’s statutory loss answer different commercial questions. These are our analytical questions, not additional company outcomes.

Air and ocean partners: local networks do not by themselves prove modal gains

Local inventory and destination networks may create work for air-cargo operators, shipping lines, forwarders, ground handlers and port-to-warehouse providers. The relevant transport plan determines whether demand is for parcel airlift, planned ocean replenishment, urgent replacement stock or local distribution. None of the warehouse or parcel figures above establishes its air/ocean split, load factor, sea-container volume or a measured modal substitution.

Commercial outcomes can also diverge across regions. KLN’s 2025 presentation reports continuing-operation international freight forwarding segment profit of HKD383 million in the Americas, versus HKD611 million in 2024, and HKD332 million in EMEA, versus HKD228 million. These are regional forwarding segment profits, not country parcel results or an individual airline’s or shipping line’s earnings. The Americas cannot be split into the US, Mexico or Brazil from these figures; EMEA extends beyond Europe. They are also separate from KEX’s Thai entity results.

Our analysis is to connect actual replenishment records with customer-order fulfilment, capacity utilization, handling, clearance, inventory holding and returns. Air and ocean providers may cooperate with the same logistics network while competing for part of its transport mix. Evaluate rate, reliability, minimum-volume commitments and end-to-end responsibility against a defined lane and product; these cases do not establish a universal saving or guaranteed benefit for either mode.

Comparing the disclosed results without changing their scope

The comparison retains the entity, period and result unit. It is not a ranking of national networks or a sum of delivered parcels. Corporate operational KPIs, customer testimony, vendor estimates, adjusted profit measures and statutory financial figures remain distinguishable.

A further review should identify the market, service, client population and accounting or cost definition before comparing performance. Initial contact can describe the market and issue; supporting shipment and commercial records can follow when the review scope is agreed.