Jilin Deyuanxin Agricultural Development Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Executive Summary

Jilin Deyuanxin Agricultural Development Co., Ltd. is a China-based agricultural supplier located in Jilin, offering fresh onion products including yellow, red, and purple onions with MOQ levels ranging from 1 ton to 26 tons. The company reports a factory area of over 12,000 sqm and more than 20 staff, indicating a basic-to-moderate production and supply foundation rather than a large-scale industrial operation. Its profile shows Gold Supplier status for 1 year, Trade Assurance support, supplier verification, and labels such as Finished Product Inspection, ODM service, warranty availability, and minor customization. However, commercial performance is still limited, with only 3 orders and CN¥13.5K+ transaction value in the past six months, no available store rating, and 0 reviews. This supplier may be suitable for buyers seeking trial orders or early-stage sourcing of fresh onions, but larger buyers should conduct additional verification before scaling cooperation.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength

Basis
- Factory location: Jilin, China
- Factory area: 12,000+ sqm
- Staff size: 20+ staff
- Verified supplier status: True
- Product focus: Fresh onion products, including yellow, red, and purple onions

Elaboration
The supplier has a reported factory area of over 12,000 sqm, which suggests a reasonable physical operating base for agricultural product handling or supply activities. However, the employee count of 20+ staff is relatively small, indicating that the company may operate with a lean team. The presence of verified supplier status strengthens the credibility of the company’s operating base, but the provided data does not include detailed production capacity, annual output, storage capacity, processing lines, cold-chain capability, or export volume.

Scoring Rationale
The supplier demonstrates basic production and supply capability through its factory area, product portfolio, and verified supplier status. However, the limited staff size and absence of detailed production-scale data prevent it from being classified as a large-scale stable supply chain. It is stronger than a supplier with no factory or verification information, but it does not reach the level of a mature, high-capacity manufacturer based on the available evidence.

Final Score
13 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility

Basis
- Gold Supplier: True
- Gold Supplier duration: 1 year
- Trade Assurance: True
- Verification status: True
- Certification / industry labels: Warranty available, Finished product inspection, ODM service available, Minor customization

Elaboration
The supplier has several important platform credibility indicators, including Gold Supplier status, Trade Assurance support, and verified supplier status. These elements provide a basic level of platform-backed transaction security and supplier identity credibility. The Finished Product Inspection label is also relevant from a compliance and quality-control perspective. However, the Gold Supplier history is only 1 year, which limits the track record available for long-term platform reliability assessment.

Scoring Rationale
The supplier has the core platform credibility elements expected from a reliable supplier: Gold Supplier status, Trade Assurance, and supplier verification. The main limitation is the short Gold Supplier duration. The profile appears credible at a basic-to-moderate level, but it does not yet demonstrate a long-standing platform history or extensive certification depth.

Final Score
16 / 20

3. Business Performance

Basis
- Orders in the past 6 months: 3
- Transaction value in the past 6 months: CN¥13.5K+
- Store rating: Insufficient Data
- Review count: 0

Elaboration
The supplier has recorded some recent transaction activity, but the scale is limited. Three orders over six months and CN¥13.5K+ transaction value indicate early-stage or low-volume platform performance. The absence of a store rating and the lack of customer reviews significantly reduce the ability to evaluate buyer satisfaction, repeat order potential, and commercial reliability through platform data.

Scoring Rationale
The supplier has some verified transaction history, which is better than having no commercial activity. However, the low order count, low transaction amount, missing store rating, and 0 reviews mean that the business performance is not yet strongly validated. From a procurement perspective, this creates uncertainty around consistency, buyer satisfaction, and ability to handle larger or repeat orders.

Final Score
8 / 20

4. Service Capability

Basis
- Communication response time: ≤1h
- Customization labels: ODM service available, Minor customization
- Full Customization: Insufficient Data

Elaboration
The supplier’s response time of within one hour is a positive service indicator, suggesting active communication and potentially efficient pre-sales engagement. The profile also lists ODM service and minor customization, which shows some customization flexibility. However, the data does not confirm Full Customization capability, so the supplier cannot be scored as having the strongest customization service level.

Scoring Rationale
The fast response time supports a strong communication score. The supplier also offers minor customization and ODM service, but there is no evidence of Full Customization. Therefore, the service capability is good for standard sourcing discussions and limited customization needs, but not fully proven for complex customized procurement projects.

Final Score
8 / 10

5. Delivery Performance

Basis
- On-time delivery rate: 100.0%

Elaboration
The reported on-time delivery rate is 100.0%, which is a strong delivery performance indicator. Based on the provided data, the supplier has met its delivery commitments for recorded transactions. However, this metric should be interpreted alongside the low order count, since only 3 orders were recorded in the past six months.

Scoring Rationale
A 100.0% on-time delivery rate meets the highest scoring band for delivery performance. The supplier deserves a high score in this dimension based strictly on the available delivery data. The only caution is that the order base is small, so the result may not yet represent performance under higher-volume purchasing conditions.

Final Score
10 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback

Basis
- Store rating: Insufficient Data
- Review count: 0
- Finished Product Inspection: Available
- Verified supplier / factory verification indicator: True
- Warranty available: Listed

Elaboration
The supplier has some quality-related platform labels, including Finished Product Inspection and warranty availability. The verified supplier status also provides some support for baseline supplier credibility. However, there are no customer reviews and no available store rating, which makes it difficult to evaluate actual buyer satisfaction, complaint history, product consistency, or after-sales performance.

Scoring Rationale
The supplier has a basic quality-control framework shown through Finished Product Inspection and verification status. However, the absence of store rating and customer reviews is a major limitation. The score reflects that quality assurance indicators exist, but customer feedback evidence is insufficient to confirm stable quality performance in real transactions.

Final Score
13 / 20

Total Score

68 / 100

Score breakdown:
- Company Strength: 13 / 20
- Platform & Compliance Credibility: 16 / 20
- Business Performance: 8 / 20
- Service Capability: 8 / 10
- Delivery Performance: 10 / 10
- Quality & Customer Feedback: 13 / 20

Procurement Recommendation

Cooperation is conditionally recommended for small-scale trial orders or buyers sourcing fresh onions with moderate customization needs. The supplier shows acceptable baseline credibility through verified supplier status, Trade Assurance, Gold Supplier membership, Finished Product Inspection, and fast response time. Its 100.0% on-time delivery rate is also positive.

However, it is not yet strongly validated for large-volume or strategic procurement. The main risks are low recent transaction volume, only 3 orders in the past six months, CN¥13.5K+ transaction value, 0 reviews, and no available store rating. These gaps limit visibility into quality consistency, buyer satisfaction, and capacity under scaled demand.

The supplier’s growth potential exists if it can build more transaction history, collect customer reviews, maintain delivery performance, and provide clearer evidence of production capacity, inspection processes, and export handling capability. For procurement teams, the recommended approach is to start with a controlled trial order, use Trade Assurance, request pre-shipment inspection, and verify product specifications before expanding order volume.