Our take: Calculate the fuel component using the applicable chargeable weight before judging its effect on fulfillment cost. A small change per pound can be easy to overstate—or overlook—when multiplied by a busy month's shipments.
A rate update is an input. The decision comes from applying it to a defined workload. Here is a small model you can replace with your own data.
The published input
DHL eCommerce's U.S. policy page lists domestic fuel at $0.29 per pound for September 2026 and $0.30 for October. It states a one-pound minimum fuel assessment for packages under one pound in chargeable weight. The domestic scope includes Expedited Max and Expedited and Ground parcel and mail products. This is DHL eCommerce, not a DHL Express rate. DHL eCommerce U.S. surcharge policy.
The linked peak notice we found covers October 5, 2025–January 17, 2026. It does not establish the upcoming season's fees. We therefore include no unverified 2026–27 peak amount in this model. Dated peak notice.
Work the numbers before scoring the provider
Illustrative order mix, not actual customer data: Assume the published domestic fuel amounts apply without account modifications. Assume the chargeable weights shown below have already been established correctly. We use whole-pound weights except for the group subject to the stated minimum, avoiding assumptions about other rounding rules.
| Group | Packages | Fuel-assessed pounds each | September component | October component |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Under-one-pound parcels | 1,000 | 1 | $290 | $300 |
| Two-pound parcels | 600 | 2 | $348 | $360 |
| Five-pound parcels | 400 | 5 | $580 | $600 |
| Total | 2,000 | 4,200 combined | $1,218 | $1,260 |
Our calculated difference is $42, or 2.1 cents per parcel across this assumed mix. This is a fuel-component comparison only. It is not total postage, a holiday budget, or evidence that this service beats another carrier.
The example also shows why dividing a rate change by the wrong unit causes confusion. One cent per pound is not necessarily one cent per order.
Replace three assumptions with evidence
First, get chargeable weights for your shipments. Do not substitute product weights without confirming how packed shipments are rated.
Second, ask your 3PL whether the published schedule is the one used in your agreement. If fuel is included in its quoted transportation price, adding this model on top may double-count it.
Third, separate the calendar periods. Do not apply October's published fuel amount to the rest of the holiday season as if it were fixed. Keep later periods marked for an update.
Keep an unresolved fee visible
For a seasonal charge that has not been verified, create a separate planning line with a named assumption and a review date. “Unknown” is more honest than zero, and more useful than copying last year's number into the approved rate field.
If you choose to model a hypothetical amount, label it as sensitivity analysis. That lets finance see the exposure without mistaking it for a carrier announcement.
What belongs on the 3PL scorecard
Score the provider's ability to explain the quote: matching service names, auditable weight inputs, clear inclusions, and timely rate updates. Do not reward a low-looking fuel line if the rest of the shipment price remains unclear.
Ask for the same representative shipment file to be priced by each candidate. Compare the complete quotes only after each provider identifies what its total includes.
Keep comparing
Research note
Sources checked September 22, 2026. Our research consists of reviewing the official policy and dated peak notice, then calculating a disclosed hypothetical order mix. No confidential rates or actual invoices were examined. Recheck time-sensitive inputs before use.