Xiamen Yamata Foods Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Executive Summary

Xiamen Yamata Foods Co., Ltd. is a China-based food supplier located in Fujian, with a reported factory area of 64,000+ sqm and 240+ staff. The company appears to have a relatively strong production base for coated nuts and mixed nuts/dried fruit products, supported by verified supplier status and 13 years as an Gold Supplier. Its platform credibility is comparatively strong due to Gold Supplier tenure and Trade Assurance availability. However, recent commercial performance is limited, with only 20+ orders and CN¥6.7K+ transaction value over the past six months. Customer feedback is also weak, reflected by a low store rating of 2.3 and only 3 reviews. Delivery performance is a notable risk, with an on-time delivery rate of 78.9%, which falls below strong procurement standards. This supplier may be suitable for buyers seeking moderate-scale food product sourcing with platform-backed transaction protection, but careful sample testing, order trialing, and delivery monitoring are recommended before larger procurement commitments.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength

Basis
- Factory location: Fujian, China
- Factory area: 64,000+ sqm
- Employees: 240+ staff
- Verified supplier: True
- Product scope provided: coated almonds, coated cashews, mixed nuts and dried fruits

Elaboration
The supplier reports a sizable production footprint of more than 64,000 sqm and a workforce of over 240 staff, which indicates a meaningful manufacturing base rather than a very small trading operation. The verified supplier status further supports the existence of operational capacity and adds credibility to the company profile. The listed products are concentrated in nuts, coated nuts, and dried fruit mixes, suggesting a focused food product category rather than a highly diversified industrial portfolio.

Scoring Rationale
The factory area and staff count support a strong company strength assessment, especially compared with smaller suppliers that provide limited operational data. Verified supplier status also improves confidence in the company’s basic production foundation. However, the data does not provide detailed production lines, annual output, food safety certifications, capacity utilization, or audit reports beyond verified supplier status. Therefore, the supplier qualifies as a relatively strong production-side candidate, but the absence of deeper factory certification and production-capacity evidence prevents a top-tier score.

Final Score
17 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility

Basis
- Gold Supplier: True
- Gold Supplier tenure: 13 years
- Trade Assurance: True
- Certification / industry labels provided: “Response time ≤9h”, “On-time delivery 78.9%”
- Verified supplier: True

Elaboration
The supplier has a long Gold Supplier history of 13 years, which is a strong platform credibility indicator. Trade Assurance availability provides transaction protection for buyers using the platform. Verified supplier status further strengthens the supplier’s compliance credibility from a platform perspective. However, the certification or industry labels shown in the data are mainly operational indicators, such as response time and on-time delivery, rather than product-specific certifications or food safety certifications.

Scoring Rationale
The long Gold Supplier tenure, Trade Assurance support, and verified supplier status create a solid credibility foundation. These elements indicate that the supplier has maintained a long-term platform presence and offers basic buyer protection mechanisms. However, the provided data does not include detailed third-party factory audit documents, food-grade certifications, export compliance certificates, or product safety certifications. As a result, the platform credibility is strong, but the broader compliance profile is not fully documented.

Final Score
17 / 20

3. Business Performance

Basis
- Orders in past 6 months: 20+
- Transaction value in past 6 months: CN¥6.7K+
- Store rating: 2.3
- Number of reviews: 3

Elaboration
The recent business data shows some transaction activity, but the scale is limited. A six-month order count of 20+ indicates that the store has received recent buyer engagement, but the transaction value of CN¥6.7K+ is low. The store rating of 2.3 is weak, and the review base of only 3 reviews is too small to provide strong commercial validation. This means the supplier’s online performance data does not yet demonstrate strong buyer acceptance or consistent high-volume transactions.

Scoring Rationale
Although there is evidence of recent orders, the transaction value is modest and the customer feedback indicators are weak. A low store rating materially reduces confidence in commercial performance, especially because the number of reviews is too small to balance or contextualize the score. The supplier therefore cannot be considered high-performing from a marketplace transaction perspective. It has some commercial activity, but not enough to support a strong business performance score.

Final Score
10 / 20

4. Service Capability

Basis
- Communication response time: ≤9h
- Full Customization: Insufficient Data
- Other communication efficiency indicators: Insufficient Data

Elaboration
The supplier’s stated response time is within 9 hours, which indicates acceptable but not highly responsive service. There is no data confirming whether the supplier supports Full Customization, private labeling, packaging customization, formula adjustment, or buyer-specific product development. Therefore, the service capability assessment is limited to the available response-time data.

Scoring Rationale
A response time of ≤9 hours is reasonable for standard communication but does not meet the strongest service benchmark of ≤1 hour. Since no customization capability is provided in the data, the supplier cannot be credited for strong customization support. The service profile is therefore assessed as basic to moderate: acceptable for initial inquiries and standard products, but not yet proven for complex sourcing projects requiring intensive customization or rapid communication cycles.

Final Score
6 / 10

5. Delivery Performance

Basis
- On-time delivery rate: 78.9%

Elaboration
The supplier’s on-time delivery rate is 78.9%, which falls within the 70%–79% range. This level indicates that delivery reliability is below the preferred procurement benchmark and may create risk for buyers with strict replenishment schedules, promotional timelines, or seasonal sales windows. The data does not provide average lead time, production cycle, shipping method, or historical delay reasons.

Scoring Rationale
Based on the stated scoring standard, a delivery rate between 70% and 79% corresponds to a score of 5 to 6 points. At 78.9%, the supplier is near the upper end of this range but still below the 80% threshold required for a stronger delivery score. This makes delivery performance one of the supplier’s key weaknesses and a point that should be controlled through trial orders, clear lead-time agreements, and milestone tracking.

Final Score
6 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback

Basis
- Store rating: 2.3
- Number of reviews: 3
- Verified supplier: True
- Finished Product Inspection: Insufficient Data
- Factory Verification: Verified supplier status provided, but detailed factory verification scope is Insufficient Data

Elaboration
The supplier has verified supplier status, which provides some basic credibility, but the available customer feedback is weak. A rating of 2.3 is low, and the review count of 3 is too limited to provide a reliable quality-performance pattern. No data is provided on Finished Product Inspection, food safety certification, third-party testing, defect rate, return rate, or complaint handling.

Scoring Rationale
Quality and customer feedback should be assessed cautiously. The low rating is a significant concern, even though the review sample is small. Verified supplier status provides some baseline assurance, but it does not replace product-level quality evidence or inspection data. Because Finished Product Inspection and detailed quality control systems are not provided, the supplier receives a conservative score. The main limitation is not only the low rating but also the lack of documented quality assurance information.

Final Score
9 / 20

Total Score

• Company Strength: 17 / 20
• Platform & Compliance Credibility: 17 / 20
• Business Performance: 10 / 20
• Service Capability: 6 / 10
• Delivery Performance: 6 / 10
• Quality & Customer Feedback: 9 / 20

Total Score: 65 / 100

Procurement Recommendation

Cooperation is conditionally recommended for small to medium trial orders, but not yet recommended for large-scale or time-critical procurement without further verification.

This supplier is most suitable for buyers seeking coated nut products, mixed nuts, and dried fruit mixes from a supplier with a sizable reported factory base and long platform history. It may be appropriate for importers, distributors, or brand buyers conducting initial supplier screening and sample-based evaluation.

Key risks include the low store rating of 2.3, very limited review count, modest six-month transaction value, insufficient quality inspection data, and an on-time delivery rate of only 78.9%. Buyers should request samples, confirm product specifications, verify quality control procedures, and use Trade Assurance for initial orders.

Growth potential exists due to the supplier’s large reported factory area, 240+ staff, verified supplier status, and 13-year Gold Supplier history. However, stronger customer feedback, improved delivery reliability, and clearer quality documentation are needed before the supplier can be considered a high-confidence procurement partner.