Vietnam tourism grows on arrivals, not spending

The debate is shifting from how many visitors Vietnam can attract to how much of their money actually stays in the country. Nguyen Tran Hoang Phuong, head of the Institute for Tourism and Society Research, argued that the current approach only tracks spending per visitor, while missing how much leaks to foreign airlines, global online travel agencies, overseas hotel chains and international payment intermediaries. His proposed “Vietnam Tourism Retention Rate” would measure how much of each tourist dollar is captured by Vietnamese hotels, transport providers, restaurants, guides, artisans, farmers and technology firms.

That distinction matters for the broader economy. A destination can post strong arrival numbers and still underperform if visitors spend little outside hotels or if a large share of the revenue is repatriated abroad. For Vietnam, the issue goes beyond tourism statistics: a low-retention model limits benefits to domestic employment, tax receipts and local investment, while leaving the country vulnerable to competing on price rather than quality.

Industry executives say the answer is not simply more hotel rooms. Hyejin Park, a tourism and hospitality lecturer at RMIT Vietnam, said high-value tourism requires destination readiness — better infrastructure, cleaner public spaces, stronger service standards, traffic management and trained staff — particularly in major hubs such as Ho Chi Minh City, Hanoi and Da Nang. Without that, even affluent travelers have fewer reasons to stay longer or spend more.

The same argument is appearing across the country’s main tourism centres. In Da Nang, sector leaders are pushing a wider ecosystem built around beach resorts, heritage links with Hoi An and Hue, night-time spending, duty-free shopping, MICE travel and event tourism. Saigontourist executive Doan Thi Thanh Tra said the city and Ho Chi Minh City need clearly packaged products with booking visibility, transport links and differentiated experiences if they want to draw higher-spending Western visitors rather than day-trippers and mass-market tourists.

That is also where the economic upside lies. Martin Koerner, commercial director at The Anam, said a traveler who stays six nights instead of four creates not only extra room revenue but also more demand for restaurants, wellness, transport, tours and shopping, lifting spillovers across airlines, retail, food service, property and finance. The bull case is that Vietnam can trade up if it improves quality fast enough. The bear case is that, without coordination and investment, the country remains trapped in a low-price model that caps margins and encourages leakage to foreign intermediaries.

For investors and policymakers, the message is the same: Vietnam’s tourism opportunity is less about adding more arrivals than about capturing more value from each trip. The next phase of growth will depend on whether the country can build complete destinations, expand night-time and premium offerings, and create a new set of metrics that reward retention, not just volume.