The risk-transfer gap on containers
Under FOB the seller's delivery is complete when the goods are on board. A container is typically gated into the terminal two to five days earlier. Damage, theft, or a terminal mishandling in that gap sits in a grey zone: the seller has already lost control, but FOB says risk has not yet passed. FCA names the actual handover — seller's warehouse, a CFS, or the container yard — so the contract matches the logistics.
FOB, FAS, CFR, and CIF are the four sea-only Incoterms 2020 rules. Using them on a multimodal container move is the first of the two weekly mistakes on the Incoterms overview. FCA, CPT, and CIP are the container-correct F- and C-term equivalents.
Who books, who pays, who sees the freight
Commercially both FCA and FOB usually put main-carriage booking with the buyer (or the buyer's forwarder). That is why importers who want to control routing buy FOB or FCA rather than CIF. The difference is not who pays ocean freight — it is where the seller's job ends. FCA seller: export-cleared, handed to the buyer's carrier at the named place. FOB seller: export-cleared, on board, and typically responsible for origin terminal handling up to loading.
Name the place with precision. 'FCA Shanghai' is incomplete. 'FCA seller's warehouse, Qingpu, export-cleared' is a different job from 'FCA Yangshan CY'. The first includes origin trucking and export clearance in the goods price; the second makes the buyer collect. Vague FCA places are how origin trucking disappears from an RFQ and reappears as a dispute.
The letter-of-credit and on-board B/L problem
Banks still ask for an 'on board' bill of lading. Under classic FOB the carrier can issue that bill because delivery is on board. Under FCA, delivery happened at the terminal or warehouse, so the first document may be a received-for-shipment bill. Incoterms 2020 explicitly lets the parties agree that, under FCA, the buyer will instruct the carrier to issue an on-board bill to the seller so the seller can present into the credit. If that instruction is missing, FCA + L/C is a document discrepancy waiting to happen.
Worked choice: containerised electronics, buyer in Los Angeles, seller in Shenzhen, payment by L/C. Prefer FCA Yangshan CY, with the L/C requiring an on-board B/L and the booking clause that the carrier issues it to the seller. Using FOB 'because the bank said FOB' keeps the risk gap the ICC warned about. Using FCA without the on-board instruction keeps the risk logic clean and fails the credit.
When FOB is still the right rule
Breakbulk, project cargo, and bulk that is actually placed on board alongside the vessel still fit FOB. Some commodity trades and older form contracts are written in FOB language that counterparties will not reopen. In those files, do not relabel the Incoterm in the quote — flag the terminal-gap risk in the booking notes and make sure origin insurance covers up to on-board. For anything in a dry van, reefer, or high-cube, start from FCA and argue back to FOB only if the contract forces it.

