Latest Brand Finance data reveals top 10 Chinese telcos represent $73 billion in brand value
BEIJING, 6 March 2025 – China Mobile leads the charge of ten Chinese telecoms brands collectively representing a total brand value of USD73.4 billion, according to Brand Finance Telecoms 150 2025, a new report from Brand Finance, the world's leading brand valuation consultancy. This highlights China's strong influence in the global telecoms industry, driven by continued 5G expansion, digital transformation, and AI-driven innovation.
China Mobile (brand value up 6% to USD47 billion) retains its position as the fourth most valuable telecoms brand globally, reinforcing its market strength. According to Brand Finance’s research data, the brand’s growth is driven by rapid expansion of cloud computing, storage services, and 5G enterprise solutions. China Mobile to experience strong customer adoption, with a growing number of 5G package users and an expanding household broadband customer base, further cementing its position as a leader in global connectivity.
China Telecom (brand value down 9% to USD12.9 billion) ranks 12th globally. Despite its brand value decline, market research data reveals that the telco is still perceived as a premium telecoms provider by respondents in China, highlighting its strong reputation for quality and reliability despite market challenges.
China Unicom (brand value down 13% to USD3.6 billion), a Chinese state-owned telecommunications operator, ranks 37th globally, reflecting its continued presence in the competitive telecoms landscape.
Scott Chen, Managing Director, Brand Finance China, commented:
“China’s leading telecoms brands are not only expanding their technological capabilities but also enhancing customer experience and brand perception. According to Brand Finance’s research, major Chinese telecoms brands achieve high scores in innovation, network quality, and reliability, reinforcing their reputation as global leaders in connectivity.”
Meanwhile, Huawei (brand value up 3% to USD31.9 billion) remains the world’s most valuable telecoms infrastructure brand in 2025. After a significant drop in brand value last year and despite challenges posed by ongoing U.S. sanctions and restrictions, Huawei is showing signs of recovery.
Both ZTE (brand value up 12% to USD 2.8 billion) and Hengtong (brand value up 8% to USD 1.3 billion) retained their global rankings at sixth and ninth respectively, among the world’s most valuable telecoms infrastructure brands.
Telecoms Industry Global Insights
Deutsche Telekom (brand value up 16% to USD85.3 billion) holds its position as the most valuable telecoms brand globally,more than USD13 billion greater than Verizon, the world’s second most valuable telecoms brand at USD72.3 billion.
Swisscom has risen from third place to become the world’s strongest telecoms brand in 2025, with a brand strength index (BSI) score of 89.8 out of 100. This achievement reflects its strong performance across key metrics, including perfect scores for familiarity, reputation, consideration, price premium, and recommendation in Switzerland, underscoring its strong appeal among consumers.
e&, the world’s fastest growing brand this year, posted an eight-fold increase in its brand value to USD15.3 billion. This achievement places e& among the top ten most valuable telecoms brands globally.
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organisations make strategic decisions.
Headquartered in London, Brand Finance operates in over 25 countries. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 6,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on 6,000 brands, surveying more than 175,000 respondents across 41 countries and 31 industry sectors. By combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database — the largest brand value database in the world — Brand Finance equips ambitious brand leaders with the data, analytics, and the strategic guidance they need to enhance brand and business value.
In addition to calculating brand value, Brand Finance also determines the relative strength of brands through a balanced scorecard of metrics evaluating marketing investment, stakeholder equity, and business performance, compliant with ISO 20671.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm and a committed leader in the standardisation of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.
Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.
Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.
Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.
Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.
The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.
Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.
The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance's proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.
