JX Apparel Group
JX Apparel Group
2.1x is the gap between the highest and lowest published valuation of the same global trench coat market for the same 2025 base year — Market Research Intellect at USD 2.68 billion against Future Market Report at USD 5.75 billion, with DataIntelo and WiseGuyReports in between.
This page aggregates 47 verified data points from the UN Comtrade trade database, Burberry Group's own corporate filings and history, Textile Exchange's Materials Market Report 2025, Cotton Outlook's Cotlook A Index summaries, Cotton Incorporated's Monthly Economic Letter, the published text of ISO 4920 and the US federal test method standard, AATCC's own method record, the test houses SATRA, SGS and Intertek, Coats Digital's GSDCost method documentation, Messe Frankfurt's and Premiere Vision's organiser records, and four market-research publishers. Every figure was confirmed against the document that published it.
Where a number could not be traced to a measurer — a trench's operation count, its fabric yield, a per-coat price band, or a minimum water-repellency grade for fashion outerwear — this page says so rather than supplying one.
Four research firms priced the same garment category for the same 2025 base year and landed between USD 2.68 billion and USD 5.75 billion — a 2.1x gap between the highest and lowest published valuation of one market. Scope explains part of it: WiseGuyReports counts car coats alongside trenches, and the four run their forecasts to three different end years, 2033, 2034 and 2035. None publishes enough method to reconcile against another.
A fifth figure sits outside that band entirely, and it needs stating rather than quietly averaging in. Verified Market Reports headlines USD 35.6 billion for 2024 — roughly ten times every other measurer — while the same page's own Key Insights paragraph values the market at USD 2 billion to USD 4 billion. That is a single page contradicting itself, not a scope difference, so the figure is carried here as unconfirmed, kept off the chart's scale, and excluded from every takeaway. Treat any trench market number that arrives through a search summary the same way until the publisher's page has been opened.
The only audited number in this section belongs to one company. Burberry's FY26 — the 52 weeks to 28 March 2026, not calendar 2026 — brought GBP 2,420 million of group revenue at a 6.6% adjusted operating margin, recovered from 1.0% in FY25, when the reported result was a GBP 3 million operating loss.
The practical reading for a small brand is narrow. The published CAGRs run 3.0%, 5.7%, 6.89%, 7.2% and 10.1%, clustering around 6 to 7% in the middle of the band. All five are forecast rates, not measured growth, so read them as a direction of travel and plan capacity against a confirmed order book instead.
Four analysts, one coat, a 2.1x spread — and a fifth headline that its own page argues with.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Global trench coat market, 2025 base year, with forecast | USD 2.68 billion (2025), estimated USD 2.9 billion in 2026, forecast USD 5.37 billion by 2035; 7.2% CAGR 2026–2035 | Market Research Intellect, Global Trench Coat Market |
| Trench coats and car coats combined, 2025 base year, with forecast | USD 3,343.3 million (2025), USD 3,246 million (2024), forecast USD 4,500 million by 2035; 3.0% CAGR 2026–2035 | WiseGuyReports, Trench Coats and Car Coats Market to 2035 |
| Global trench coat market, 2025 base year, with forecast | USD 4.8 billion (2025), forecast USD 7.9 billion by 2034; 5.7% CAGR 2026–2034 | DataIntelo, Trench Coat Market Research Report 2034 |
| Global trench coat market, 2025 base year, with forecast | USD 5,750.00 million (2025), forecast USD 9,800.50 million by 2033; 6.89% CAGR 2026–2033 | Future Market Report, Trench Coat Market 2026–2033 |
| Headline figure that its own publisher's page contradicts | USD 35.6 billion (2024) to USD 94.7 billion (2033); 10.1% CAGR 2026–2033 — unconfirmed, because the same page's Key Insights paragraph values the market at USD 2–4 billion | Verified Market Reports, Trench Coat Market 2026–2033 |
| China's exports of women's overcoats, raincoats and anoraks (HS 6202), 2024 | USD 5,865,778,522 (about USD 5.87 billion), all destinations | UN Comtrade, China HS 6202 exports 2024 |
| Burberry group revenue, FY26 (52 weeks ended 28 March 2026) | GBP 2,420 million, flat at constant exchange rates and −2% at reported rates; FY25 (52 weeks ended 29 March 2025) was GBP 2,461 million, −15% CER | Burberry Group plc, FY26 Preliminary Results (14 May 2026) |
| Burberry operating profit and margin, FY26 vs FY25 | FY26 adjusted operating profit GBP 160 million (6.6% margin) and reported operating profit GBP 115 million (4.8%); FY25 adjusted operating profit GBP 26 million (1.0%) against a reported operating loss of GBP 3 million | Burberry Group plc, FY26 Preliminary Results (14 May 2026) |
Every measurer here publishes its own estimate; none was audited, and no two share a base year, an end year and a scope definition at once. The figures are presented as a named band, never averaged into a single number.
No institution publishes a pattern-piece count, a sewing-operation count or a standard minute value for a trench coat. That is the honest result of this research, and it belongs in the open, because the counts circulating in factory blogs and search summaries have no measurer behind them. The most widely indexed operation breakdown for a generic jacket was examined and set aside: it is anonymous, its time column is corrupted, and the garment is not a trench.
What is published is the method. A standard minute value is an observed time multiplied by a performance rating, then loaded with bundle, machine and personal-fatigue allowances — Online Clothing Study's worked example runs two observed minutes at a 90% rating to a 1.8-minute basic time, and a 20% allowance to 2.16 SMV. Coats Digital's GSDCost builds the same figure bottom-up from 39 predetermined motion codes, each with a fixed standard time, as stated on the vendor's own product page, read 21 September 2026.
The nearest published comparator is a tailored suit jacket at 101 standard allowed minutes, range 70 to 135, in a table published in 2011 by Online Clothing Study, an unaudited single-author educational blog — about five times a formal shirt at 21 and three times a trouser at 35. A trench adds a storm flap, a gun flap, epaulettes, a belt with D-rings and a full lining on top of a coat's base construction, which places it in the jacket's class rather than the shirt's.
That is a bracket, not a number, and the suit-jacket row is a suit jacket rather than a trench. A factory quoting minutes for a specific trench is quoting its own line study, which is legitimate and specific to that line; a blog quoting minutes for trenches in general is quoting nobody. The costing question a tech pack can actually settle is how labour and fabric split a premium coat's cost, line by line against the BOM.
Capacity is the honest substitute for a minutes figure. JX Apparel Group's own published terms are three production lines, 70 employees and a 2,176 sqm floor running 40,000 to 60,000 pieces a month, roughly 2,000 a day, on 50 JUKI DDL-9000C machines and 10 Brother units with a Fuyi CAD/CAM system. That is a statement of throughput, not a claim about how many minutes any one coat takes.
Ask a factory for its SMV study, not the internet for a trench's operation count. Only one of them measured anything.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| How a standard minute value is constructed | SMV = basic minute + bundle allowances + machine allowance + personal and fatigue allowances; basic minute = observed time × performance rating. Worked example: 2 minutes observed at a 90% rating = 1.8 basic minutes; a 20% allowance gives 2.16 SMV | Online Clothing Study, Standard Minute Value (SMV): Definition and Calculation |
| Predetermined motion codes behind a computed SMV | 39 Motion Codes, each with a fixed standard time; the software sums the motions in a sewing operation to give that operation's SMV, and the 39 codes combine into thousands of operations (as stated on the vendor's product page, read 21 September 2026) | Coats Digital, GSDCost product page |
| Published standard allowed minutes for basic garments — and the garments missing from the table | Tailored suit jacket 101 SAM (range 70–135); hooded sweatshirt 45; formal trouser 35; formal full-sleeve shirt 21; women's blouse 18 (15–45); polo 15; crew-neck T-shirt 8 (6–12). The table carries no trench, overcoat or raincoat row | Online Clothing Study, Standard Minutes (SAM or SMV) for Few Basic Garment Products, 2011 — an unaudited single-author educational blog |
| Peer-reviewed treatment of standard allowed minutes and sewing-line efficiency | Correlates standard allowed minute with sewing-section efficiency (production rate, number of workstations, operation breakdown) by Pearson correlation, across products from V-neck shirts to workwear and military uniforms at one vertically integrated Ethiopian factory | Abtew et al., Autex Research Journal 20(4) |
Research gap, stated deliberately. Per-trench pattern-piece counts, operation counts and SMV minutes were searched for and not found in any fetchable primary source. This section is built from published SMV method facts plus the verified component inventory in Section 5, and publishes no count of its own.
Gabardine is a construction, not a fibre. The Encyclopedia of Clothing and Fashion puts its density anywhere from 76 ends by 48 picks per inch to 124 by 76, at a wale angle of 45 or 63 degrees and a weight of 7 to 11 ounces per square yard, roughly 237 to 373 gsm. That range is what a tech pack has to close for the shell alone — lining and interlining are separate lines of the bill of materials, with their own weight and hand specifications — and it comes from a reference-work compilation rather than a mill or lab measurement, so it should be read as a published reference range rather than a tested specification.
The synthetic alternative is larger than most brands assume and less circular than the marketing implies. Polyester took 59% of a record 132-million-tonne global fibre year in 2024, and recycled polyester grew to 9.3 million tonnes while still losing share — 12.5% of all polyester in 2023, 12.0% in 2024 — because virgin capacity grew faster.
98% of that recycled polyester comes from plastic bottles. A GRS-certified recycled shell is therefore a bottle-to-fabric claim in almost every case, not a textile-to-textile one; across the whole fibre market, bottle-derived recycled polyester alone accounts for 6.9% of everything produced, against 7.6% for recycled fibre of all kinds.
The thresholds matter before the hangtag is designed, not after. 20% recycled content supports a business-to-business GRS claim; 50% is required for consumer-facing GRS labelling. A shell that clears the first threshold does not automatically clear the second, and the difference between them is a labelling decision made at lab dip stage rather than at bulk. The wider picture on GRS-certified recycled polyester and natural-fibre outerwear certifications sets out which certifications travel with the fibre and which travel with the facility.
JX Apparel Group is itself GRS certified, which is a factory-level certification covering the site's own chain of custody. It says nothing about any mill's certification status, and the factory does not audit mills or run laboratory testing. The fabric range it works in — silk, cashmere, wool, polyester, nylon and blends — plus registered-position printing, hand embroidery and laminating or bonding, are likewise its own published capability rather than a sourced statistic.
A recycled shell is a bottle claim, not a textile-to-textile one — 98% of the time.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Gabardine construction: density, wale angle and weight (published reference range, not a mill or lab measurement) | Density ranges from 76 warp ends per inch × 48 filling picks per inch up to 124 epi × 76 ppi; wale angle 45 or 63 degrees; weight 7 to 11 ounces per square yard (about 237 to 373 gsm) | Encyclopedia of Clothing and Fashion, Gabardine entry (via Encyclopedia.com) |
| Global fibre production and polyester's share, 2024 | A record 132 million tonnes of fibre produced in 2024, up from about 125 million tonnes in 2023; polyester took 59% (about 78 million tonnes), up from 57% in 2023, of which about 88% is fossil PET and about 12% recycled PET | Textile Exchange, Materials Market Report 2025 (data for 2024) |
| Recycled polyester fibre production, 2024 | About 9.3 million tonnes, up from about 8.9 million tonnes in 2023 | Textile Exchange, Materials Market Report 2025 (data for 2024) |
| Recycled polyester's share of all polyester, 2024 | About 12.0% in 2024, down from about 12.5% in 2023 — the share fell because virgin polyester grew faster (62 to 68 million tonnes) | Textile Exchange, Materials Market Report 2025 (data for 2024) |
| Share of recycled polyester made from plastic bottles, 2024 | 98% | Textile Exchange, Materials Market Report 2025 (data for 2024) |
| Recycled fibre's share of the whole fibre market, 2024 | 7.6% of global fibre production was recycled fibre; recycled polyester made from plastic bottles alone accounted for 6.9% of all fibre produced | Textile Exchange, Materials Market Report 2025 (data for 2024) |
| GRS recycled-content thresholds for claims | At least 20% recycled content for a business-to-business GRS claim; at least 50% for consumer-facing GRS labelling (as of September 2026) | Textile Exchange, Global Recycled Standard page |
Two different denominators run through this section and are easy to confuse. Recycled polyester is 12.0% of polyester; bottle-derived recycled polyester is 6.9% of all fibre. Textile Exchange states on its standard page that it is transitioning the GRS into the Materials Matter Standard, so the 20/50 thresholds are current rather than permanent.
"Water-repellent" on a quotation is not a specification, and the standard behind the test says so more bluntly than any supplier will. ISO 4920:1981 — the first edition, and the only one whose full text is freely readable, since the 2012 revision is paywalled and could not be read — states in its own scope that the spray test "is not intended for use in predicting the rain penetration resistance of fabrics, since it does not measure penetration of water through the fabric." SATRA, a UK test house and standards body, makes the same point on its method page, and SGS reduces it to a sentence: the spray test indicates how wet the coat gets, not how wet the wearer gets.
The scale is five rungs, and the cross-walk between the two standards is published rather than conventional. The 1981 edition runs from 5, no sticking or wetting of the upper surface, down to 1, complete wetting of the whole upper surface, and its normative annex maps those straight onto the AATCC numbers: ISO 1 = AATCC 50, 2 = 70, 3 = 80, 4 = 90, 5 = AATCC 100. That edition also directs that no intermediate rating be assigned, wording the 1978 US federal test standard repeats almost exactly; whether later revisions relaxed it could not be checked.
Hydrostatic head is the other axis, and the number on a spec sheet is not what most buyers assume. SATRA's TM259 method page, read on 21 September 2026, records the pressure at which water penetrates at the third place on the specimen, not the first. James Heal's testing guide and the 1978 US federal method supply the other half: the reported figure is an average across repeated specimens — five, in James Heal's account — rather than a single reading. SGS notes in a 2019 article that marketing claims run as high as 20 metres of head, and discourages the word waterproof altogether: unless a fabric's head equals its bursting pressure, the correct description is water penetration resistant.
No published floor for a fashion trench surfaced in this research. No standards body, national regulator or accredited laboratory reached here publishes a minimum spray rating or hydrostatic head that retail outerwear has to meet. The two sets of numbers that did surface belong to schemes rather than to the language. Intertek's High-Performance Mark is a proprietary certification a brand pays to carry, and on the page read on 21 September 2026 it set its own entry criteria at a spray result of 90, at least 1000 mmH2O for its water-resistant claim and at least 3000 mmH2O for its waterproof claim; a European standard for protective rainwear sets classes of its own, but it governs workwear rather than fashion. Neither tells anyone what waterproof means. Each states what its own label requires.
The consequence for a tech pack is narrow and worth writing down. Name the method, the edition, the grade and the condition the grade is measured in, and state whether the requirement applies as received, after laundering, or both. There is no universal number of wash cycles after which a repellent finish must be retested: the standards define the laundering routine and leave the count to the buyer's own specification, so the count belongs in the tech pack or it does not exist. Where that check lands in the calendar is part of what to check at each sampling stage, well before the PP sample is signed.
The 1981 edition of the standard that defines the spray test says, in its own scope, that it does not predict rain penetration.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| AATCC TM22: what the method is and what it measures | AATCC TM022, "Test Method for Water Repellency: Spray Test", 2024 edition. Applicable to any textile fabric, whether or not it has been given a water-repellent finish; it measures the resistance of fabrics to wetting by water. Water sprayed against the taut surface of a specimen produces a wetted pattern whose size depends on the fabric's relative repellency, and that pattern is compared with pictures on a standard chart | AATCC, TM022 Test Method for Water Repellency: Spray Test |
| The ISO 4920 spray-rating scale, in full, from the standard itself | Five rungs. 5 = no sticking or wetting of the upper surface; 4 = slight random sticking or wetting of the upper surface; 3 = wetting of the upper surface at spray points; 2 = partial wetting of the whole upper surface; 1 = complete wetting of the whole upper surface. The standard directs that no attempt be made to assign intermediate ratings | ISO 4920:1981, clause 8 (first edition; the 2012 revision is paywalled) |
| The published ISO-to-AATCC spray-rating equivalence | ISO 1 = AATCC 50; ISO 2 = AATCC 70; ISO 3 = AATCC 80; ISO 4 = AATCC 90; ISO 5 = AATCC 100 | ISO 4920:1981, normative annex "ISO photographic scale" (first edition) |
| What the spray test does not tell a coat buyer | ISO 4920 states in its scope that the method "is not intended for use in predicting the rain penetration resistance of fabrics, since it does not measure penetration of water through the fabric." It measures resistance of the fabric surface to wetting, and nothing else | ISO 4920:1981, clause 1 Scope and field of application (first edition) |
| How a hydrostatic head figure is recorded | The pressure is recorded when water penetrates at the third place, not the first: a specimen is subjected to steadily increasing hydrostatic pressure until penetration occurs in three places, and the pressure at the third is recorded as the measure of resistance to the passage of water | SATRA TM259, Determination of resistance to water penetration (read 21 September 2026) |
| Why "waterproof" is not a defensible word for a fabric | In recent editions of Textile Terms and Definitions a fabric should not be called waterproof unless its hydrostatic head equals the fabric's hydraulic bursting pressure; otherwise the correct description is Water Penetration Resistant. "Proof" is an absolute term, and the pressure can always be raised further | SGS United Kingdom, "The Background to Rain Resistance in Clothing and Other Textiles" (2019) |
| The only published numeric water thresholds found — and they are a paid voluntary mark's own entry criteria, not a standard, a regulation or a definition of "waterproof" | Intertek's High-Performance Mark is a proprietary certification brands pay to carry rather than a standard, a regulation or a definition of "waterproof", and on the page read 21 September 2026 it required, for textiles and apparel, a spray test result of "90 (4.0) AR; 80 (3.0) AF" (AATCC TM22, ISO 4920 and national equivalents); at least 1000 mmH2O by hydrostatic pressure (AATCC TM127, ISO 811 and equivalents) for its water-resistant claim; at least 3000 mmH2O for its waterproof claim | Intertek, High-Performance Mark Standards, Textiles & Apparel |
| How coarse the standard spray test is for fluorine-free finishes | Extending the spray shower to 60 or 120 minutes, with additional calculations, was needed to separate fluorinated from non-fluorinated finishes that grade alike on the standard test; after 120 minutes the difference appeared as a 1.37 g mass difference | Hill et al., AATCC Journal of Research 7(6) |
Three things this section deliberately does not publish, because nothing reached in this research publishes them: a difference between ISO 811 and AATCC 127 in how a result is reported; a universal wash-cycle count for retesting a repellent finish; and a minimum spray rating or hydrostatic head for fashion outerwear. Intertek's condition abbreviations are not defined on its page and are not expanded here, and the mbar figures printed beside its millimetre values are not reproduced because one of the two pairs does not convert correctly.
The details that make a trench expensive to sew all started as functional requirements, and Burberry's own corporate history is the primary record of them. Epaulettes carried insignia and could hold gloves, the gun flap added a second layer of protection, the D-rings hung equipment and the storm shield ran rain off the back — four functional details, four extra components, none decorative in origin.
Burberry dates gabardine's invention to 1879 and its patent to 1888, and patents the Tielocken — which it describes as the trench coat's predecessor, not the trench coat itself — in 1912. These are the company's own dates rather than an independent archive's, and neither page publishes a patent number, so none is quoted here. The 1879-versus-1888 argument that circulates online is an invention-versus-patent conflation, not a factual dispute.
The wartime supply record explains why the specification hardened. Burberry supplied the British Army through the Second World War along with the RAF, the Royal Navy, the Royal Pioneer Corps, the Officer Cadet Training Unit and the Auxiliary Territorial Service, including its women's division.
The reading for a tech pack is that a trench's part count is inherited rather than designed. Deleting the gun flap or the D-rings is a legitimate costing decision with roughly a century of precedent arguing the other way, and a buyer should price it as a design change rather than a saving — which is also why the three-layer BOM a structured coat tech pack needs runs longer for this garment than for almost any other.
Four details, four extra components — and not one of them was drawn for looks.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Burberry's date for the invention of gabardine | 1879 — described by Burberry as an open, reticular weave that lets the body breathe while repelling the weather | Burberry Group plc, The History of the Trench Coat (heritage page) |
| Burberry's date for the gabardine patent | 1888 — "Burberry patents gabardine" on the company's own timeline, distinct from the 1879 invention entry | Burberry Group plc, Company History timeline |
| Burberry's date for the Tielocken patent | 1912 — the Tielocken, which Burberry describes as the predecessor to the trench coat, closing with a strap-and-buckle fastening and a single button at the collar | Burberry Group plc, Company History timeline |
| The functional brief behind the trench's components | Four functional details named by Burberry: epaulettes (displayed insignia, could also hold items such as gloves), the gun flap (additional protection), the D-rings (attaching military equipment) and the storm shield (running rain off more efficiently) | Burberry Group plc, Company History timeline (1914–1918 entry) |
| Wartime supply as the source of the specification | In the Second World War Burberry supplied the British Army plus the Royal Air Force, the Royal Navy, the Royal Pioneer Corps, the Officer Cadet Training Unit and the Auxiliary Territorial Service, including the women's division | Burberry Group plc, Company History timeline (1940s entry) |
Every date and description in this section is Burberry's own corporate account of its own product, phrased accordingly. No museum, archive or patent-office record was reached to corroborate them independently, and no patent numbers exist on the pages cited.
Cotton moved roughly 40% inside one season. The Cotlook A Index is a spot-quotation index — a record of physical-market prices, not a futures price and not a forecast. It closed April 2026 at 89.05 US cents per pound, peaked near 97.65 in mid-May 2026, expired the 2025/26 season at 90.00 on 31 July 2026, then added 1,130 cent points across August 2026 to reach 101.30 on the 28th, its firmest since May 2024. Against a 12-month average of 80.05 and a February 2026 low of 72.55, a gabardine quotation taken in February and one taken in September are not the same quotation.
The supply-side reason is straightforward. USDA's preliminary February 2026 Outlook Forum forecasts, relayed in Cotton Incorporated's March 2026 Monthly Economic Letter and possibly superseded by later WASDE rounds, put 2026/27 world production at 116.0 million bales against 120.1 million bales of mill use — a deficit of around four million bales — with Chinese imports rebounding to 7.0 million bales, the highest since 2023/24.
Two cautions travel with these numbers. The USDA figures are preliminary projections rather than a settled WASDE, and every Cotlook reading is a month-stamped point on a moving series, not a specification.
For a small brand the operational consequence is a validity window, not a forecast. Ask how long a mill's quotation holds, and fix the fabric price at lab dip approval rather than at bulk order, which lands weeks later, after the PP sample has been signed off.
72.55 cents in February, 101.30 in August. A fabric quotation without a validity date is not a price.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Cotlook A Index (spot-quotation index), end of April 2026 | 89.05 US cents per pound at the end of April 2026, up 810 cent points from the end of March; intramonth high of 90.55 on 22 April 2026 | Cotlook, April 2026 Market Summary |
| Cotlook A Index (spot-quotation index), May 2026 | Peak of 97.65 US cents per pound in mid-May 2026; month-end 86.70 | Cotlook, May 2026 Market Summary |
| Cotlook A Index (spot-quotation index), July 2026 and the close of the 2025/26 season | Up 445 cent points over July 2026 to a final 2025/26 value of 90.00 US cents per pound on 31 July, the index's expiry; season 12-month average 80.05, season low 72.55 on 9 February 2026 | Cotlook, July 2026 Market Summary |
| Cotlook A Index (spot-quotation index), 28 August 2026 | 101.30 US cents per pound, up 1,130 cent points across August 2026 — the firmest level since May 2024 | Cotlook, August 2026 Market Summary |
| USDA preliminary world cotton production forecast, 2026/27 | 116.0 million bales in 2026/27 against 121.0 million in 2025/26; the same letter puts the production deficit against mill use at around four million bales | Cotton Incorporated, Monthly Economic Letter, March 2026 (relaying USDA's preliminary February 2026 forecasts) |
| USDA preliminary world cotton mill-use forecast, 2026/27 | 120.1 million bales in 2026/27 against 118.6 million in 2025/26 | Cotton Incorporated, Monthly Economic Letter, March 2026 (relaying USDA's preliminary February 2026 forecasts) |
| USDA preliminary forecast for Chinese cotton imports, 2026/27 | 7.0 million bales, the highest level since 2023/24; China imported 15.0 million bales in 2023/24 and 5.2 million in 2024/25 | Cotton Incorporated, Monthly Economic Letter, March 2026 (relaying USDA's preliminary February 2026 forecasts) |
The USDA figures here are preliminary Annual Outlook Forum forecasts published in February 2026 and relayed in the March 2026 letter, not the latest USDA numbers; later WASDE releases may supersede them. Cotlook's own A Index page is subscriber-restricted, so every reading is cited to the relevant monthly market summary and carries its month.
China shipped 407,729,177 women's overcoats, raincoats and anoraks under HS 6202 in 2024, worth USD 5.87 billion. Dividing one by the other gives an implied average export unit value of about USD 14.39 per garment — a figure derived from the trade data rather than published by Comtrade, and an all-tier average across the whole tariff line from promotional rainwear upward. It is never a trench FOB price. It is quoted here for one purpose: to show how far a small premium programme sits from the volume that defines the trade statistics.
The fabric calendar is fixed by two fairs. Intertextile Shanghai Apparel Fabrics ran 25–27 August 2026 with more than 3,500 exhibitors from 30 countries across 240,000 square metres, and Premiere Vision Paris followed on 1–3 September with roughly 900 exhibitors. A brand that has not selected shell cloth by early autumn is buying from stock rather than from a mill's development range.
Zhejiang is where a large share of that cloth originates. The province's large-scale — above-designated-size — textile and garment enterprises reported RMB 1.12 trillion of operating revenue in 2025, 25.5% of the national total, and USD 95.33 billion of textile exports, 32.4% of the national total. Both figures arrive through Chinese state media reporting provincial data; Economic Daily, China Daily and the provincial textile association carry identical numbers, but none names the originating statistics agency, so they are carried as consensus rather than as a primary release.
MOQ is the question this page is asked most and the one with the least published data behind it. Makers Row, a US manufacturing marketplace, writes in its own editorial guidance that outerwear minimums in the US typically start between 50 and 300 units per style, with tailored and structured coats at the higher end — marketplace guidance about US factories, not a measured survey, and stated per style.
That last qualifier is where most quotations are misread. A minimum quoted per style and a minimum quoted per style per colour are different commitments. Take a factory quoting 100 units: on a per-style basis a three-colour capsule is 100 pieces in total, while on a per-style-per-colour basis the same capsule is 300. Ask which basis a quotation uses before comparing it against any other quotation.
JX Apparel Group's own published terms are 200 pcs per style, per colour — so a three-colour capsule is a 600-piece commitment, not a 200-piece one — with samples in 7 to 10 working days at 1.5 to 2× bulk price, refunded on order, and bulk production of 15 to 25 days after PP sample approval. Those are first-party terms, not a market measurement, and they sit alongside the fabric-fair calendar rather than inside it: an August or September cloth selection, a lab dip and PP sample cycle, then a bulk window measured in weeks. The full sequence is set out in coat production lead times from proto sample to shipment.
Per style and per style per colour are different orders. A three-colour capsule tells you which one you were quoted.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| China's export volume of women's overcoats, raincoats and anoraks (HS 6202), 2024 | 407,729,177 garments (quantity unit: items), all destinations | UN Comtrade, China HS 6202 exports 2024 |
| Implied average export unit value, China HS 6202, 2024 (derived from the trade data, not published; an all-tier average across the whole tariff line, never a trench price) | About USD 14.39 per garment (USD 5,865,778,522 divided by 407,729,177 items) | UN Comtrade, China HS 6202 exports 2024 |
| Intertextile Shanghai Apparel Fabrics, Autumn 2026: dates and venue | 25–27 August 2026, National Exhibition and Convention Center, Shanghai | Messe Frankfurt, Intertextile Shanghai Apparel Fabrics Autumn Edition 2026 |
| Intertextile Shanghai Apparel Fabrics, Autumn 2026: scale | More than 3,500 exhibitors from 30 countries and regions across 240,000 square metres; more than 100,000 visitors | Messe Frankfurt, Intertextile Shanghai Apparel Fabrics Autumn Edition 2026 |
| Premiere Vision Paris, September 2026: dates and scale | 1–3 September 2026 at Paris Nord Villepinte, with more than 900 international exhibitors (organiser pre-show figure) | Premiere Vision, Paris September 2026 press release |
| Zhejiang's above-designated-size textile and garment enterprises: operating revenue, 2025 (Chinese state media reporting provincial data; no originating statistics agency named) | RMB 1.12 trillion (about USD 162.21 billion) of operating revenue in 2025, 25.5% of the national total and first among provinces | Economic Daily / China Daily, Zhejiang textile industry embraces smart manufacturing (March 2026) |
| Zhejiang textile exports, 2025 (same consensus basis; no originating statistics agency named) | USD 95.33 billion of textile exports in 2025, 32.4% of the national total and first among provinces | Economic Daily / China Daily, Zhejiang textile industry embraces smart manufacturing (March 2026) |
| Published US outerwear minimums, stated per style (a marketplace's own editorial guidance about US factories, not a measured survey) | Outerwear MOQs in the US typically start between 50 and 300 units per style, with tailored and structured coat manufacturers requiring higher minimums because of setup time and skill | Makers Row, 6 Best Coats Manufacturers In The USA For Brands (2026) |
The Comtrade unit value is an all-tier average across HS 6202 and is never a trench price. The US minimums here are one marketplace's editorial guidance about US factories, stated per style; they are not a measurement of the market and not comparable to a per-style-per-colour minimum. No factory's published MOQ is evidence of what another factory requires.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Global trench coat market, 2025 | USD 2.68 billion, forecast USD 5.37 billion by 2035 (7.2% CAGR) | Market Research Intellect |
| Trench coats and car coats combined, 2025 | USD 3.34 billion, forecast USD 4.50 billion by 2035 (3.0% CAGR) | WiseGuyReports |
| Global trench coat market, 2025 | USD 4.8 billion, forecast USD 7.9 billion by 2034 (5.7% CAGR) | DataIntelo |
| Global trench coat market, 2025 | USD 5.75 billion, forecast USD 9.80 billion by 2033 (6.89% CAGR) | Future Market Report |
| China HS 6202 exports (women's overcoats, raincoats, anoraks), 2024 | USD 5.87 billion across 407,729,177 garments | UN Comtrade |
| Burberry group revenue, FY26 (52 weeks to 28 March 2026) | GBP 2,420 million, flat at constant rates (FY25: GBP 2,461 million) | Burberry Group plc, FY26 Preliminary Results |
| Burberry adjusted operating profit and margin, FY26 | GBP 160 million, 6.6% margin (FY25: GBP 26 million, 1.0%, on a GBP 3 million reported loss) | Burberry Group plc, FY26 Preliminary Results |
| Burberry's own dates for gabardine and the trench's predecessor | Gabardine invented 1879, patented 1888; Tielocken patented 1912 | Burberry Group plc, Company History timeline |
| How a standard minute value is built | Observed time × performance rating = basic minute; plus bundle, machine and personal-fatigue allowances | Online Clothing Study, SMV: Definition and Calculation |
| Published SAM for a tailored suit jacket — and the gap | 101 standard allowed minutes, range 70–135, in a table published in 2011; no trench, overcoat or raincoat row is published anywhere | Online Clothing Study (unaudited educational blog), Standard Minutes for Few Basic Garment Products, 2011 |
| Predetermined motion codes behind a computed SMV | 39 | Coats Digital, GSDCost |
| Gabardine construction range (published reference range, not a mill or lab measurement) | 76×48 to 124×76 ends/picks per inch; 45 or 63 degree wale; 7–11 oz/yd² (about 237–373 gsm) | Encyclopedia of Clothing and Fashion, Gabardine entry |
| Recycled polyester, 2024 | 9.3 million tonnes; 12.0% of all polyester, down from 12.5%; 98% made from plastic bottles | Textile Exchange, Materials Market Report 2025 |
| GRS recycled-content thresholds | 20% for a business-to-business claim; 50% for consumer-facing labelling (as of September 2026; the standard is in transition) | Textile Exchange, Global Recycled Standard page |
| ISO-to-AATCC spray-rating equivalence, from the standard's normative annex | ISO 1 = AATCC 50; 2 = 70; 3 = 80; 4 = 90; 5 = AATCC 100 (five rungs; ISO 4920:1981, first edition) | ISO 4920:1981, normative annex |
| What the spray test measures | Surface wetting only; ISO 4920:1981's scope says the test is "not intended for use in predicting the rain penetration resistance of fabrics" (first edition; the 2012 revision is paywalled and could not be read) | ISO 4920:1981, clause 1 |
| How a hydrostatic head figure is recorded | Pressure at the third penetration point on the specimen, not the first (SATRA TM259 published method, read 21 September 2026) | SATRA TM259 |
| Cotlook A Index (spot-quotation index), 28 August 2026 | 101.30 US cents per pound, firmest since May 2024 (season low 72.55 in February 2026) | Cotlook, August 2026 Market Summary |
| Numeric water thresholds found in this research — all inside a paid voluntary certification scheme | Intertek High-Performance Mark entry criteria, read 21 September 2026: spray result 90 (ISO 4.0); at least 1000 mmH2O for its water-resistant claim; at least 3000 mmH2O for its waterproof claim. A proprietary paid scheme's own criteria — not a standard, not a regulation, not a definition of "waterproof" | Intertek, High-Performance Mark Standards |
This page aggregates 47 externally sourced data points, each confirmed against the document that published it. Market valuations are reported as a named band with every measurer identified, because four firms price the same category between USD 2.68 billion and USD 5.75 billion and a fifth publishes a headline its own page contradicts; no figure is averaged across publishers. Test-method facts are cited to the published text of the standards themselves where that text is freely available, and otherwise to named test houses; no vendor blog is cited for a grade scale. Trade figures come from the UN Comtrade public API and were recomputed from the raw records rather than quoted second-hand.
Where no institution publishes a number — a trench's pattern-piece count, its sewing-operation count, its standard minute value, its fabric yield in metres, a minimum water-repellency grade for fashion outerwear, or a universal wash-cycle count for retesting a finish — this page says so instead of supplying a plausible figure. Factory-specific facts about JX Apparel Group are stated separately as first-party information and are excluded from every count and percentage above.
Primary sources
Qualified sources, each caveated at the point of use above
Corroborating sources
Research gaps recorded rather than filled
No fetchable primary source publishes a pattern-piece count, a sewing-operation count or a standard minute value for a trench coat. No standards body, national regulator or accredited laboratory reached in this research publishes a minimum spray rating or hydrostatic head that fashion outerwear must meet. No accredited source reached publishes a difference between ISO 811 and AATCC 127 in how a hydrostatic head result is reported. No universal number of wash cycles exists after which a water-repellent finish must be retested. No named measurer publishes a fabric yield in metres per trench coat, and no trench-specific FOB or per-coat cost figure was found from any measurer. No Jiaxing city-level textile statistic exists in the sources reached; only province-level Zhejiang figures. No institution quantifies an autumn/winter production calendar with dated deadlines — the fabric-fair dates are the only verifiable calendar anchors.
Last updated: September 2026. Reviewed quarterly; the Cotlook readings, the GRS thresholds and the Intertek High-Performance Mark criteria are the fastest-moving figures on this page.
Written by
Ray Wang
Women's outerwear manufacturing specialist with 13 years of experience producing wool, cashmere, and down coats for fashion brands across Europe and North America at JX Apparel Group in Jiaxing, China.
Ready to Source?
20+ years of team experience in mid-to-high-end women's coats and jackets. Low MOQ from 200 pcs. Cashmere, wool, silk capabilities.
Get in Touch →