Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 38, June 2021

03

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

This Report reflects the latest trends
observed in the data published in March
2022.
Remittance Prices Worldwide is available at
http://remittanceprices.worldbank.org© The World Bank Group, 20222

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Overview
Remittance Prices Worldwide (RPW) monitors remittance prices across all geographic regions of theworld. Launched in September 2008, RPW monitors the cost incurred by remitters when sending money
along major remittance corridors. RPW is used as a reference for measuring progress towards global
cost reduction objectives, including the G20 commitment to reduce the global average to 5 percent,which is being pursued in partnership with governments, service providers, and other stakeholders.
Since Q2 2016, RPW covers 48 remittance sending countries and 105 receiving countries, for a total of367 country corridors worldwide. RPW tracks the cost of sending remittances for four main RSP types:
Banks, MTOs, Mobile Operators, and Post Offices. MTOs include both traditional providers andinnovative/fintech players. On average, 17.3 services per corridor are tracked.
This Report uses data from RPW’s most recent release to analyze the global, regional, and country
specific trends in the average cost of migrant remittances.
FXC Intelligence provides the underlying data used in the RPW.
The World Bank is calling for feedback to improve the RPW dataset in regard to provider and product coverage within thescope of the RPW methodology. We would like to hear your feedback at: paymentsystems@worldbank.org

Key findings•

The Global Average increased from 6.04 percent in Q4 2021 to 6.09 percent in Q1 2022.

•

The International MTO Index experienced a modest increase over the quarter to 6.44 percent in
Q1 2022, from 6.37 percent in Q4 2021.

•

The Global Weighted Average increased to 4.92 percent in Q1 2022.

•

The Global SmaRT Average for Q1 2022 was recorded at 3.71 percent.

•

The Digital remittances index increased from 4.64 in Q4 2021 to 4.79 percent in Q1 2022.

•

South Asia remains the lowest cost receiving region, with an average cost of 4.21 percent. SubSaharan Africa remains the most expensive region to send money to, recorded at 7.84 percent total
average cost in Q1 2022.

•

Banks remain the most expensive type of service provider, with an average cost of 10.94 percent.

•

The proportion of corridors with average costs of less than 5 percent has increased considerably
since Q1 2009 (from 17 percent to 35 percent in Q1 2022).

•

In Q1 2022, mobile money remains the least costly instrument to originate remittances and was also
the least cost instrument to receive remittances.

•

Q1 2022 data were collected in March 2022. Due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, RPW did notinclude any data on corridors originating in the Russian Federation.

3

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Table of Contents
Overview.............................................................................................................................
Key findings ...................................................................................................................... 3
Progress tracker ............................................................................................................... 6
Number of corridors in the Q1 2022 dataset ..................................................................... 6
Prospects index ................................................................................................................ 6
Global trends .................................................................................................................... 7
Global average experiences a small increase ...................................................................................................... 7
International MTO Index .................................................................................................................................... 8
Global weighted average ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Smart Remitter Target (SmaRT) ......................................................................................................................... 9
Trends in corridor average total costs ............................................................................................................... 11G8 and G20 countries ..................................................................................................... 11
Cost of sending remittances from G8 countries ................................................................................................ 11
Cost of sending remittances from and to G20 countries ................................................................................... 12

Regional trends .............................................................................................................. 14
Cost structure ................................................................................................................. 15
Cash vs. Digital Services ................................................................................................................................... 15
Costs by RSP Type ............................................................................................................................................ 15
Costs by Sending and Receiving Method ......................................................................................................... 17

Annex I – Tables ($200) ................................................................................................. 19
Annex II - Cost Trends for Sending $500 ........................................................................ 20
Global trends for sending $500 ......................................................................................................................... 20
Global average total cost ....................................................................................................................................................20
International MTO Index ....................................................................................................................................................21

G20 Countries ................................................................................................................................................... 21
Cost of sending remittances from and to G20 countries ...................................................................................................21

Annex III – Tables ($500)................................................................................................ 24
Annex IV – Prospects Index............................................................................................ 25

4

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

5

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Progress tracker
RPW indicators are used to measure the progress towards targets of global efforts for the reduction ofremittance costs. The G8 (L’Aquila, 2010) and the G20 (Cannes, 2011 and Brisbane, 2014) committed toreduce the Global Average Total Cost to 5 percent. The UN SDGs have indicated a target of 3 percent for
the Global Average to be reached by 2030. At the same time, the UN SDGs have also committed toensuring that in all corridors, remittances can be transferred for 5 percent or less.
The figure below summarizes the progress towards these three targets.

Number of corridors in the Q1 2022 dataset
The number of corridors covered by RPW in Q1 2022 is lower than 367. Q1 2022 data were collected in
March 2022. Due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, RPW did not include any data on corridors
originating in the Russian Federation. In addition, remittance service providers (RSPs) have still notresumed outgoing remittance operations in Nigeria due to the Central Bank of Nigeria banning alloutbound transfers from the country. Remittance services in the Cote d’Ivoire to Mali corridor stopped asa consequence of the sanctions imposed by ECOWAS, of which Cote d’Ivoire is part, on Mali. Moreover,
several providers suspended services in the Senegal to Mali corridor for the same reason. Lastly, inPakistan, outbound money transfers have been restricted by the government for medical and education
purposes only, subject to government approval. Data on Pakistan to Bangladesh and Pakistan to
Afghanistan were accordingly not available at the time of data collection. The Q1 2022 dataset includes
data from 354 corridors (excluding 13 originating in Russia, 3 originating in Nigeria, 2 originating inPakistan and one originating in Cote d’Ivoire).

Prospects index
As of Q1 2022, RPW data collection would be used to also monitor new services via a prospects
index. These new services could be candidates for inclusion in the main index in the future subject tothem meeting certain requirements. Please see Annex IV for details.

6Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Global trends
Global average experiences a small increase
In Q1 2022, the Global Average cost for sending remittances was 6.09 percent, an increase from 6.04 in
Q4 2021. The Global Average has remained below 7.00 percent since Q1 2019 (see Figure 1 below andTable 1 in the Annex). Overall, this represents a decline of 3.58 percentage points since Q1 2009, when
the figure was recorded at 9.67 percent. In Q1 2022, the global average for digital remittances wasrecorded at 4.79 percent, while the global average for non-digital remittances was 6.69 percent. Digital
services account for 32% of all services RPW collected in Q1 2022.1
Figure 1 Trends in the global cost of sending $200 in remittances2

1

A digital remittance must be sent via a payment instrument in an online or self-assisted manner, and received into a transaction account,i.e., bank account, transaction account maintained at a non-bank deposit taking institution (say a post office), mobile money or e-money
account.
2 Figures for the global average were adjusted in Q1 2014 following a clean-up of the entire database. Some values slightly vary from figures
published prior to Q1 2014.

7

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

International MTO Index
The International MTO Index tracks the prices of MTOs that are present in at least 85 percent of corridors
covered in the RPW database.3 In Q1 2022, the International MTO Index recorded a modest increase to
6.44 percent from the previous value of 6.39 percent in Q4 2021. Over the year, this figure was up by 0.13
of a percentage point, recorded at 6.31 percent in Q1 2021. This figure has come down by 3.92 percentage
points from its first recorded value of 10.36 percent in Q1 2009. In Q1 2022, the digital-only MTO Index
recorded at 3.73 percent, a moderate increase from 3.58 percent in Q4 2021.4 The digital-only MTO Index
has consistently remained below both the International MTO Index and the global average.
Figure 2 Trends in International MTO Index & Digital-only MTO Index

Global weighted average
Also, a weighted average total cost is calculated, which accounts for the relative size of the flows in each
remittance corridor.5 The Global Weighted Average of sending remittances, as illustrated in Figure 3 (see3 The International MTOs Index includes all MTOs that are present in over 85 percent of RPW corridors. Thus far, it has included Western

Union and MoneyGram, which operate in 95 percent and 90 percent of the country corridors covered in the database, respectively.
4
A digital-only MTO refers to money transfer operators that send remittances only through digital channels. The digital-only MTO index
includes five digital-only MTOs, Wise, Remitly, WorldRemit, InstaReM and Xoom.
5 It is important to note that, while official data on remittance flows by bilateral corridors are currently not available, estimates (Ratha andShaw 2007, last updated in 2018, available at8

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

also Table 1 in the Annex), has at times shown a different pattern from the simple average. In Q1 2022,
the Global Weighted Average recorded at 4.92 percent. This is the sixth consecutive quarter in which thisfigure has been recorded below 5.00 percent. Over the last five years, this figure has decreased byapproximately 0.73 percentage points – recorded at 5.65 percent in Q1 2017.
Figure 3 Trends in Global weighted average & SmaRT average

Smart Remitter Target (SmaRT)
To complement the Global Average and Global Weighted Averages described above, the World Bank
introduced the SmaRT indicator in Q2 2016, which aims to reflect the cost that a savvy consumer withaccess to sufficiently complete information could pay to transfer remittances in each corridor. SmaRT is
calculated as the simple average of the three cheapest qualifying services for sending the equivalent of$200 in each corridor and is expressed as a percentage of the total amount sent. In addition totransparency, services must meet additional criteria to qualify for being included in the SmaRT calculation,
including transaction speed (five days or less), and accessibility, determined by geographic proximity of

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/migrationremittancesdiasporaissues/brief/migration-remittances-data) have been used in this calculation.
These estimates are based on the Balance of Payments (BOP) and factor in migrant stocks, destination country incomes, and source country
incomes. The methodology for these estimates has been questioned, as well as the accuracy of official data on remittance flows and migrant
stocks. However, this still represents the only available comprehensive dataset on bilateral remittance flows. It also seems likely that overall,
the dataset is sufficiently accurate to reflect at least the proportion between the different corridors, hence offering a good approximation toweight the relevance of each corridor in terms of flow size.

9Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

branches for services that require physical presence, or access to any technology or device necessary to
use the service, such as a bank account, mobile phone, or the Internet. 6 In Q1 2022, the Global SmaRT
Average was recorded at 3.71 percent. Since Q1 2021 this figure has come down from 3.98 percent, adecrease of 0.26 percentage point.
The potential of SmaRT can be appreciated even more at the corridor level, where the indicators caninform policy actions by identifying limitations at a more granular level. In Q1 2022, 25 of the 3547 corridors
did not have any SmaRT qualifying services, indicating that in these corridors there is an issue with either
access or reach of services, or a lower level of competition. Of these 25 corridors, fourteen are destinedfor Sub-Saharan Africa, five for the Middle East and North Africa, five for South Asia, and one for Latin
America and the Caribbean. An overwhelming majority of these corridors have low Internet penetration
and/or have low transaction account penetration, which indicate that access to the Internet and accounts
should be proactively targeted in these regions as a means of encouraging more diverse payment andremittance services offering. Majority of the receiving countries in this group have a “Green Light” SmaRT
rating for accessibility to Cash, and majority (19 out of 25 – see Box) have a “Green Light” rating for Mobile
services (measured by availability of cash services and number of cellular subscriptions per 100 persons).

Box - Corridors without SmaRT qualifying services with “Green Light” rating for mobile
services
Côte d'Ivoire to Mali
Nigeria to Benin
Saudi Arabia to Sudan
Italy to Egypt, Arab Rep.
Nigeria to Mali
Saudi Arabia to Syrian Arab Rep.
Ghana to Nigeria
Nigeria to Togo
Jordan to Syrian Arab Rep.
India to Bangladesh
Netherlands to Suriname
United Arab Emirates to Yemen, Rep.
India to Pakistan
Pakistan to Afghanistan
United Arab Emirates to Sudan
India to Sri Lanka
Pakistan to Bangladesh
United States to Yemen, Rep.
Qatar to Sudan
Note: In Q1 2022, RPW experienced difficulties in collecting data on Cote d’Ivoire to Mali, and all outbound services from
Nigeria and Pakistan. In addition, data on services originating in the Russian Federation (13 corridors) were not collected.
Therefore, for Q1 2022, RPW reports no qualifying services in these 19 corridors, six of which are listed in this Box initalics.

The UN SDGs committed to ensure that, by 2030, it should be possible to send remittances for 5 percent
or less in every corridor. The SmaRT averages are used as a reference for this indicator, reflecting thefact that in any given corridor there are services available to customers that meet the requirements
described above, while also on average offering a cost that is in line with the UN SDG. As of Q1 2022, 69
percent of all corridors covered in the RPW database had SmaRT corridor averages below 5 percent.8

6

For additional information on the methodology used to calculate SmaRT see
https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/smart_methodology.pdf
7 The number of corridors excludes the 13 corridors originating in Russia.
8 Please note that this figure excludes the 13 corridors which originate in Russia.

10Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Trends in corridor average total costs
Figure 4 shows that compared to Q1 2009, the proportion of corridors with average costs of less than 10
percent has increased considerably, showing an overall increase of share by 31 percentage points (53percent of corridors in Q1 2009, compared to 84 percent of corridors in Q1 2022). This shift is naturallyaccompanied by a decrease of share of corridors exhibiting total costs over 15 percent (18 percent ofcorridors compared to 3 percent of corridors). In the 10-15 percent total cost category there are 8 percentof corridors in Q1 2022, compared to 29 percent of corridors in Q1 2009. Year over year since Q1 2019,
this gradual shift is visible. Of the 6 corridors with costs above 20 percent in Q1 2022, four originate in
Sub-Saharan Africa and are destinated for Sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, corridor average total costs
for Côte d'Ivoire to Mali, as well as all outbound services from Nigeria and Pakistan remain unavailable in
Q1 2022. Corridor average total costs for services originating from Russia are also unavailable. These 19
corridors are shown as “NA” in Figure 4.

Figure 4 Distribution of Average Total Costs

G8 and G20 countries
Cost of sending remittances from G8 countries
The G8 countries include several of the major remittance sending countries in the world. The average costfor sending remittances from the G8 countries increased from 5.61 percent in Q4 2021 to 5.80 percent in
Q1 2022. This is the fifth quarter in which this figure has been recorded below 6.00 percent. Over the year,
this figure has decreased by 0.12 of a percentage point (from 5.92 percent in Q1 2021).
The largest decrease in total average cost to send remittances is seen in Japan (7.52 percent to 7.35

11

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

percent), followed by Germany (6.22 percent to 6.10 percent), Canada (6.69 percent to 6.66 percent), andthe United Kingdom (6.65 percent to 5.64 percent). The largest increase is seen in the United States (5.18
percent to 5.52 percent), France (6.41 percent to 6.69 percent), and Italy (4.54 percent to 4.78 percent).
Figure 5 Total average over time in G8 countries

Cost of sending remittances from and to G20 countries
The cost of remitting from G20 countries increased from 6.00 percent in Q4 2021 to 6.20 percent in Q1
2022, as shown in Figure 6 (also see Table 3 in the Annex).
Figure 6 Average cost of sending $200 from G8 and G20 countries

South Africa remains the costliest G20 country to send remittances from (see Figure 7). This is despite
an overall decrease from its peak in Q1 2013, when the cost of sending from South Africa was more than
20 percent. In Q1 2022, remitting from South Africa incurred an average cost of 13.93 percent, a moderateincrease from its recorded value of 13.02 percent in Q4 2021. The cost of sending from the second mostexpensive G20 sending country – Japan – was recorded at 7.35 percent in Q1 2022. The Republic ofKorea is the least expensive G20 sending country, recorded at 2.98 percent, followed by Saudi Arabia

12Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

(4.43 percent), Italy (4.78 percent), the United States (5.52 percent), the United Kingdom (5.64 percent),and Brazil (5.93 percent).
Figure 7 Average cost of remitting from G20 countries

Figure 8 Average cost of sending $200 to G20 countries

Figure 9 Average cost of remitting to G20 countries, by Country

13Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Figures 8 and 9 display the total average cost of sending $200 to G20 countries over time and in Q1 2022,
respectively (see also Table 4 in the Annex). The average cost of sending money to the G20 countries
that are included in RPW as receiving markets was recorded at 5.69 percent in Q1 2022.
Apart from a few quarters, the average cost of sending money to the G20 countries has followed thepattern of the Global Average. Since Q2 2017, the cost of remitting to G20 countries is recorded below
the Global Average. In Q1 2022, Brazil (6.56 percent) is the most expensive country in this group to remit
to, followed by China (6.52 percent), South Africa (6.36 percent), and Turkey (6.08 percent). Costs forsending remittances to Indonesia, India and Mexico were recorded below 6 percent. Mexico remained thecheapest receiving market in the G20 group, recorded at 4.81 percent.

Regional trends
The cost for remittance services varies significantly depending on the region where the money is being
sent to (see Figures 10 & 11 below and Table 5 in the Annex). Over the quarter, most regions recorded
an increase in average total cost. Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) experienced the largest increase
from 5.60 percent to 6.03 percent, followed by Europe & Central Asia (ECA), Middle East and North Africa(MNA), and Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). South Asia (SA) experienced the largest decrease from 4.30
percent to 4.21 percent, followed by East Asia and Pacific (EAP).
Figure 10 Average costs over time by region of the world

Figure 11 Average costs by region of the world

14

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Cost structure
Cash vs. Digital Services
Figure 12 further compares the costs for remittance services among different regions, by breaking down
the cost into two components: fee and foreign exchange (FX) margin. Within each region, Figure 12
differentiates between digital and non-digital remittances. It shows fees account for a large portion of thecosts for remittance services. Moreover, costs for non-digital services are consistently higher than thosefor digital services regardless of the region where the money is being sent to.
Figure 12 Average costs by region: cash vs digital services

Costs by RSP TypeRPW tracks the cost of sending remittances for four main RSP types: Banks, MTOs, Mobile Operators,
and Post Offices. Figure 13 provides a time series visual of all the RSP types included in the RPW dataset.
Over time, Banks, Mobile Operators, and MTOs have seen a general decline of total average costs, while
Post Office services, due to the small number of services, have led a volatile trend and overall recorded
periodic increases since the historic low recorded in Q3 2013. Banks have been firmly above the Global
Average, whereas MTOs and Mobile Operators have remained below.
Figure 14 provides an overview for each RSP type in Q1 2021 and Q1 2022. Banks continue to be thecostliest RSP type, with an average cost of 10.94 percent in Q1 2022. Post Offices are recorded at 6.78

15

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

percent in Q1 2022.9 Money Transfer Operators are recorded at 5.28 percent, while Mobile Operators are
the cheapest RSP type recorded at 2.87 percent. However, Mobile Operators only account for a very small
share (less than 1%) of the sample size.
Figure 13 Total averages over time by RSP typeFigure 14 Total average by RSP type

9 Several services originating in France via “La Poste” are provided by “La Banque Postale” which is a subsidiary of La Poste and islicensed as a bank. This recategorization seems to have impacted the average cost of sending via post offices in Q1 2022.

16

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Costs by Sending and Receiving Method
RPW captures separately the payment instrument used to fund the transaction and the one used to
disburse the funds to the receiver. This approach is reflected in the charts below. This approach allows
for further refinement of the analysis and increases its adaptability to new products that might emerge andhas proven particularly useful in monitoring innovative products and players.
In Q1 2022, the cheapest method for funding a remittance transaction was Mobile Money at 2.77 percent(54 services recorded in RPW) (Figure 15). The average cost when using Cash (1,716 services) was 6.37
percent. Sending money using credit or debit card (2,576 services) cost 5.22 percent. Using a bankaccount incurred an average cost of 6.61 percent (2,354 services).
Figure 15 Average Cost by Instrument Used to Fund the Transaction

Figure 16 Average cost by means of disbursing the funds

The cost of sending remittances to a bank account within the same bank or to a partner of the originatingbank (81 services) was recorded at 8.29 percent in Q1 2022 (Figure 16). In contrast, sending money to a17Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

bank account regardless of originating bank (2,415 services), was 6.44 percent.10 When funds are sent toa mobile wallet (377 services) the average cost in Q1 2022 was 4.19 percent. Services where money is
disbursed in cash (3,498 services) cost on average 5.95 percent.

10 The average cost of sending within the same bank has increased by 2 percentage points due to a bank instituting specific fees across all

corridors originating in the US at the time of data collection,18

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Annex I – Tables ($200)
Table 1 – Global Average (%), International MTO Index

Table 2 – Total average in G8 Countries (%)

Table 3 – Total average in G20 sending countries (%)

Table 4 – Total average in G20 receiving countries (cost to send money to select countries %)Table 5 – Total average by regions of the world (%)

19

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Annex II - Cost Trends for Sending $500
This Annex is a continued supplement to the ongoing Global Cost Reduction monitoring efforts establishedwith the main RPW Quarterly Report. Global targets for reduction of remittances cost have focused on the$200 (or local currency equivalent) as the amount sent, which is believed to be an accurate representationof a typical remittance transaction size. However, data for $500 (or equivalent) have also been collectedalongside the data for $200 and have been analyzed since Q4 2017 to complement the $200 analysis.
The analysis in this annex shows again that, as expected, the average cost of sending $500 is lower as apercentage of amount sent compared to the average cost of sending $200. The analysis additionallyconfirms that the average cost of sending $500 has followed a similar trend to the one observed over thelast years for $200.

Global trends for sending $500
Global average total cost
In Q1 2022, the Global Average cost for sending $500 was 4.09 percent. The average cost of sending$500 has remained below the 5.00 percent total average cost since Q2 2014 and has never exhibited avalue above 6 percent (the costliest period was in Q3 2011, where the total average cost of sending $500
was recorded at 5.59 percent). The Global Average of sending $500 exhibits an overall downwards trend
since Q1 2011, as seen in Figure 17 below. This represents a decline of 1.23 percentage point since Q1
2011, when the figure was recorded at 5.32 percent. Over the preceding 5-year period (Q1 2017 – Q12022), the total cost of sending $500 has decreased by 0.56 percentage point.
Figure 17 Global average total cost for sending $500

20

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

International MTO Index
The International MTO Index tracks the prices of MTOs that are present in at least 85 percent of corridors
covered in the RPW database.11 In Q1 2022, the International MTO Index for $500 experienced a modest
increase to 4.86 percent from 4.83 percent in Q4 2021. As seen in Figure 17, the International MTO Index
exhibits an overall downwards trend. Over the preceding 5-year period (Q1 2017 – Q1 2022), the total
cost of sending $500 has decreased by 0.97 percentage point.

G20 Countries
Cost of sending remittances from and to G20 countries
The cost of remitting $500 from G20 countries has remained below 5.00 percent since Q1 2014, when
this figure was recorded at 5.10 percent. The total cost of remitting $500 from G20 countries has closely
followed a similar trend as the Global Average of sending $500, as seen in Figure 18. The cost of remitting$500 from G20 countries in Q1 2022 experienced an increase, recorded at 4.19 percent.

Figure 18 Average cost of sending $500 from G20 countries

In Q1 2022, South Africa is the most expensive G20 country to send $500 from, consistent with the $200
findings (see Figure 19). The average cost of remitting $500 from South Africa increased to 8.18 percent
from 7.75 percent in Q4 2021, and this is despite an overall decrease from its peak in Q2 2013, when the11

The International MTOs Index includes all MTOs that are present in over 85 percent of RPW corridors. Thus far, it has included Western
Union and MoneyGram, which operate in 95 percent and 90 percent of the country corridors covered in the database, respectively.

21

Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

cost of sending from South Africa was more than 12 percent. Brazil is the second most expensive G20
country to send $500 from, recorded at 6.01 percent. The Republic of Korea became the least expensive
sending country in this grouping, exhibiting a total average cost of sending $500 of 1.87 percent, followed
by Saudi Arabia (2.88 percent), Italy (3.31 percent), the United States (3.89 percent), and Germany (3.93
percent). Of this group Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, the UK, and South Africa exhibit costs
higher than the Global Average in Q1 2022.
Figure 19 Average cost of remitting from G20 countries

Figures 20 and 21 display the total average cost of sending $500 to G20 countries over time and in Q1
2022, respectively. The average cost of sending $500 to the G20 countries that are included in RPW as
receiving markets increased between Q4 2021 and Q1 2022, recorded at 3.71 percent in Q1 2022.
Figure 20 Average cost of remitting to G20 countries

22Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

For the past 5 consecutive years, the cost of remitting $500 to G20 countries is recorded below the Global
Average cost of sending $500. In Q1 2022, Brazil (5.04 percent) remains the most expensive country inthis grouping to remit to, followed by South Africa (4.75 percent), Turkey (4.18 percent), and China (4.11
percent). Over the last 5 years, the total average cost of sending to G20 countries has decreased slightly
by 0.83 of a percentage point (in Q1 2017, this figure was recorded at 4.54 percent).
Figure 21 Average cost of remitting $500 to G20 countries, by Country23Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Annex III – Tables ($500)
Table 6 – Global Average, International MTO Index ($500)

Table 7 – Cost of sending $500 from G20 countries

Table 8 – Cost of receiving $500 in G20 countries

24Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Annex IV – Prospects Index
As of Q1 2022, RPW data collection would be used to also monitor new services via a prospects
index. These new services could be candidates for inclusion in the main index in the future subject tothem meeting certain requirements. In Q1 2022, 46 services originating from 14 sending countries were
included in the prospects index, covering 31 destination countries. A breakdown of these services byreceiving region is provided in Figure 22. Services destined for Sub-Saharan Africa account for a large
share in the prospects index. The objective of this index is to keep track of the new entrants and newservices, to get a sense of the market developments. In the past while we identified new entrants the priceand other data was not captured because these services did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the mainindex.
Figure 22 Number of services by receiving region

East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Afr..
South Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa

Figure 23 Average cost by region, sending $200 (%)
7%
6%

5.86%

6.27%

6.02%

5.14%

4.76%

5%
4%
2.77%

3%
2%
1%
0%
East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central
Asia

Latin America &Caribbean

25

Middle East &North Afr..

South Asia

Sub-SaharanAfricaRemittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

Average cost for sending $200 for the prospects index in Q1 2022 was 5.36 percent, below the global
average of 6.09 percent. Twenty-four services were digital services, accounting for over half of all services
in the prospects index. Average cost for digital remittances was 5.09 percent, slightly higher than the
global digital remittances index of 4.79 percent. Figure 23 plots the average cost by receiving regions.
In Q1 2022, cheapest method to fund a remittance transaction among the services in the prospects index
was bank account transfers at 4.74 percent. According to Table 9, average costs of sending $200 via
various payment instrument do not differ significantly. Moreover, mobile money services account for agreater share in the sample (6 percent) compared to its share in the RPW main dataset (less than 1%).
Table 9 Average Cost by Instrument Used to Fund the Transaction, sending $200

Q1 2022

Cash

Bank AccountDebit/Credit Card

Mobile Money

6.00%

4.74%

5.59%

5.64%

10

14

34

3

Number of services

Table 10 Average cost by means of disbursing the funds, sending $200

Q1 2022

Cash

Bank AccountBank Account (same bank)

Mobile Wallet

4.90%

5.32%

NA

4.91%

28

25

NA

10

Number of services

Table 11 provides additional information for comparison, including the average costs using the services
included in the prospects index only, the average costs without these services as shown elsewhere in thisreport, and the average costs if these services would instead be included in the main analysis.
Table 11 A comparison of cost of sending $200 with/without the services in the prospects index
Newprospects
5.14%

# of
services8

Q1 2022 averages(Reported in the main section)
5.85%

Would-be Q1 2022 averages
including prospects
5.85%

Europe & Central Asia

5.86%

3

6.40%

6.40%

Latin America & Caribbean

6.27%

6

6.03%

6.03%

Middle East & North Africa

2.77%

6

6.66%

6.61%

South Asia

4.76%

4

4.21%

4.21%

Sub-Saharan Africa

6.02%

19

7.84%

7.81%

Average total cost

5.36%

46

6.09%

6.08%

Digital remittances index

5.09%

24

4.79%

4.79%

East Asia & Pacific

RPW will continue to monitor new services in the coming quarters as part of the prospects index. Overtime, these services will be added to the main analysis and indices, based on a combination of materialityand diversity criteria.

26Remittance Prices Worldwide - Issue 41, March 2022

The World Bank Group 1818 H
Street NW Washington, DC
20433 USA
www.worldbank.org
paymentsystems@worldbank.org
Telephone: +1 202 473-1000

27