Xingtai Qiwo Rubber & Plastic Technology Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Executive Summary

Xingtai Qiwo Rubber & Plastic Technology Co., Ltd. is a China-based supplier located in Hebei, offering automotive rubber and plastic-related parts such as radiator hoses, intake hoses, intercooler hose pipes, and drive shaft-related products. Based on the provided data, the company appears to be a small-scale supplier with over 40 staff and verified supplier status, but its factory area is not disclosed, which limits visibility into production capacity. The supplier has basic platform credibility, including 2 years as a Gold Supplier and Trade Assurance support. Commercial activity is present but moderate, with 20+ orders and CN¥67.6K+ transaction value over the past six months. Its 4.9 store rating is positive, although supported by only 5 reviews. Delivery performance is relatively strong at 89.5% on-time shipment. This supplier may be suitable for buyers seeking low-MOQ automotive hose and rubber/plastic parts, especially for trial orders or small-to-medium procurement programs.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength — 20 Points

Basis

• Company: Xingtai Qiwo Rubber & Plastic Technology Co., Ltd.
• Location: Hebei, China
• Staff size: 40+ staff
• Factory area: Insufficient Data
• Verified supplier: True
• Product scope includes automotive hoses and related rubber/plastic parts.

Elaboration

The company has a disclosed workforce of over 40 employees, which indicates a small but operational manufacturing or supply organization. The supplier is marked as a verified supplier, which provides some level of basic credibility regarding its existence and business operations. However, the absence of factory area data limits the ability to assess production scale, workshop capacity, warehousing capability, and potential output volume.

The listed products are primarily automotive rubber/plastic parts, including radiator outlet hoses, engine air intake hoses, turbo intercooler hoses, and related automotive components. This suggests a focused product direction within automotive replacement or aftermarket parts, but the data does not provide information on production lines, machinery, annual capacity, R&D capability, or quality laboratory setup.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier demonstrates basic company strength through verified supplier status and a staff size above 40, which supports the assumption of fundamental operating capability. However, it does not meet the profile of a large-scale or clearly mid-sized stable factory because factory area and production scale data are missing. The available data supports classification as a small supplier with basic production or supply capability rather than a large or highly mature manufacturer.

Final Score

13 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility — 20 Points

Basis

• Gold Supplier: True
• Gold Supplier duration: 2 years
• Trade Assurance: True
• Verification status: Verified supplier
• Platform/industry labels: “Response time ≤2h”, “On-time delivery 89.5%”
• Additional certifications: Insufficient Data

Elaboration

The supplier has several core platform credibility indicators, including Gold Supplier status, Trade Assurance support, and verified supplier status. These elements provide a basic level of transaction protection and platform-based credibility. The 2-year Gold Supplier history indicates that the supplier has some continuity on the platform, though it is not yet a long-established supplier.

The available certification labels mainly relate to response time and delivery performance. There is no provided evidence of additional factory certifications, product certifications, management system certifications, or industry-specific compliance credentials. Therefore, while platform credibility is acceptable, the certification profile is not complete based on the supplied data.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier meets several important platform credibility requirements: Gold Supplier, Trade Assurance, and supplier verification. However, the Gold Supplier history is relatively short at 2 years, and there is insufficient data on broader compliance certifications or complete certification labeling. This places the supplier in the category of having core platform protections but not a fully mature or long-term verified compliance profile.

Final Score

15 / 20

3. Business Performance — 20 Points

Basis

• Orders in the past 6 months: 20+
• Transaction value in the past 6 months: CN¥67.6K+
• Store rating: 4.9
• Number of reviews: 5

Elaboration

The supplier has recorded commercial activity on the platform, with more than 20 orders and over CN¥67.6K in transaction value during the past six months. This indicates that the company has actual buyer engagement and transaction history. However, the order volume and transaction amount are moderate to low compared with suppliers demonstrating large-scale marketplace traction.

The store rating of 4.9 is strong, suggesting that buyers who left feedback were generally satisfied. However, the review base is very limited, with only 5 reviews. This means the rating is positive but not yet strongly validated by a large customer feedback sample.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has real transaction evidence and a high rating, which supports a reasonable level of business credibility. However, the relatively low number of reviews and moderate six-month transaction value limit the strength of commercial validation. The business performance is stronger than an unproven supplier but does not yet represent high-volume, highly validated platform performance.

Final Score

13 / 20

4. Service Capability — 10 Points

Basis

• Communication response time: ≤2h
• Full Customization capability: Insufficient Data
• Other customization services: Insufficient Data

Elaboration

The supplier’s response time is listed as within 2 hours, which indicates acceptable communication efficiency for online sourcing and quotation processes. This response speed is suitable for buyers who require relatively prompt communication during inquiry, sampling, or order confirmation stages.

However, the provided data does not confirm whether the supplier supports Full Customization, OEM/ODM development, technical drawing support, logo customization, packaging customization, or material-specific customization. As a result, the supplier’s service capability can only be evaluated based on response speed, not on deeper customization or project support capability.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier performs reasonably well in communication responsiveness, but it does not meet the highest service score range because response time is not within 1 hour and customization capability is not confirmed. Without evidence of Full Customization or advanced service support, the rating should remain in the basic-to-moderate range.

Final Score

6 / 10

5. Delivery Performance — 10 Points

Basis

• On-time delivery rate: 89.5%

Elaboration

The supplier’s on-time delivery rate is 89.5%, which is close to the 90% threshold generally associated with strong delivery performance. This indicates that most orders are shipped on time, although there remains some delivery risk compared with suppliers consistently achieving above 90%.

For buyers managing time-sensitive automotive parts procurement, this delivery record is acceptable but should still be monitored, especially for repeat orders, urgent shipments, or multi-SKU consolidation.

Scoring Rationale

According to the scoring standard, an on-time delivery rate between 80% and 89% falls into the 7–8 point range. At 89.5%, the supplier is at the high end of this range and very close to the next performance tier. Therefore, a score of 8 is justified.

Final Score

8 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback — 20 Points

Basis

• Store rating: 4.9
• Number of reviews: 5
• Verified supplier: True
• Finished Product Inspection: Insufficient Data
• Factory Verification: Supplier verification is indicated as True
• Additional quality certifications: Insufficient Data

Elaboration

The supplier’s store rating of 4.9 is positive and suggests satisfactory buyer feedback from existing reviewers. However, the number of reviews is only 5, which is a small sample size and limits the reliability of the rating as a broad quality indicator.

The supplier is marked as verified, which provides a basic level of credibility, but the provided data does not confirm Finished Product Inspection, factory audit details, product testing procedures, quality control systems, or third-party inspection arrangements. Therefore, quality assurance visibility remains limited.

Scoring Rationale

The high store rating supports a favorable quality impression, but the small review count prevents a stronger conclusion. Verified supplier status adds some reassurance, yet there is insufficient evidence of a complete quality assurance system such as Finished Product Inspection or formal quality certifications. The supplier therefore fits the category of acceptable but not fully validated quality performance.

Final Score

13 / 20

Total Score

Procurement Recommendation

Recommendation: Conditional cooperation recommended for trial orders or small-to-medium volume procurement.

Xingtai Qiwo Rubber & Plastic Technology Co., Ltd. shows basic supplier credibility, verified status, Trade Assurance support, acceptable response speed, and relatively good delivery performance. The supplier may be suitable for buyers sourcing automotive rubber/plastic parts with low MOQ requirements, especially for sample orders, replacement parts procurement, or initial supplier development projects.

Suitable customer types:
- Small and medium automotive parts distributors
- Buyers requiring low-MOQ trial orders
- Importers seeking automotive hose-related products
- Procurement teams willing to validate quality through samples before scaling orders

Main risks:
- Factory area and production capacity are not disclosed.
- Review volume is low, with only 5 reviews.
- Finished Product Inspection capability is not confirmed.
- Full Customization capability is not confirmed.
- Gold Supplier history is relatively short at 2 years.

Growth potential:
The supplier has a positive store rating, verified status, and near-90% on-time delivery performance. If it can provide more factory capacity details, quality inspection documentation, and stronger customer feedback volume, its procurement attractiveness could improve significantly.