Suzhou Cleva Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Executive Summary

SUZHOU CLEVA ELECTRIC APPLIANCE CO., LTD. is a China-based supplier located in Jiangsu with a reported factory area of 110,000+㎡ and 830+ staff, indicating a large-scale manufacturing base. The supplier is marked as a verified supplier and holds Gold Supplier status for 1 year, with Trade Assurance support and platform labels including Finished Product Inspection, ODM service, Full Customization, and OEM for well-known brands. Its listed product range covers Vacmaster cleaning appliances and robotic garden equipment, with MOQs ranging from 300 to 2,160 pieces, suggesting suitability for buyers with medium-to-large batch procurement needs. However, business performance data is weak: past six-month order volume, transaction value, shop rating, and customer review evidence are either blank or recorded as zero reviews. The on-time delivery rate is listed as 0.0%, which represents a significant procurement risk. Overall, this supplier shows strong production capacity and platform compliance indicators, but commercial validation and delivery performance require careful verification before cooperation.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength

Basis
- Factory location: Jiangsu, China
- Factory area: 110,000+㎡
- Employees: 830+ staff
- Verified supplier: True

Elaboration
The supplier demonstrates a strong physical manufacturing foundation based on the reported factory size and workforce. A factory area above 110,000㎡ and more than 830 employees indicate that the company is not a small workshop-level supplier, but a large-scale manufacturer with substantial production infrastructure. The verified supplier status further supports the credibility of its operational presence.

Scoring Rationale
The available data supports a high score because both factory scale and employee count are significantly above typical small or medium supplier levels. The presence of supplier verification strengthens confidence in the company’s production base. However, no additional factory audit details, production capacity figures, or specific factory certification documents are provided, so a perfect score is not assigned.

Final Score: 19 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility

Basis
- Gold Supplier: True
- Gold Supplier duration: 1 year
- Trade Assurance: True
- Verified supplier: True
- Certification / industry labels: OEM for well-known brands, Finished Product Inspection, ODM service available, Full Customization

Elaboration
The supplier has several important platform credibility indicators, including Gold Supplier status, Trade Assurance, and verification. The presence of Finished Product Inspection and ODM / customization-related tags adds to its compliance and service credibility on the platform. However, the Gold Supplier history is only 1 year, which limits the evidence of long-term platform reliability.

Scoring Rationale
The supplier has the core platform trust mechanisms expected from a credible supplier, especially Trade Assurance and verification. The short Gold Supplier duration reduces confidence compared with suppliers that have maintained platform credibility for many years. Certification labels are useful, but the data does not provide external certificate numbers, audit reports, or detailed compliance documents.

Final Score: 16 / 20

3. Business Performance

Basis
- Past 6-month order volume: Insufficient Data
- Past 6-month transaction value: Insufficient Data
- Shop rating: Insufficient Data
- Review count: 0

Elaboration
The supplier’s business performance evidence is limited. No order volume, transaction amount, or shop rating is provided, and the review count is recorded as zero. This means there is no visible transaction history or customer feedback base in the provided data to verify recent commercial activity.

Scoring Rationale
Although the supplier has strong company-scale indicators, business performance must be scored based on transactional proof. Since the key commercial indicators are missing and there are no reviews, the supplier lacks observable market validation in the provided dataset. This creates uncertainty around buyer satisfaction, order execution history, and recent sales performance.

Final Score: 6 / 20

4. Service Capability

Basis
- Communication response time: ≤4h
- Full Customization: Listed
- ODM service available: Listed

Elaboration
The supplier shows reasonable service capability through a response time within four hours and platform labels indicating Full Customization and ODM service availability. These data points suggest that the supplier may be able to support customized procurement requirements rather than only standard product sales.

Scoring Rationale
The response time is acceptable but does not reach the strongest category of ≤1 hour. Full Customization and ODM tags support a higher service score, but there is no additional data on engineering support, sampling lead time, design capability, or after-sales handling. Therefore, the service capability is assessed as solid but not top-tier.

Final Score: 8 / 10

5. Delivery Performance

Basis
- On-time delivery rate: 0.0%

Elaboration
The reported on-time delivery rate is 0.0%, which is a critical weakness. Delivery reliability is essential for procurement planning, especially for buyers managing seasonal inventory, retail launches, or production schedules.

Scoring Rationale
Based strictly on the provided metric, the supplier falls far below the 70% threshold. Even if the figure may be affected by limited transaction data, the report cannot assume that without supporting evidence. Therefore, the delivery score must reflect the stated 0.0% on-time shipment rate.

Final Score: 2 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback

Basis
- Shop rating: Insufficient Data
- Review count: 0
- Finished Product Inspection: Listed
- Verified supplier: True

Elaboration
The supplier has some quality assurance indicators, especially the Finished Product Inspection label and verified supplier status. These are positive signs from a quality-control perspective. However, there is no shop rating and no customer review base, which means product quality cannot be validated through buyer feedback in the provided data.

Scoring Rationale
The quality system indicators justify a moderate score, but the absence of customer reviews and shop rating significantly limits confidence. A supplier with factory verification and finished product inspection has stronger quality credibility than an unverified supplier, but without customer feedback, the quality performance remains insufficiently proven.

Final Score: 11 / 20

Total Score

62 / 100

Procurement Recommendation

Cooperation is conditionally recommended, mainly for buyers seeking a large-scale Chinese manufacturer with customization capability and Trade Assurance support. The supplier appears suitable for medium-to-large batch procurement, especially where buyers can conduct their own sampling, factory audit, and pre-shipment inspection.

Key risks include Insufficient Data for recent order volume, transaction value, shop rating, and customer feedback, plus a reported 0.0% on-time delivery rate. These issues should be clarified before placing significant orders. Growth potential exists due to the supplier’s large factory scale, workforce, verification status, and customization-related platform labels, but commercial reliability and delivery performance require further validation.