Hangzhou Yujing Chemical Fiber Textile Technology Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Supplier Evaluation Report

Supplier: Hangzhou Yujing Chemical Fiber Textile Technology Co., Ltd.
Country/Region: China
Factory Location Provided: Zhengjiang
Product Scope Based on Provided Data: Polyester / DTY-related chemical fiber textile products

Executive Summary

Hangzhou Yujing Chemical Fiber Textile Technology Co., Ltd. appears to be a small-to-medium scale chemical fiber textile supplier offering polyester and DTY-related products, with listed items including high-tenacity polyester, 108D/144F, 150D/144F, 300D raw white DTY, and high-stretch DTY. The company reports a factory area of 4,800+㎡ and 20+ staff, supported by supplier verification and platform credibility indicators such as Gold Supplier status, Trade Assurance, response time ≤2h, and 100% on-time delivery. However, its Gold Supplier history is only 1 year, and key commercial validation data—such as six-month order volume, transaction value, store rating, and customer reviews—is either missing or shows no accumulated reviews.

This supplier may be suitable for buyers seeking low-MOQ sampling, preliminary sourcing, or controlled trial orders in polyester/DTY products. For larger-volume or long-term procurement, further verification of production capacity, quality control procedures, and customer references is recommended.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength — 20 Points

Basis

• Factory area: 4,800+㎡
• Employees: 20+ staff
• Verified supplier: True
• Product range includes several polyester / DTY-related yarn products.
• No additional factory certification details were provided.

Elaboration

The supplier has a physical factory footprint of over 4,800㎡ and a workforce of more than 20 staff. This indicates an operational manufacturing base rather than a purely trading-oriented profile, especially given the presence of multiple related polyester and DTY product listings. The factory size is not large compared with major textile or chemical fiber manufacturers, and the employee count suggests a relatively lean production organization.

The presence of supplier verification improves credibility to some extent, as it indicates that certain company or factory information has been checked by the platform or a verification party. However, the provided data does not include production line numbers, annual output, machinery details, capacity utilization, or recognized factory management certifications.

Scoring Rationale

The company demonstrates basic production capability through factory area, staff count, and verified supplier status. However, the scale appears limited based on the available employee number and factory area. Since there is no evidence of large-scale manufacturing capacity, advanced production infrastructure, or factory-level certifications beyond verification, it should not be classified as a large-scale stable supply chain. The supplier fits the category of a smaller manufacturer with basic operational capability.

Final Score

12 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility — 20 Points

Basis

• Gold Supplier: True
• Gold Supplier tenure: 1 year
• Trade Assurance: True
• Certification / industry tags provided:
• Response time ≤2h
• On-time delivery 100.0%
• Verified supplier: True

Elaboration

The supplier has several important platform credibility elements, including Gold Supplier status, Trade Assurance support, and supplier verification. These features provide a basic level of platform-backed trust and transaction protection. Trade Assurance is particularly relevant for international buyers because it can help structure payments and delivery commitments through the platform.

However, the Gold Supplier duration is only 1 year, which limits the ability to evaluate long-term platform stability. The provided certification or industry tags are operational indicators rather than broader compliance certifications. There is no data showing internationally recognized management system certifications, product compliance certifications, or third-party factory audit reports beyond the stated verification.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has core credibility features: Gold Supplier status, Trade Assurance, and supplier verification. These are positive indicators for initial sourcing. However, the short Gold Supplier history and limited certification label completeness reduce the overall credibility score. The platform profile is credible but not yet mature enough to be considered long-term and fully established.

Final Score

15 / 20

3. Business Performance — 20 Points

Basis

• Orders in the past 6 months: Insufficient Data
• Transaction value in the past 6 months: Insufficient Data
• Store rating: Insufficient Data
• Number of reviews: 0

Elaboration

Business performance data is very limited. The supplier has no provided record of recent order volume or transaction amount, and the store rating is not available. In addition, the review count is listed as 0, meaning there is no visible customer feedback volume in the provided data.

Without order history, transaction value, rating score, or reviews, it is difficult to confirm whether the supplier has demonstrated stable commercial activity on the platform. The absence of commercial validation does not necessarily mean poor performance, but it does mean that buyers cannot rely on platform transaction evidence to assess reliability, repeat purchasing, or customer satisfaction.

Scoring Rationale

Because the key business performance indicators are missing and the review count is 0, the supplier lacks sufficient marketplace validation. There is no available evidence of strong recent sales, high transaction value, or accumulated buyer feedback. This places the supplier below the level of stable medium-scale transaction performance and makes the business performance risk relatively high.

Final Score

6 / 20

4. Service Capability — 10 Points

Basis

• Communication response time: ≤2h
• Full Customization: Insufficient Data
• Other service capability indicators: Insufficient Data

Elaboration

The supplier’s response time of ≤2h is a positive service indicator and suggests a reasonably responsive communication process. For procurement, fast response is important during quotation, sample confirmation, technical clarification, and order follow-up stages.

However, there is no provided evidence that the supplier supports Full Customization. There is also no data on multilingual service, technical consultation ability, sample lead time, after-sales process, or dedicated account management. Therefore, service capability can only be partially confirmed based on response speed.

Scoring Rationale

The response time is acceptable and better than slow-response suppliers, but it does not meet the strongest service benchmark of ≤1h. Since Full Customization capability is not confirmed, the supplier cannot be rated in the highest service range. The available evidence supports a basic-to-moderate service capability score.

Final Score

6 / 10

5. Delivery Performance — 10 Points

Basis

• On-time delivery rate: 100.0%

Elaboration

The supplier reports a 100.0% on-time delivery rate, which is a strong delivery performance indicator. From a procurement perspective, on-time delivery is critical for production planning, inventory control, and downstream customer commitments.

However, the provided data does not include the number of orders behind this on-time delivery rate. Therefore, while the rate itself is excellent, the statistical strength of the metric cannot be fully assessed without order volume or shipment count.

Scoring Rationale

According to the scoring standard, an on-time delivery rate above 90% qualifies for the 9–10 point range. Since the reported rate is 100.0%, the supplier deserves a high delivery score. A full score is reasonable based strictly on the delivery metric, while noting that supporting order-volume data is unavailable.

Final Score

10 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback — 20 Points

Basis

• Store rating: Insufficient Data
• Number of reviews: 0
• Finished Product Inspection: Insufficient Data
• Factory / supplier verification: True
• Product listings indicate polyester / DTY-related textile products, but no quality certification data is provided.

Elaboration

The supplier has supplier verification, which provides a basic credibility layer. However, quality and customer feedback evidence is weak in the provided dataset. There is no store rating, no customer reviews, and no confirmation of Finished Product Inspection.

For textile and chemical fiber procurement, quality consistency is important because yarn specifications, denier, filament count, stretch performance, color fastness, and batch stability can directly affect downstream manufacturing. The provided product names mention quality-related wording such as “high quality” and “high color fastness,” but these are product listing descriptions and cannot be treated as verified quality evidence. No test reports, inspection procedures, defect rates, or customer satisfaction data are provided.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has limited quality assurance evidence. Supplier verification helps reduce basic identity or factory-existence risk, but it does not replace product inspection data, customer reviews, or quality system certification. Because rating data is missing and the review count is 0, quality performance cannot be validated through buyer feedback. Therefore, the score should remain below 10 due to insufficient quality information.

Final Score

8 / 20

Total Score

Procurement Recommendation

Recommendation: Conditional cooperation is recommended only for low-risk trial orders, sampling, or small-batch procurement.

Hangzhou Yujing Chemical Fiber Textile Technology Co., Ltd. has a verified supplier profile, Trade Assurance support, responsive communication within ≤2h, and a reported 100.0% on-time delivery rate. These factors make it a potentially usable supplier for buyers seeking polyester or DTY-related products with low MOQ requirements, especially for early-stage supplier development or price comparison.

However, the main risks are the lack of business performance data, no visible customer reviews, missing store rating, no disclosed six-month order or transaction value, and insufficient quality assurance information such as Finished Product Inspection or product test documentation. The company also has only 1 year of Gold Supplier history, which limits long-term platform credibility.

Suitable customer types:
- Buyers conducting initial supplier screening
- Small-batch purchasers
- Sample-stage textile buyers
- Price-sensitive buyers requiring Trade Assurance protection

Key risks:
- Insufficient transaction history
- No customer review base
- Limited quality verification data
- Small workforce and moderate factory scale
- Short Gold Supplier tenure

Growth potential:
The supplier may improve its procurement attractiveness if it accumulates verified transaction records, customer reviews, quality inspection evidence, and clearer production capacity documentation.