Xuzhou Datianxia Packaging Technology Co., Ltd. Supplier Evaluation

Supplier Evaluation Report

Supplier: Xuzhou Datianxia Packaging Technology Co., Ltd.
Country/Province: China, Jiangsu

Executive Summary

Xuzhou Datianxia Packaging Technology Co., Ltd. is a China-based packaging supplier with a reported factory area of over 2,700㎡ and more than 50 staff. The company appears to focus on glass and packaging-related products such as foam bottles, glass spray bottles, refill bottles, custom round glass bottles, and perfume bottles, with relatively low MOQs ranging from 100 to 500 pieces based on the provided product data. Its platform credibility is comparatively strong, supported by 7 years as a Gold Supplier, Trade Assurance, verified supplier status, and listed service/quality tags including warranty availability, low MOQ customization, and finished product inspection.

Commercially, the supplier shows moderate recent activity with 80+ orders and CN¥405.6K+ transaction value in the past six months. However, the store rating of 4.4 and only 6 reviews indicate limited customer feedback depth. Overall, this supplier is suitable for small to mid-sized buyers seeking low-MOQ packaging procurement with basic customization needs, while larger buyers should conduct further sampling and quality validation before scaling orders.

Detailed Analysis

1. Company Strength — 20 Points

Basis

• Factory area: 2,700+㎡
• Employees: 50+ staff
• Verified supplier: True
• Location: Jiangsu, China

Elaboration

The supplier has a physical production or operational base with more than 2,700㎡ of factory space and over 50 employees. This indicates a defined manufacturing or supply operation rather than a very small trading-only profile. The verified supplier status further supports the existence and basic credibility of its business setup.

However, the provided data does not include production lines, monthly capacity, machinery details, export markets, factory audit reports, or internationally recognized factory certifications. Therefore, while the company has a measurable operational base, the scale cannot be classified as large or highly industrialized based only on the available information.

Scoring Rationale

The company fits the profile of a small-to-medium supplier with basic production capability and a verified operating presence. The factory size and staff count are adequate for low-to-medium volume packaging orders, but insufficient data on production capacity and factory certifications prevents a higher score. It is stronger than a small unverified supplier, but not enough evidence is available to classify it as a large-scale stable supply chain.

Final Score

15 / 20

2. Platform & Compliance Credibility — 20 Points

Basis

• Gold Supplier: True
• Gold Supplier duration: 7 years
• Trade Assurance: True
• Verified supplier: True
• Certification/industry tags:
• Warranty available
• Low MOQ for customization
• Finished product inspection

Elaboration

The supplier has a relatively solid platform profile. A 7-year Gold Supplier history indicates a sustained platform presence, while Trade Assurance adds transaction protection for buyers. Verified supplier status also improves platform-level credibility.

The listed tags show that the supplier provides warranty availability, low MOQ customization, and finished product inspection. These tags are useful for procurement risk control, especially for buyers placing first-time or small-batch orders.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has most of the core platform credibility indicators: Gold Supplier status, 7 years of platform history, Trade Assurance, verification, and quality-related service tags. This creates a relatively complete platform compliance structure. The score is not full because the data does not include detailed third-party audit results, specific factory certification names, or internationally recognized compliance certificates.

Final Score

19 / 20

3. Business Performance — 20 Points

Basis

• Orders in past 6 months: 80+
• Transaction value in past 6 months: CN¥405.6K+
• Store rating: 4.4
• Number of reviews: 6

Elaboration

The supplier has demonstrated recent commercial activity, with over 80 orders and more than CN¥405.6K in transaction value during the past six months. This suggests that the supplier has active buyers and ongoing sales momentum on the platform.

However, the store rating of 4.4 is acceptable but not outstanding. More importantly, the review count is only 6, which limits the reliability of customer feedback as a performance indicator. A small number of reviews makes it difficult to fully validate consistency in service, product quality, and delivery experience across a broader customer base.

Scoring Rationale

The order count and transaction value indicate moderate business activity, which is positive. However, the limited review base and mid-level rating reduce confidence in long-term commercial consistency. The supplier shows business validation, but not enough to be classified as high-volume or strongly proven by customer feedback.

Final Score

15 / 20

4. Service Capability — 10 Points

Basis

• Communication response time: ≤2h
• Customization-related tag: Low MOQ for customization
• Full Customization support: Insufficient Data

Elaboration

The supplier’s response time of within 2 hours is relatively efficient and suitable for normal sourcing communication. The platform tag “Low MOQ for customization” indicates that the supplier can support some level of customization at relatively low order quantities. This is relevant for buyers testing packaging designs, launching new SKUs, or placing trial orders.

However, the data does not explicitly confirm full customization capability, such as mold development, private labeling scope, color customization, logo printing, surface finishing, packaging design, or engineering support. Therefore, the supplier’s service capability should be treated as responsive with basic customization potential, but not fully validated for complex customization projects.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier performs well in response speed, but because the response time is ≤2h rather than ≤1h, and full customization capability is not clearly confirmed, it does not reach the top scoring range. The “Low MOQ for customization” tag supports a mid-level service score.

Final Score

7 / 10

5. Delivery Performance — 10 Points

Basis

• On-time dispatch rate: 92.2%

Elaboration

The supplier’s on-time dispatch rate of 92.2% is above the 90% benchmark. This indicates a generally reliable delivery performance based on the provided platform data. For procurement teams, this is a positive signal, especially when managing launch timelines, inventory planning, or repeat replenishment orders.

However, the data does not include average lead time, peak season delivery stability, logistics methods, or delayed order reasons. Therefore, while the dispatch rate is strong, broader logistics reliability still requires confirmation during actual order execution.

Scoring Rationale

According to the scoring standard, an on-time dispatch rate above 90% qualifies for 9–10 points. The supplier’s 92.2% performance supports a strong delivery score, though not a perfect score due to lack of deeper delivery data.

Final Score

9 / 10

6. Quality & Customer Feedback — 20 Points

Basis

• Store rating: 4.4
• Review count: 6
• Finished product inspection: Listed
• Verified supplier: True

Elaboration

The supplier has some quality assurance indicators, including finished product inspection and verified supplier status. These are positive signs for procurement risk management, particularly for buyers concerned about shipment quality before dispatch.

However, customer feedback data is limited. A 4.4 store rating is acceptable but not especially high, and only 6 reviews are available. This makes it difficult to assess consistency across different products, batches, or buyers. The available quality-related tags are useful, but there is no data on defect rate, inspection standards, quality certificates, sample approval process, or third-party testing.

Scoring Rationale

The supplier has basic quality assurance support through finished product inspection and verification, but the limited number of reviews weakens the reliability of customer feedback. The rating is reasonable but not strong enough to indicate highly proven quality performance. Therefore, the supplier fits the “good but not fully validated” category.

Final Score

15 / 20

Total Score

Procurement Recommendation

Recommendation: Conditional Cooperation Recommended

Xuzhou Datianxia Packaging Technology Co., Ltd. is recommended for buyers seeking low-MOQ packaging products, especially glass bottles, spray bottles, foam bottles, refill bottles, and perfume bottle-related packaging based on the provided product listings. The supplier is suitable for small to mid-sized procurement projects, trial orders, new product testing, and buyers who value Trade Assurance and verified supplier status.

Suitable Customer Types

• Small and medium-sized brands requiring low MOQ packaging
• Buyers testing new bottle designs or product lines
• Importers seeking moderate-volume packaging supply
• Procurement teams that prefer platform-backed transaction protection

Main Risk Points

• Limited customer review base: only 6 reviews
• Store rating of 4.4, which is acceptable but not top-tier
• Full customization capability is Insufficient Data
• No provided details on production capacity, machinery, certifications, defect rate, or quality testing standards

Growth Potential

The supplier shows good platform credibility, a 7-year Gold Supplier record, Trade Assurance support, verified supplier status, and a strong on-time dispatch rate of 92.2%. If the company can improve customer review volume, provide clearer quality documentation, and demonstrate stronger customization capability, it has potential to become a more reliable long-term packaging supplier for larger procurement programs.