Global logistics has become increasingly connected, but it has not yet achieved continuous visibility.
Most shipments can be followed at major checkpoints: departure from a warehouse, arrival at a port, customs clearance and final delivery. The difficulty lies in what happens between those checkpoints. A trailer may be parked in an unfamiliar location overnight. A container may remain at a transfer yard longer than planned. Construction equipment may be moved after working hours. By the time the next system update appears, the most useful window for intervention may already have passed.
This is the central weakness of incomplete logistics data. The problem is not necessarily that companies have no information. It is that the available information may arrive too late, cover only part of the journey or fail to explain why an asset is no longer following its expected pattern.
The cost of incomplete visibility becomes most obvious when cargo is delayed, misdirected or stolen.
According to the Transported Asset Protection Association, nearly 160,000 cargo-related crimes were recorded across 129 countries between 2022 and 2024. Meanwhile, BSI’s 2025 Global Cargo Theft Report found that trucks accounted for 70% of recorded incidents, while insider involvement contributed to 22% of cases.
These numbers should not be interpreted as evidence that a tracking device can prevent every loss. Cargo security involves drivers, facilities, routes, procedures and access control. However, the figures show why logistics operators need more than milestone updates and manually entered records.
When an asset moves without authorization, leaves a defined operating area or remains stationary for an unusual period, the timing of that information matters. A location record reviewed several hours later may help with an investigation. It may not help an operator respond while the incident is still developing.
The way the industry measures logistics performance is also changing.
The World Bank’s redesigned Logistics Performance Index has moved toward shipment-level operational data when assessing supply-chain connectivity, speed and reliability. This approach looks beyond whether a shipment eventually reached its destination. It examines how cargo moves through the network and where time is lost along the way.
That distinction is important. Two shipments may both be delivered successfully, but one may have experienced an unexplained route deviation, an extended stop or a delayed handover. Without reliable movement data, these events are easily absorbed into the final delivery record and forgotten.
Over time, those blind spots make it more difficult to identify inefficient routes, investigate customer disputes, measure asset utilization or distinguish an ordinary delay from a genuine security risk.
The obvious response is to increase the reporting frequency of every tracking device. In practice, that is rarely the complete answer.
A powered vehicle operating inside a city can usually transmit data more frequently. A non-powered trailer, container or piece of construction equipment may need to work for months without external power. Frequent reporting can provide more location points, but it can also reduce battery life, increase communication costs and create large volumes of data that operators may never use.
The reporting strategy therefore needs to reflect the asset and its operating environment.
A trailer may require more frequent reporting while moving and less frequent reporting while parked at an authorized location. High-value cargo may require tighter geofences and faster abnormal-movement alerts. Equipment stored at a construction site may only need to report periodically until movement is detected outside its permitted working hours.
The purpose is not to collect the maximum possible amount of data. It is to capture the events that have operational meaning.
Recent regulatory developments also show that the technical foundation of asset tracking is becoming more diverse.
In September 2026, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission proposed the first comprehensive modernization of its ultra-wideband rules since their adoption in 2002. According to the FCC’s UWB proposal, the technology is already used in property tags, package tracking, vehicle-access systems and applications requiring precise ranging. The proposed changes are intended to support newer applications, including factory automation, autonomous navigation and AI-enabled sensing.
The FCC also announced plans to consider additional spectrum resources for satellite communications. Its spectrum announcement specifically identifies connectivity for ships, aircraft and vehicles, together with telemetry, tracking and control services, as areas that could benefit.
These proposals have not yet become final rules, and neither technology will replace cellular IoT or conventional GNSS positioning. Their importance lies elsewhere: future logistics visibility is unlikely to depend on a single positioning method or one communication network.
Cellular connectivity remains practical for most wide-area tracking applications. Bluetooth and UWB can support nearby identification and more precise short-range positioning. Satellite connectivity may gradually improve coverage for selected maritime routes, remote assets and areas where terrestrial networks remain unreliable.
The most effective solution will depend on where the asset operates, how frequently it moves and what type of information the business actually needs.
At Kingwo IoT, we believe an asset-tracking project should begin with the operating scenario rather than a product specification.
A vehicle, trailer, container and piece of non-powered equipment may all need location visibility, but their requirements are different. Installation conditions, available power, expected operating life, reporting frequency, network coverage, and platform integration should be evaluated before hardware is selected.
For powered vehicles and fleet operations, the focus may be continuous positioning and vehicle-related data. For containers, trailers, and movable equipment, battery life, magnetic or concealed installation and abnormal-movement monitoring may carry greater importance.
Kingwo’s asset-tracking portfolio includes solutions such as NT08E, NT27E and NT28E for different logistics and non-powered asset scenarios. Devices can be configured around project requirements and connected directly to a customer’s private server through supported communication protocols. This allows logistics companies and solution providers to retain control over how device data is received, interpreted and incorporated into their existing systems.
The hardware, however, is only one part of the deployment. A useful system must connect the asset, communication network and management platform in a way that supports actual operational decisions.
By Kailiang Tang
Acting Marketing Director, Kingwo IoT
English
French
Portuguese
Spanish
