Linerboard prices do not capture the full cost of producing a corrugated box. Likewise, the average price a mill pays for recovered fiber does not by itself show whether its purchasing performance is competitive.
Two recent ResourceWise analyses highlight the value of broader benchmarks for adjusting contracts and comparing procurement costs.
Looking Beyond Linerboard Prices
In the United States, corrugated contracts have often relied on linerboard price indices for price adjustments.
Paper, however, represents only part of the cost of a finished box. According to ResourceWise, energy, freight, maintenance and labor account for a significant share of total box costs and, for some box types, may collectively exceed the cost of the paper itself.
When those expenses move differently from linerboard prices, an adjustment mechanism based solely on linerboard may not fully reflect changes in production and delivery costs.
Against this backdrop, ResourceWise has developed the U.S. Unbleached Corrugated Box Cost Index, a quarterly benchmark designed to reflect the industry-average cost of manufacturing and delivering an unbleached corrugated box in the United States.
The index does not determine the selling price of an individual box. Buyers and suppliers first establish a starting price based on product characteristics, service requirements and other commercial considerations. They can then agree on an adjustment mechanism tied to movements in the index, specifying the adjustment frequency, timing, thresholds and share of index movements reflected in the contract price.
The model combines market pricing data, industry intelligence and engineering-based production cost models. It also recalibrates the relative weighting of cost categories each quarter to reflect changes in the industry’s underlying cost structure.
Comparing Recovered Fiber Purchases
A similar need for comparison applies upstream at mills purchasing old corrugated containers (OCC).
ResourceWise notes substantial changes in OCC prices between 2025 and 2026, while its transaction data show significant differences in prices paid by mills within the same region.
Those differences illustrate why procurement performance cannot always be assessed solely against historical prices, internal budgets or the outcome of supplier negotiations. Comparing transactions with those of mills facing similar market conditions can provide additional context.
Price itself is only part of the equation. Purchasing timing and the balance between contracted volumes and open-market purchases can also affect a mill’s average fiber cost.
ResourceWise illustrates how open-market prices can move both above and below contracted prices. When a mill needs to secure additional tons during a period of higher spot prices, those purchases can increase its overall average fiber cost.
The objective is therefore not to time every market movement perfectly, but to determine whether the mix of contracts, volumes and purchasing decisions contributes to a competitive procurement position.
According to ResourceWise, recovered fiber represents the largest operating cost for containerboard mills that rely on it. Transaction-based benchmarking can help procurement teams assess whether cost differences are related to fiber prices, freight, volumes, quality requirements, contract structures or purchasing timing.
The two approaches serve distinct purposes: linking contract adjustments more closely to manufacturing and delivery costs, and assessing recovered-fiber purchases against comparable market transactions. Both can inform commercial decisions without replacing an assessment of the conditions specific to each mill or contract.
ResourceWise provides data, market analysis and cost modeling for the forest products, pulp, paper and packaging sectors.
