Linyi Shengjian Industry & Trade Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Executive Summary

Linyi Shengjian Industry & Trade Co., Ltd. is a China-based supplier located in Shandong, with a reported factory area of 50,000+㎡ and 170+ staff. The company appears to have a meaningful physical production base and is identified as a verified supplier, which supports its basic manufacturing credibility. Its listed product range focuses on insecticide spray and mosquito/insect killer aerosol products, with MOQ levels mainly at 1,000 pieces, except one OEM mini portable can insecticide item requiring 9,000 pieces. On -related indicators, the supplier has 7 years as a Gold Supplier and supports Trade Assurance, which provides a moderate-to-strong platform credibility foundation. However, business performance data is limited: only 3 orders and CN¥20.2K+ transaction value in the past six months, with just 1 review despite a 5.0 store rating. The most significant concern is delivery reliability, as the on-time delivery rate is only 40.0%. This supplier may fit buyers prioritizing factory scale and platform-backed sourcing, but it requires careful order control, delivery confirmation, and quality verification before larger procurement commitments.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength

Basis
- Factory location: Shandong, China
- Factory area: 50,000+㎡
- Employees: 170+ staff
- Verified supplier: True

Elaboration
The supplier demonstrates a relatively strong physical operating base based on the reported factory size and employee count. A 50,000+㎡ facility indicates meaningful production space, while 170+ staff suggests an organized workforce beyond a small workshop level. The verified supplier status further supports basic credibility regarding the company’s existence and production setup.

Scoring Rationale
The factory area is large and the employee base is sufficient for stable manufacturing activity. However, the available data does not include detailed production lines, monthly capacity, machinery, factory audit reports, or specific factory certifications. Therefore, while the supplier shows strong scale indicators, the score should not reach the highest band without deeper production and audit evidence.

Final Score
17 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility

Basis
- Gold Supplier: True
- Gold Supplier duration: 7 years
- Trade Assurance: True
- Certification/industry tags: “Response time ≤5h”, “On-time delivery 40.0%”
- Verified supplier: True

Elaboration
The supplier has a meaningful platform history, with 7 years as a Gold Supplier and Trade Assurance support. These factors provide a credible -based transaction framework. The verified supplier status also strengthens platform trust. However, the listed tags are operational indicators rather than comprehensive compliance certifications, and no product certifications, regulatory approvals, or inspection system certifications are provided.

Scoring Rationale
Seven years of Gold Supplier history and Trade Assurance represent strong platform credibility. The supplier is not new or unverified. However, compliance depth is limited because the provided data does not show product safety certifications, chemical compliance documents, factory audit certificates, or finished product inspection certification. This supports an upper-mid score, but not a top-tier compliance score.

Final Score
16 / 20

3. Business Performance

Basis
- Past 6-month orders: 3
- Past 6-month transaction value: CN¥20.2K+
- Store rating: 5.0
- Reviews: 1

Elaboration
The supplier has some recent commercial activity, but the transaction base is limited. Three orders over six months and CN¥20.2K+ transaction value indicate low visible platform sales volume. The 5.0 store rating is positive, but it is based on only 1 review, which makes the rating less statistically reliable for procurement evaluation.

Scoring Rationale
The supplier has demonstrated transactions, so it is not commercially inactive. However, the low order count, modest transaction value, and very limited review base reduce confidence in sustained market validation. The excellent rating helps, but the sample size is too small to support a high business performance score.

Final Score
11 / 20

4. Service Capability

Basis
- Communication response time: ≤5h
- Full Customization: Insufficient Data

Elaboration
The supplier’s response time of ≤5 hours suggests acceptable communication efficiency, though it does not meet the strongest benchmark of response within one hour. No data is provided confirming Full Customization capability, private label service scope, design support, packaging customization, or OEM/ODM process capability beyond one product title containing “OEM”.

Scoring Rationale
The response speed is reasonable for standard sourcing communication, but customization capability cannot be fully confirmed from the provided data. Because the scoring dimension specifically considers both response time and Full Customization, the absence of verified customization information limits the score to a basic-to-moderate level.

Final Score
7 / 10

5. Delivery Performance

Basis
- On-time delivery rate: 40.0%

Elaboration
The supplier’s delivery performance is the weakest area in the available dataset. A 40.0% on-time delivery rate indicates that less than half of recorded shipments were delivered on schedule according to the platform indicator.

Scoring Rationale
Based on the required scoring rule, delivery performance below 70% should receive below 5 points. A 40.0% on-time delivery rate represents a significant procurement risk, especially for buyers with seasonal demand, retail launch schedules, or strict replenishment timelines.

Final Score
3 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback

Basis
- Store rating: 5.0
- Reviews: 1
- Finished Product Inspection: Insufficient Data
- Factory Verification: True / verified supplier status provided

Elaboration
The supplier’s 5.0 rating is positive, but the review count is only 1, which is insufficient to establish broad customer satisfaction. Verified supplier status provides some quality-related credibility at the company level, but there is no provided evidence of Finished Product Inspection, product testing, quality certifications, inspection reports, or complaint history.

Scoring Rationale
The high rating supports a positive initial impression, but the extremely small review base limits confidence. The supplier has basic verification support, yet the absence of finished product inspection data and detailed quality control evidence prevents a higher score. Quality risk should therefore be considered moderate due to insufficient customer feedback depth.

Final Score
12 / 20

Total Score

66 / 100

Procurement Recommendation

Cooperation is conditionally recommended for buyers seeking insecticide spray or mosquito/insect killer aerosol products from a supplier with visible factory scale, Gold Supplier history, Trade Assurance support, and verified supplier status. It is more suitable for buyers who can manage supplier risk through sample testing, pre-shipment inspection, phased orders, and strict delivery terms.

The main risks are the 40.0% on-time delivery rate, low recent transaction volume, only 1 customer review, and insufficient data on finished product inspection or formal product compliance certifications. Growth potential exists due to the supplier’s factory scale, 7-year Gold Supplier status, and verified supplier profile, but larger orders should only proceed after confirming production capacity, quality documentation, delivery commitments, and inspection arrangements.