From January through September 2026, Ukraine exported insulated wires and cables, including fiber-optic products, worth $1.065 billion, maintaining shipment volumes at virtually the same level as the same period last year.
According to data from the State Customs Service, Germany remains the largest market for Ukrainian cable products. Over the nine-month period, shipments to this country totaled $348.7 million, down 2.8% compared to January–September 2025.
Germany’s share of Ukraine’s total exports of wires and cables decreased by approximately 1 percentage point—to 32.7%—but the country continues to account for nearly one-third of the industry’s total export revenue.
Poland ranks second, with Ukraine supplying $177.1 million worth of products, compared to $168.1 million a year earlier. Thus, exports to Poland increased by approximately 5.4%.
Hungary retained its third position with purchases totaling about $172 million, virtually unchanged from last year’s figure of $172.3 million.
The three largest European markets—Germany, Poland, and Hungary—accounted for a total of nearly $698 million in January–September, or about 65.5% of Ukraine’s total exports of wires and cables.
In September, exports of these products totaled $122.7 million. Compared to September of last year, this figure decreased by 6.6%, but compared to August 2026, it increased by 26%.
The cable industry remains one of the most prominent export-oriented segments of Ukraine’s machine-building and component manufacturing sectors. A significant portion of the products is supplied to companies in the European automotive, electrical engineering, and industrial sectors.
For the full year 2025, Ukraine increased its exports of insulated wires and cables by 10.6%—to $1.41 billion. If shipment rates in the fourth quarter remain close to last year’s levels, the annual export volume in 2026 may also remain at around $1.4 billion.
Both directions of cross-border electricity trade increased during the period of October 5–11: imports rose by 6% compared to the previous week—to 13,100 MWh—while exports rose by 20%—to 176,400 MWh.
“Despite localized restrictions, Ukraine remained a net exporter throughout the week,” the DIXI Group analytical center reported on Tuesday, citing data from Energy Map.
As previously reported, since October 6, due to Russian attacks on energy infrastructure, power restriction schedules (PRS) for industry and businesses and hourly blackout schedules (HBS) for the general public have been in effect in some regions of Ukraine.
However, even amid localized restrictions, Ukraine remained a net exporter throughout the past week due to a power surplus in other regions. This situation was caused by the inability to transmit power to certain regions and cities because the enemy had damaged transmission grids, substations, and distribution lines—particularly near major cities.
According to Energy Map, Hungary accounted for the largest share of exports that week—84,900 MWh, or 48.1%. Moldova accounted for 56,600 MWh (32.1%), Romania for 33,100 MWh (18.7%), and Poland for 1,800 MWh (1.0%).
Exports to Hungary, Romania, and Moldova increased by 15%–26%, and exports to Poland increased eightfold, though the volumes remained insignificant. No electricity was sold to Slovakia. The average daily export volume for the week was 25.2 thousand MWh.
Hungary remained the main source of imports, accounting for 8.7 thousand MWh (66.6%). Romania accounted for 3.6 thousand MWh (27.6%), Poland for 0.7 thousand MWh (5.5%), and Moldova for 0.05 thousand MWh (0.4%).
Imports from Romania and Moldova increased by 70% and 124%, respectively, while those from Hungary and Poland decreased by 3% and 39%. There were no deliveries from Slovakia for five consecutive weeks. The average daily import volume was 1.9 thousand MWh.
As previously reported, the week before last, from September 28 to October 4, electricity exports rose by 75.6% compared to the previous week—to 147.0 thousand MWh, marking the highest weekly export volume since September 2025.
European Union countries remain the largest destination for Ukrainian rolled metal products: in January–September 2026, the EU accounted for 82.2% of Ukraine’s exports of metallurgical products.
According to data from the State Customs Service of Ukraine, another 9.2% of shipments went to other European countries, and 6.7% went to CIS countries.
In total, Ukrainian steel mills exported approximately 2.277 million metric tons of rolled steel over the nine-month period, which accounted for 61.1% of the country’s total production.
At the same time, the geography of Ukrainian imports differs significantly from the structure of exports.
The largest source of steel product shipments to Ukraine was other European countries outside the EU, which accounted for 48.8% of imports.
Asian countries ranked second with a 26.6% share, while the EU-27 ranked third with 17%.
In total, Ukraine imported 1.276 million metric tons of rolled metal products from January through September.
Source: “Ukrmetallurgprom,” State Customs Service of Ukraine.
The Moldovan government will discuss with Ukrainian officials the possibility of signing a long-term contract for the supply of natural gas, Moldovan Prime Minister Vasile Tofan said on the eve of his visit to Kyiv.
“Until now, there has been a moratorium on gas exports from Ukraine. Very recently, an initiative was launched to lift this moratorium, as Ukraine also needs budget revenue. Indeed, the country has a certain surplus of gas. It is produced in two regions: Poltava and Ivano-Frankivsk. The volumes available for export are not very large. I’ve heard figures of around 500 million cubic meters of gas, which is roughly the amount we’ll need during the gas year on the regulated market,” said Tofan, as quoted by the state agency “Moldpres.”
According to him, this issue will be discussed during his visit to Kyiv, which is planned for the near future.
The prime minister expects Kyiv to offer Chisinau a competitive price for gas if a long-term contract—for 3 to 5 years—is signed. “We need to understand that Ukraine will sell this gas at market price. The cost can be reduced through an agreement that provides for a longer purchase term. If we buy gas for immediate consumption, we pay the market price or a price close to it. However, Ukrainian gas could be cheaper because our transportation costs will be lower. If we manage to negotiate the terms and conclude an agreement for a longer purchase period—three, four, or five years—by offering them a purchase guarantee, then the price could indeed be lower,” Tofan noted.
On October 7, the Ukrainian government approved the partial resumption of natural gas exports, which had been suspended in 2022. According to the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, private producers will be able to export up to 15% of the volume of gas produced in the previous month. This mechanism will not apply to state-controlled companies and is intended to allow private producers to sell gas to foreign markets under regulated conditions.
As previously reported, Moldova entered another round of the energy crisis in August and September, causing domestic gas tariffs to rise 1.7-fold over two months; the country is also facing a sharp increase in the cost of imported petroleum products. A state of emergency in the energy sector has been in effect in Moldova since September 26.
In September, the Moldovan prime minister repeatedly stated the need to conclude long-term direct contracts for gas imports with producers, as opposed to exchange-traded forward contracts on the TTF hub in the Netherlands, under which gas has been supplied to Moldova since 2022. In particular, Tofan initiated negotiations on gas imports from the United States, Qatar, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan. He also stated that Moldova plans to conclude direct contracts for gas supplies in 2027 from Romania, specifically from the Neptun Deep field in the Black Sea.
Ukraine’s foreign trade in goods in January–August 2026 was characterized by imports significantly exceeding exports and the concentration of the negative trade balance in relations with several of its largest partners. According to calculations based on the table “Ukraine’s Foreign Trade with Selected Countries” as of August 31, total trade turnover amounted to $92.95 billion, imports to $66.25 billion, and exports to $26.70 billion. The negative balance reached $39.55 billion, while imports exceeded exports by a factor of 2.48.
Exports covered only 40.3% of the value of imported goods. China was the largest individual trading partner and supplier, Poland was the main market for Ukrainian products, and the European Union as a whole accounted for 59.1% of Ukraine’s merchandise exports. Meanwhile, the largest positive trade balances were recorded in trade with Moldova, Spain, and Egypt.
“For every hundred dollars of merchandise imports, there were approximately forty dollars of merchandise exports. This ratio demonstrates the limited ability of the export sector to balance the economy’s demand for foreign products. Some imports support production and reconstruction, so they must be assessed with regard to the purpose of the goods. To improve the balance in the long term, the equipment purchased must help increase the output of competitive products in Ukraine,” said Maksym Urakin, PhD in Economics and founder of the Experts Club information and analytical center.
Ukraine recorded its largest trade turnover with China at $20.56 billion, or 22.1% of the total. Poland ranked second with $9.54 billion, followed by Germany with $6.10 billion. Ukraine had almost the same volume of trade with Turkey, at $6.08 billion, with the difference compared with Germany amounting to just $20.9 million. The United States completed the top five partners with $3.91 billion.
These five countries accounted for 49.7% of trade turnover, while the ten largest partners accounted for 63.4%. Thus, trade results with a relatively small group of countries largely determined Ukraine’s overall foreign trade balance.
Ukraine’s Ten Largest Trading Partners by Trade Turnover in January–August 2026, USD Billion
| Country | Imports | Exports | Balance | Trade Turnover |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| China | 19.639 | 0.924 | −18.715 | 20.563 |
| Poland | 6.277 | 3.261 | −3.016 | 9.538 |
| Germany | 4.377 | 1.726 | −2.651 | 6.104 |
| Turkey | 3.991 | 2.092 | −1.899 | 6.083 |
| United States | 3.210 | 0.700 | −2.510 | 3.910 |
| Italy | 1.834 | 1.519 | −0.315 | 3.353 |
| Netherlands | 1.151 | 1.311 | +0.160 | 2.462 |
| Hungary | 1.549 | 0.846 | −0.703 | 2.394 |
| Czech Republic | 1.670 | 0.705 | −0.965 | 2.375 |
| Slovakia | 1.343 | 0.792 | −0.551 | 2.135 |
Source: State Customs Service of Ukraine
The next largest partners included Romania, with trade turnover of $2.05 billion, Spain with $1.98 billion, Lithuania with $1.80 billion, France with $1.77 billion, and Greece with $1.52 billion. Total trade turnover with the 27 EU member states amounted to $43.60 billion, or 46.9% of the overall figure. Ukrainian exports to the EU totaled $15.78 billion, imports reached $27.81 billion, and the deficit amounted to $12.03 billion.
The EU’s high share of exports means that access to the European market is of decisive importance for Ukrainian producers. At the same time, substantial purchases from EU countries constitute a separate source of the trade deficit. The situation within this trade relationship is uneven: the largest gaps are recorded with Poland and Germany, while Ukraine has positive trade balances with Spain and the Netherlands.
China supplied $19.64 billion worth of imports, or 29.6% of total merchandise imports. Supplies from Poland amounted to $6.28 billion, or 9.5%, while those from Germany reached $4.38 billion, or 6.6%. Together, these three countries accounted for 45.7% of Ukraine’s merchandise imports.
The five largest suppliers also included Turkey with $3.99 billion and the United States with $3.21 billion. The combined share of the top five reached 56.6%, while the ten largest suppliers accounted for 68.3%. Other major sources of imports included Italy with $1.83 billion, the Czech Republic with $1.67 billion, Hungary with $1.55 billion, and Slovakia and Lithuania with approximately $1.34 billion each.
The State Customs Service provides a breakdown of the overall commodity structure for the same period. In January–August 2026, Ukraine imported machinery, equipment, and transport vehicles worth more than $29.9 billion, fuel and energy products worth more than $9.5 billion, and chemical industry products worth more than $9 billion. These categories accounted for more than 73% of imports; machinery, equipment, and transport represented approximately 45%.
This ratio indicates the significant role of industrial and energy products in imports. However, the broad category of machinery and transport includes goods intended for different purposes. Its entire value cannot be interpreted as investment in production: doing so would require separate analysis of industrial equipment, components, vehicles, and final consumer goods.
“The concentration of almost one-third of imports with a single supplier makes Ukrainian businesses sensitive to supply conditions from China. Logistics disruptions or changes in component prices may affect many enterprises simultaneously. At the same time, reducing purchases without affordable alternatives could constrain Ukrainian production itself. The practical task is to diversify suppliers and develop domestic production of goods for which Ukraine has the economic and technological prerequisites,” Urakin commented.
Poland remained the largest export market, receiving goods worth $3.26 billion, or 12.2% of Ukraine’s total exports. Turkey ranked second with $2.09 billion and a share of 7.8%, followed by Germany with $1.73 billion and 6.5%. Italy followed with $1.52 billion, the Netherlands with $1.31 billion, and Spain with $1.29 billion.
Exports to China amounted to $924.2 million, Romania to $878.0 million, Hungary to $845.6 million, and Slovakia to $792.4 million. Egypt and Moldova purchased Ukrainian goods worth $751.0 million and $750.5 million, respectively. Supplies to the Czech Republic amounted to $705.2 million, while exports to the United States reached $700.0 million.
Exports were less concentrated among individual countries than imports: the three largest markets accounted for 26.5% of shipments, the top five for 37.1%, and the top ten for 54.8%. At the same time, the EU’s dominance as a combined market means that the diversity of destination countries only partially reduces dependence on the economic and regulatory conditions they share.
According to the State Customs Service, food exports exceeded $15.4 billion over the eight months, exports of metals and metal products approached $2.7 billion, and exports of machinery, equipment, and transport approached $2.4 billion. The approximate shares of these groups in total exports were 58%, 10%, and 9%, respectively. Food products remained the main source of merchandise export revenue. [2]
“The geography of exports allows Ukraine to operate in different markets, but the commodity structure remains heavily dependent on food products. For such shipments, harvest volumes, global prices, and transportation costs are particularly important. The development of processing can increase revenue per unit of raw material, although it requires investment and a stable energy supply. At the same time, industrial exports must be expanded so that the performance of several agricultural commodity groups has less influence on the overall picture,” Maksym Urakin noted.
The largest bilateral deficit was recorded in trade with China at $18.71 billion. This was equivalent to 47.3% of Ukraine’s net merchandise trade deficit. Exports to China covered only 4.7% of imports from that country, while Chinese goods accounted for 95.5% of bilateral trade turnover.
The second-largest deficit was recorded with Poland at $3.02 billion. Germany followed with $2.65 billion, the United States with $2.51 billion, and Turkey with $1.90 billion. Together, the negative trade balance with these five countries amounted to $28.79 billion.
Significant deficits were also recorded in trade with Greece at $1.07 billion, the Czech Republic at $964.7 million, Lithuania at $864.6 million, France at $864.5 million, and Taiwan at $844.5 million. Thus, the imbalance extended far beyond relations with the single largest supplier.
The sum of negative trade balances across all deficit-producing trade relationships reached $43.90 billion. Positive balances totaling $4.35 billion in other rows of the table reduced this amount to an overall deficit of $39.55 billion. Accordingly, China accounted for 42.6% of the sum of bilateral deficits, while the five largest deficit-producing trade relationships accounted for 65.6%. This provides a more accurate picture of their concentration than comparing them solely with the net result after surpluses are taken into account.
“The deficit with China exceeds the combined negative trade balance with all EU countries. This illustrates how unevenly Ukraine’s dependence on imports is distributed. At the same time, a bilateral deficit in itself does not determine whether trade with a particular country is economically beneficial. It is necessary to assess how imported goods are used domestically and what contribution they make to employment, production, and future exports,” Urakin emphasized.
Ukraine recorded its largest positive trade balance with Moldova at $640.6 million. With exports of $750.5 million, imports from that country amounted to $109.9 million, meaning that Ukrainian supplies exceeded imports by almost 6.8 times. Spain ranked second in terms of the surplus, at $613.0 million: exports to Spain reached $1.29 billion, while imports amounted to $681.8 million.
The third-largest surplus was recorded with Egypt at $493.5 million. Algeria followed with $361.0 million, Lebanon with $258.7 million, and Libya with $219.8 million. The positive balance with Iraq amounted to $169.1 million, the Netherlands to $160.1 million, Tunisia to $157.0 million, and Yemen to $134.0 million.
The five largest surpluses – with Moldova, Spain, Egypt, Algeria, and Lebanon – totaled $2.37 billion, or 54.4% of all positive balances. However, surplus-generating trade relationships offset only 9.9% of the sum of bilateral deficits overall. Even successful export markets had not yet generated sufficient revenue to balance purchases from the largest suppliers.
“Moldova, Spain, and Egypt demonstrate that Ukraine has markets where its own supplies significantly exceed imports. These should be considered a basis for expanding product ranges and strengthening long-term relationships with buyers. However, a large surplus in an individual trade relationship does not necessarily mean it can be increased rapidly without demand constraints. To have a tangible impact on the overall balance, exports must increase simultaneously across many markets,” Maksym Urakin believes.
A detailed breakdown by commodity helps explain differences between trade relationships. Below, figures for January–August 2026 are supplemented with reference data for 2025 and other explicitly specified periods. Historical shares describe their respective periods and cannot automatically be applied to the first eight months of 2026.
According to GMK Center calculations based on State Customs Service data, Ukraine supplied 7 million tonnes of iron ore to China in January–August 2026, 38% less than a year earlier. This represented approximately 44% of Ukraine’s total iron ore exports by physical volume during the period, which amounted to 15.8 million tonnes. The Chinese market thus remained extremely important for the mining industry, although Ukraine’s total exports to China were much smaller than imports.
For its part, the National Institute for Strategic Studies noted in its review of 2025 that machinery, equipment, and transport accounted for 69.8% of Ukrainian imports from China. Comparing these data from different periods highlights the differences in the commodity profiles of bilateral trade: the major role of manufactured products in Chinese supplies is combined with the importance of raw materials in Ukrainian exports. The precise structure of this exchange during the first eight months of 2026 can only be determined through a complete breakdown of commodity categories.
In January–August 2026, Ukraine shipped 2.1 million tonnes of iron ore to Poland. For comparison, Slovakia received 2.9 million tonnes over the same period. These figures illustrate the role of both markets in sales of products from Ukraine’s mining industry.
A broader Polish commodity profile is contained in the Polish Ministry of Development and Technology’s response to parliamentary inquiry No. 17426, reproduced in the Politoskop database. According to the GUS data for 2025 cited there, major supplies from Ukraine to Poland included soybean oil worth €399.7 million, iron ores and concentrates worth €342.3 million, and rolled ferrous metal products worth €315.5 million. In the opposite direction, substantial volumes consisted of petroleum products worth €1.76 billion, unmanned aerial vehicles worth €759.6 million, and passenger cars worth €555.8 million. These figures come from Polish statistics for the full year 2025 and therefore serve as a separate description of the commodity composition of trade.
According to preliminary German official agricultural statistics for 2025, industrial goods accounted for approximately 94% of German supplies to Ukraine. Meanwhile, Germany imported agricultural and food products from Ukraine worth approximately €1.3 billion and industrial sector goods worth €1.8 billion. Agricultural supplies notably included oilseeds, primarily rapeseed, as well as vegetable oils worth €172 million and processed fruit products and preserved fruit worth €101 million. This structure indicates that Ukrainian exports to Germany also include a substantial industrial component.
According to the analysis by the National Institute for Strategic Studies, corn was an important item in Ukrainian exports to Turkey in 2025, with shipments worth approximately $1.2 billion. Among imports from Turkey, petroleum products accounted for $639 million, while the aggregated category of “other goods” amounted to $2.1 billion. Without further detail, it would be incorrect to associate the latter with any specific industry. Data for January–August 2026 also confirm the presence of metallurgical trade: according to GMK Center calculations, Ukraine exported 83,200 tonnes of pig iron to Turkey.
In January–August 2026, the United States purchased 900,600 tonnes of Ukrainian pig iron, while total exports of this product amounted to approximately 1.03 million tonnes. Thus, the US market accounted for approximately 87% of shipments by physical volume. Italy received 26,500 tonnes during the same period. Sales of an individual commodity may be much more concentrated in one market than Ukraine’s total exports across countries.
Data from the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Agrarian and Land Policy, citing the State Customs Service, demonstrate the importance of the Spanish, Italian, and Indian markets for the vegetable oil industry. In the first half of 2025, Spain purchased Ukrainian sunflower oil worth $356.9 million, Italy purchased $337.5 million, and India purchased $326.1 million. Their shares in the value of exports of this product were 12.88%, 12.18%, and 11.77%, respectively. This is an example of the specialization of individual markets in sales of Ukrainian processed agricultural products, not an estimate of their shares for January–August 2026.
The geographic and commodity data indicate a combination of high demand for imported industrial products with exports dominated by food products, while ore and metallurgical products play a substantial role in certain trade relationships. Given this structure, opportunities to improve the balance depend on production capacity, energy supply, accessible logistics, and conditions for entering foreign markets.
At the same time, the merchandise trade deficit is not equivalent to a deficit in the overall balance of payments or an automatic reduction in foreign exchange reserves by the same amount. External financing is also influenced by trade in services, income, transfers, and financial transactions. Therefore, the figure of $39.55 billion specifically characterizes the gap between merchandise exports and imports within the statistics presented.
“Improving the trade balance requires expanding the capacity of Ukrainian enterprises to produce goods and sell them abroad. Equipment purchases can contribute to this if they are accompanied by investment in production, access to energy, and clear operating conditions. Stable transportation and the ability to fulfill contracts without forced interruptions are equally important for exporters. It is the growth of competitive domestic production that can gradually narrow the gap between imports and exports,” Maksym Urakin concluded.
ECONOMY, EXPERTS CLUB, EXPORTS, FOREIGN TRADE, IMPORTS, TRADE DEFICIT, UKRAINE
Electricity imports in September 2026 fell by 58.6% compared to August—to 76.1 thousand MWh, the lowest figure since November 2023, while exports rose by 24.4% to 473,700 MWh, marking the highest monthly volume since September 2025.
“As a result, Ukraine has been a net exporter for the third consecutive month, with sales exceeding purchases by a factor of 6.2,” the DIXI Group analytical center reported on Thursday, citing data from Energy Map.
As the center noted, weather remained the main factor driving foreign trade dynamics. September was noticeably cooler than August: the need for air conditioning had subsided, and the heating season had not yet begun, so demand remained moderate. At the same time, shorter daylight hours and cloud cover reduced output from residential and industrial solar power plants.
The price situation remained favorable for exports. In September, the average BASE baseload electricity price index on Ukraine’s day-ahead market (DAM) stood at EUR116.2/MWh—29–50% lower than in neighboring markets: in Poland – EUR149.8/MWh, Slovakia – EUR163.8/MWh, and Romania – EUR174.4/MWh.
However, as explained by DIXI Group, the SWAM carbon adjustment mechanism—which will take effect on January 1, 2026—remains a constraining factor for electricity exports to EU countries, as it increases the price of Ukrainian electricity on the European market, negatively impacting its price competitiveness and exporters’ margins.
According to Energy Map, Hungary accounted for the largest share of exports in September—232,500 MWh, or 49.1%. Moldova accounted for 152,500 MWh (32.2%), Romania for 81,600 MWh (17.2%), Slovakia for 5,300 MWh (1.1%), and Poland for 1,800 MWh (0.4%).
Compared to August 2026, exports to Romania, Hungary, and Moldova increased by 14–36%, while exports to Poland and Slovakia decreased by 39% and 75%, respectively.
On a year-over-year basis, total exports decreased by 25.4% compared to September 2025 (635.1 thousand MWh).
Hungary remained the main source of imports, accounting for 38.8 thousand MWh (50.9%). Poland accounted for 17.0 thousand MWh (22.4%), Romania for 14.8 thousand MWh (19.4%), Slovakia for 5.4 thousand MWh (7.1%), and Moldova for 0.1 thousand MWh (0.2%).
Compared to August 2026, imports decreased by 37–87% across all countries. Trade with Slovakia took place only during the first five days of the month; starting September 6, volumes from this source were zero.
For comparison: in September 2025, electricity imports totaled 139.7 thousand MWh, which is 83.5% more than in September 2026, according to DIXI Group.
