One article explains why LoRaWAN frequencies and channels vary across countries and regions.

As is well known, LoRaWAN has become the mainstream technology for global IoT connectivity. By leveraging 16 standardized frequency bands, it has established a spectrum framework that covers more than 98% of IoT use cases. By 2025, among the world’s 3.2 billion cellular IoT devices, LoRaWAN will continue to lead the LPWAN market with a 41% share. Next, we will analyze the reasons behind the varying frequency and channel restrictions across different countries and regions.

Summary of LoRaWAN Frequency/Channel Allocations by Country and Region

1. EU868 (Europe)

Uplink frequency (terminal → gateway): 863–870 MHz

By default, there are 8 uplink channels (starting at 868.1 MHz, with a 200 kHz spacing):

868.1 MHz, 868.3 MHz, 868.5 MHz, 868.8 MHz

868.1 MHz, 868.3 MHz, 868.5 MHz, 868.8 MHz (repeated)

Maximum transmit power: 14 dBm (25 mW) or 16 dBm (in certain regions).

Downlink frequency (gateway → terminal): 869.4–869.65 MHz

RX1 window: The downlink frequency corresponding to the uplink channel (e.g., 868.1 MHz uplink corresponds to 869.525 MHz downlink).

RX2 window: Fixed at 869.525 MHz (default).

2. US915 (United States, Canada, and certain countries in South America)

Uplink frequency: 902–928 MHz

64 upstream channels (divided into 8 sub‑bands, with 8 channels per sub‑band).

Typical channel: 902.3 + 0.2×k MHz (k = 0–63).

Downlink frequency: 923–928 MHz

RX1 window: The downlink channel corresponding to the uplink sub-band (e.g., uplink sub-band 0 corresponds to 923.3 MHz).

RX2 window: Fixed at 923.3 MHz.

Note: The US915 supports a higher transmit power (30 dBm, approximately 1 W), but it must comply with dynamic duty-cycle limits.

3. AS923 (Asia and Oceania)

Uplink frequency: 923–925 MHz (varies by subregion):

AS923-1: 923.2–924.6 MHz

AS923-2: 921.4–922.8 MHz

AS923-3: 916.8–918.2 MHz (in some Southeast Asian countries)

AS923-4: 917.3–920.9 MHz

Downlink frequency: Corresponds to the uplink and is typically the uplink frequency plus 18.6 MHz (e.g., AS923-1 downlink: 921.4–922.8 MHz).

RX2 window: Fixed at 923.2 MHz (AS923-1) or the frequency corresponding to the sub‑region.

4. CN470 (China)

Uplink frequency: 470–510 MHz

96 uplink channels (with 200 kHz spacing, starting at 470.3 MHz).

Downlink frequency: 500–510 MHz

RX1 window: The downlink channel corresponding to the uplink frequency (uplink + 39.75 MHz).

RX2 window: Fixed at 505.3 MHz.

Note: Must comply with Chinese radio regulations; the maximum transmit power is 17 dBm (50 mW).

5. AU915 (Australia)

Similar to US915, but with slightly different frequency bands:

Uplink: 915–928 MHz (64 channels).

Downlink: 923–928 MHz.

RX2 window: Fixed at 923.3 MHz.

6. KR920 (South Korea)

Uplink frequency: 920.9–923.3 MHz

16 upstream channels (spaced 200 kHz apart).

Downlink frequency: 921.9–923.3 MHz

RX2 window: Fixed at 921.9 MHz.

Key Considerations

Duty cycle limitation: Most regions require a duty cycle of less than 1% (1% for EU868, and 1% to 10% for AS923).

Transmit Power: Must comply with local regulations (e.g., EU 868 MHz: maximum 14/16 dBm; US 915 MHz: maximum 30 dBm).

Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS): In certain regions (such as AS923), it may be required to avoid interference with radar frequency bands.

For a detailed list of channels or the latest standards, please refer to the LoRa Alliance’s official documentation (such as “LoRaWAN Regional Parameters”) or to your local radio regulatory authority (such as the FCC or ETSI).

II. Why do these differences exist?

1. Spectrum Management Regulations

Radio regulatory authorities in various countries (such as the FCC, ETSI, and China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology) independently allocate frequency bands, giving priority to existing local services (e.g., broadcasting, military, and 5G).

For example:

In China, the 470 MHz band was originally allocated to wireless microphones but was later reassigned to the Internet of Things.

In the United States, the 902–928 MHz band is an ISM unlicensed frequency range, but it must comply with FCC Part 15 regulations.

2. Technical Optimization Requirements

Transmit Power: In sparsely populated regions (such as the United States), higher power levels (30 dBm) are permitted, whereas in densely populated areas (such as Europe), power is limited to minimize interference.

Duty cycle: In high‑density deployment areas (such as Europe), the duty cycle must be strictly limited to 1%, whereas in low‑density areas (such as farms), it may be relaxed.

3. History and Industrial Ecology

In the early stages of LoRaWAN deployment, Europe opted for the 868 MHz band, while the United States chose the 902–928 MHz range due to the existing IoT devices—such as ZigBee—that occupied frequencies below 915 MHz.

China is promoting the independently controllable CN470 frequency band to achieve independence from global standards.

4. Avoid international interference

Neighboring countries may coordinate to stagger their frequency bands (e.g., AS923‑1 and AS923‑3) to prevent cross-border signal interference.

For example, Japan’s AS923-2 operates in the 921–923 MHz band, avoiding domestic aviation radar frequencies.

III. Challenges in Practical Applications

Hardware compatibility: The device must support multiple frequency bands (e.g., global‑band modules); otherwise, it will need to be redesigned for each region.

Certification costs: Each time a product enters a new country, it must obtain local radio‑frequency certification (e.g., CE, FCC, SRRC).

Dynamic Adjustment: The gateway must automatically switch frequency bands based on geographic location (e.g., roaming between AS923 sub‑regions).

IV. Summary

The differences among national LoRaWAN standards result from the combined effects of spectrum allocation, technical requirements, and regulatory policies. Developers should take note:

Comply strictly with local laws and regulations to avoid legal risks;

Choose multi-band hardware (such as the Semtech SX1302 chip);

Refer to the latest version of the “LoRaWAN Regional Parameters” (published by the LoRa Alliance).

By understanding the logic behind these settings, you can design cross-border IoT solutions more efficiently.