Qingdao Chuyou Food Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Supplier Evaluation Report: Qingdao Chuyou Food Co., Ltd.

Executive Summary

Qingdao Chuyou Food Co., Ltd. is a China-based food seasoning supplier located in Shandong, offering concentrated pork bone soup bases, chicken bone soup base seasoning, golden soup seasoning, and savory/spicy sauces. Based on the provided data, the company operates with a reported factory area of 5,600+㎡ and 70+ staff, indicating a small-to-medium production setup with basic manufacturing capacity. The supplier is marked as a verified supplier and holds Gold Supplier status for 1 year, but does not support Trade Assurance, which weakens platform-backed transaction security. Product inspection capability is indicated through the “Finished product inspection” label, and ODM service is available. However, business performance data is largely insufficient: no disclosed six-month order volume, transaction amount, store rating, and 0 reviews. The supplier may be suitable for buyers seeking seasoning products with moderate customization needs, but commercial validation and customer feedback are currently limited.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength — 20 Points

Basis

• Company name: Qingdao Chuyou Food Co., Ltd.
• Country/region: China, Shandong Province
• Factory area: 5,600+㎡
• Employees: 70+ staff
• Verified supplier / factory audit status: True

Elaboration

The supplier has a reported factory area of over 5,600 square meters and more than 70 employees. This indicates that the company has a physical production base and a workforce capable of supporting regular manufacturing activities. The company is not presented as a very large-scale supplier, but the facility size and employee count suggest it has more than a minimal workshop-level operation.

The “verified supplier” status provides some support for the existence and credibility of the manufacturing entity. However, no additional details are provided regarding annual production capacity, production lines, food safety certifications, export volume, or specific factory audit scope. These missing elements limit the ability to fully assess large-scale supply chain stability.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier demonstrates a small-to-medium production foundation with a measurable factory area, staff size, and verified supplier status. This supports a reasonable level of production capability. However, the company does not reach the level of a large-scale stable supply chain because the provided data does not include production capacity, certification details, factory audit reports, or major operational scale indicators. Therefore, the score is positioned in the medium-factory range rather than the top tier.

Final Score

15 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility — 20 Points

Basis

• Gold Supplier: True
• Gold Supplier tenure: 1 year
• Trade Assurance: False
• Verification status: Verified supplier marked as True
• Platform/industry labels:
• Warranty available
• Finished product inspection
• ODM service available
• Response time ≤2h

Elaboration

The supplier has Gold Supplier status, but the tenure is only 1 year, indicating a relatively short platform history. The supplier is also marked as verified, which provides some credibility regarding supplier identity or operational presence. The available platform labels show certain service and inspection capabilities, including warranty availability and finished product inspection.

However, the lack of Trade Assurance is a significant limitation from a procurement risk-control perspective. Trade Assurance usually provides platform-supported protection for payment, delivery, and order fulfillment; its absence means buyers may need to rely more heavily on direct contract terms, third-party inspection, and payment safeguards. No additional food industry certifications, export certifications, or compliance documents are provided in the data.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has basic platform credibility through Gold Supplier status and verification, but the short 1-year tenure and lack of Trade Assurance reduce the strength of compliance and transaction security. The certification/tag system is partially informative but not comprehensive. Since the supplier has some credible backing but lacks a complete platform protection framework, the score falls into the lower-middle range.

Final Score

12 / 20

3. Business Performance — 20 Points

Basis

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

Elaboration

The available business performance data is very limited. No six-month order volume is provided, no transaction amount is disclosed, and no store rating is available. The number of reviews is listed as 0, meaning there is no visible buyer feedback in the provided dataset.

This lack of transaction and review data makes it difficult to verify whether the supplier has consistent market demand, repeat orders, or proven buyer satisfaction. For procurement teams, this increases uncertainty because commercial performance cannot be validated through historical platform activity.

Scoring Rationale

Business performance is one of the weakest areas in this assessment. The absence of order volume, transaction value, and store rating prevents a reliable evaluation of sales traction. With 0 reviews, there is no customer-side confirmation of product quality, communication, delivery, or after-sales service. The supplier may still have offline business activity, but such information is not provided and therefore cannot be considered. A low score is appropriate due to insufficient commercial validation.

Final Score

5 / 20

4. Service Capability — 10 Points

Basis

• Communication response time: ≤2h
• ODM service available: Yes, based on platform label
• Full Customization: Insufficient Data

Elaboration

The supplier’s response time is listed as within 2 hours, which indicates acceptable communication responsiveness. This is not at the highest level of ≤1 hour, but it is still suitable for routine procurement communication. The supplier also lists ODM service availability, suggesting some level of product development or customization support.

However, the data does not confirm whether the supplier supports full customization, private labeling, packaging customization, formulation adjustment, or export documentation support. Therefore, the customization assessment must remain limited to the stated ODM label only.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier shows a reasonable service foundation through ≤2h response time and ODM service availability. This supports a middle-level service capability score. However, because there is no confirmation of full customization and response speed is not within the strongest ≤1h category, the supplier does not qualify for the top score range.

Final Score

7 / 10

5. Delivery Performance — 10 Points

Basis

• On-time delivery rate: 100.0%

Elaboration

The supplier’s on-time delivery rate is listed as 100.0%, which is a strong indicator under the provided scoring framework. If this rate is based on actual platform or order performance, it suggests reliable fulfillment behavior.

However, the supporting context is limited because there is no provided order volume or transaction amount. A 100% on-time delivery rate carries more weight when supported by a large number of completed orders, but the order quantity is not disclosed. Therefore, the score can follow the stated delivery metric, while noting that the sample size is unclear.

Scoring Rationale

According to the scoring rule, an on-time delivery rate above 90% should receive 9–10 points. Since the supplier’s reported rate is 100.0%, it qualifies for the maximum delivery score. The only limitation is the lack of order-volume context, but the metric itself is clearly provided and meets the highest threshold.

Final Score

10 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback — 20 Points

Basis

• Store rating: Insufficient Data
• Number of reviews: 0
• Finished product inspection: Yes, based on platform label
• Factory/supplier verification: True
• Warranty available: Yes, based on platform label

Elaboration

The supplier has some quality-related indicators, including “Finished product inspection” and “Warranty available.” These labels suggest that the supplier has at least basic inspection and after-sales support mechanisms. The verified supplier status also provides some level of structural credibility.

However, customer feedback is a major weakness. No store rating is provided, and the review count is 0. Without customer reviews, it is not possible to evaluate buyer satisfaction, consistency of product quality, packaging reliability, flavor acceptance, complaint handling, or repeat purchase behavior. No specific food safety certifications, test reports, HACCP, ISO, BRC, FDA, or similar compliance documents are included in the supplied data, so they cannot be assumed.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has basic quality assurance indicators through finished product inspection and verification, which prevents the score from being extremely low. However, the absence of store rating and customer reviews significantly limits confidence in actual product performance. Because quality systems are only partially visible and customer feedback is unavailable, the score is placed in the lower-middle range.

Final Score

12 / 20

Total Score

Procurement Recommendation

Recommendation: Conditional cooperation recommended with risk controls.

Qingdao Chuyou Food Co., Ltd. shows basic-to-moderate supplier capability, supported by a 5,600+㎡ factory, 70+ staff, verified supplier status, finished product inspection, ODM service availability, and a reported 100.0% on-time delivery rate. The supplier may be suitable for buyers looking for soup base seasonings, pork bone broth base products, chicken bone seasoning, golden soup seasoning, and savory/spicy sauces, especially buyers who are open to working with a developing platform supplier.

However, cooperation should be approached cautiously because business performance data is weak. There is no disclosed six-month order volume, no transaction amount, no store rating, and 0 reviews. Trade Assurance is also not supported, which increases transaction risk.

Suitable customer types:
- Small to medium buyers seeking seasoning products
- Buyers requiring ODM-level support rather than fully confirmed deep customization
- Importers or distributors willing to conduct additional supplier verification

Main risks:
- Insufficient commercial track record
- No customer review validation
- No Trade Assurance support
- Insufficient disclosed certification/compliance information
- MOQ data appears inconsistent for several products, listed as “100 kilometers,” which requires clarification before purchasing

Growth potential:
The supplier has a physical production base, inspection label, ODM capability, and strong stated delivery performance. If it builds transaction history, obtains more buyer reviews, and improves platform protection or certification transparency, its procurement attractiveness could improve significantly.