Research / Digital Product Passport / Supplier Register

The yellow3 Supplier Register

Find the right people for your Digital Product Passport project.

Discover Digital Product Passport platforms and specialists. Explore what they offer, build a shortlist and start a conversation.

Free to explore. Free to be listed. No sponsored placement.

248 organisations 230 commercial suppliers 35 countries Last researched 26 Oct 2026

Buyer views: suppliers in Europe · battery passport providers · software comparison by capability

Before you shortlist: Digital Product Passport FAQ for buyers →

Browse by country and more filters

Headquarters is the business base the register recorded for a company, not a limit on where it works. Sectors and supplier types come from the register’s research. A search match shows where a word appears; it is not a recommendation.

How to read stated and shown

Explore the marketSelect a country to open its list
EuropeAsia USAOther Circle size shows how many organisations

210 organisations have a publicly sourced headquarters location. 38 are not on the map because no public headquarters source was found.

Read the research method →

Digital Product Passport suppliers

230 suppliers Showing commercial suppliers.

Company-managed profiles first · Alphabetical within each group

Also in the register

Research projects, standards bodies and other organisations, recorded as market evidence. They are not commercial suppliers.

For DPP businesses

Help buyers discover what you do.

Claim your free profile to add your logo, introduction and contact link. Company-managed profiles appear first.

Already listed? Open your profile and choose Claim. Not listed yet? Ask us to research your company. A request is not a listing.

Add your business →

Evidence, not inference

Blank space is part of the map.

We do not infer a headquarters from a company name, domain ending, legal-form suffix, or regional office. If a location is not publicly sourced, the organisation stays off the map until it can be proven.

01Every location has a source, or a dated record that none was found.
02Every source has a date.
03No ranking. No composite score.

Capability evidence

How to read the evidence states

Each published finding records the strongest evidence position yellow3 can support from the source material shown. These are evidence states, not capability ratings.

Shown: Public evidence reviewed by yellow3 supports the capability finding.

Stated: The supplier publicly states the capability. The statement remains attributed to the supplier.

Evidence requirements

Law, buyer requirements and provider evidence are not the same thing.

Legal obligation. yellow3 treats a requirement as law only when it traces to an applicable official provision. Under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation, Articles 9 and 10 establish the Digital Product Passport framework and essential requirements, while applicable delegated acts determine product-group data and granularity. For batteries, Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 Article 77 and Annex XIII set the battery-passport information framework.

Buyer procurement requirement. A buyer can require evidence or controls beyond what a current legal provision expressly requires, for example a clean data export, portability, access controls or evidence retention. That is a buyer-selected requirement, not a statement that the law requires it.

Provider capability evidence. The public Register records what yellow3 could establish from public sources against its own published capability criteria. In the Digital Product Passport Buyer Platform, a provider can also answer a buyer-specific evidence request. Those responses stay separate from the public Register finding.

Requirement-to-proof examples: a legal data requirement should cite the official provision; a buyer portability requirement can be tested with an export artifact or written contractual commitment; registry connectivity can be supported by public technical documentation or a provider response. None of those, by itself, proves overall legal compliance.

Official legal sources: Regulation (EU) 2024/1781 ↗ and Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 ↗.

01Law must trace to an official provision.
02Buyer-selected requirements stay labelled as buyer requirements.
03Provider evidence stays attributed to its source.

How the research is produced

Agent-assisted research, with every published finding tied to its source.

The research in this register is collected and classified by AI agents working from public sources. A person sets the research questions and the evidence rules, and yellow3 lab is accountable for every published record.

Classification is not human review. Review attribution appears only when an identifiable person has reviewed that specific finding.

Every published capability finding must remain tied to an inspectable source. Where the available research does not support a public finding, the Register does not turn that absence into a statement about the supplier.

When a correction is supported by public evidence, yellow3 reviews the finding, updates the record and preserves the source and date so the change can be inspected.

01No source, no finding.
02A description is not a quotation.
03A published finding must show what supports it.

Our interest, declared

We work in this market. You should know that before relying on our research.

yellow3 lab participates commercially in the market this register catalogues. We sell buyer-side Digital Product Passport services and operate the Digital Product Passport Buyer Platform, which uses evidence from this register to help buyers evaluate and select suppliers.

Suppliers cannot pay to appear, rank, receive faster assessment or change a finding. There are no sponsored placements or paid findings.

Buyers pay yellow3 for research and support with their own procurement decisions. That work does not alter the register’s evidence standard or any published finding.

We do not operate Digital Product Passports. We do not host, issue, resolve, maintain or publish them. The suppliers in this register do that.

Every finding carries a source and a date, so readers can inspect the evidence, challenge the conclusion and request a correction.

Corrections

Tell us what we got wrong.

Every finding here is a dated statement about published evidence, and every one of them can be wrong: a source we did not reach, a page that changed, a judgement we made badly. Corrections are free, they are never a commercial conversation, and you do not need to claim a profile to send one.

Send the supplier, the check or field, and a public URL with the sentence on that page that supports it. That is the same standard we hold ourselves to, and it is the only thing that lets us act on a correction the same day. Send a correction →

01Evidence outside your own domain counts.
02A correction never costs anything.
03We record who was right, and when.

Corrections recorded

Two supplier locations completed and one location grade corrected

26 Oct 2026

Ixalab: its TraceSurfer site states Montevideo, Uruguay, so the city is now recorded and tracesurfer.com is listed as its second address. The location had been graded verified on a trademark bulletin; the register's own rule says a trademark bulletin cannot establish where a company is based, so it is now graded claimed, citing the company's own site. WIARA: its second site, digiproductpass.com, states its registered office in Plovdiv, Bulgaria, which is now recorded, and that address is listed. No finding changed.

Three source links repaired

19 Oct 2026

A site check found three links on supplier profiles that no longer worked. Tilkal's evidence page has moved; the profile now cites Tilkal's home page, which states the same activity. The Siemens annual report link was written in a form some browsers reject; it now opens the same document. E Circular ApS's web address has lapsed, so the profile no longer links to it and says when this was checked. No finding changed.

Quotations checked against pages suppliers have since changed

19 Oct 2026

44 quotations no longer matched the supplier's page as first read. Each page was read again, also in a full browser. Four still carry the statement and are unchanged. Where the supplier has reworded the statement, 28 quotations now give the current wording, word for word and dated to the day it was read. Ten values that the supplier's current pages no longer state were withdrawn. Two quotations are on a page that does not allow automated reading; they remain as recorded, because a page that cannot be read is not evidence that a statement was removed.

A second pass over the quotations: 234 more cut back to the supplier's own sentence

19 Oct 2026

The first clean-up today found joined text by looking for buttons and menus. A second, exact test then compared every quotation with the structure of the supplier's page: a supplier's sentence sits inside one heading, paragraph or list item, so a quotation that runs across several was joined together by yellow3's automated reading. 234 quotations did. Each is now the single heading, sentence or item that carries the statement, word for word as it appears on the page and dated to the day it was re-read. No supplier's wording was changed.

Quotations restored to the suppliers' exact words

19 Oct 2026

A review of every Supplier Fit quotation found two faults of yellow3's own making. In 64 quotations the automated reading had joined a supplier's sentence to neighbouring page text such as buttons, menus, step numbers or the page title; each is now cut back to the supplier's own sentence, word for word as it appears on the page. In 75 quotations yellow3 had replaced the supplier's dashes with commas to suit its own writing style; the supplier's original punctuation is restored. A quotation is the supplier's words and is never edited. While re-reading the pages, eleven statements had been reworded by the supplier since the first reading and are now quoted as they read today, and two values the supplier no longer states were withdrawn. Every changed quotation is dated to the day it was re-read.

Ownership no longer names individuals: two more profiles

17 Oct 2026

A review of every ownership entry found two more that named a person: one as the operator of a service, one as the controlling shareholder of a company. Ownership now states the legal form and any company name the source gives, and otherwise says that an individual operates or controls the business. The sources each profile cites still carry the full details. Nothing about either supplier changed in this correction.

Ownership no longer names individuals

17 Oct 2026

Two profiles recorded the ownership of a sole proprietorship by naming the person who owns it. The register records businesses, not people, so ownership now gives the legal form and the trading name, the same way for every supplier. The legal notice each profile cites still carries the operator's full details. Nothing about either supplier changed in this correction.

An ownership field corrected after the supplier pointed to its legal notice

17 Oct 2026

A newly recorded supplier's profile showed its ownership as not disclosed. Its legal notice does disclose it: the service is operated by a self-employed professional under a trading name and is not a separate incorporated company. yellow3 had read that page for the supplier's location and did not record the ownership it also stated. The profile now records the operator as a sole proprietor under its trading name. The error was yellow3's.

One quotation relinked, one finding withdrawn after a supplier page was retired

6 Oct 2026

A supplier restructured its website and two pages that Supplier Fit findings quoted no longer exist. One statement now appears on a current page of the same site: the finding is relinked to it, quoted from that page, and dated to the day yellow3 read it. The other statement appears on no current page, so yellow3 withdrew that finding. Nothing about the supplier changed in this correction; the register follows what the supplier publishes today.

Extraction method tightened

2 Oct 2026

yellow3 tightened its own method for reading supplier websites. A re-review of every automatically extracted finding checked that each quoted sentence is the supplier describing its own product, in the language as written. 479 findings that our earlier reading did not support were withdrawn: in those cases the sentence was a general explanation, a title or menu text, a description of another organisation, or used the matched word in another sense. The error was yellow3's. 978 findings remain published, each with its source and date.

Review attribution removed

25 Sep 2026

Published findings no longer show a reviewer's name. The name previously shown did not identify a person who had reviewed each finding, so no finding currently has a recorded human review. A finding will show review attribution again only when an identifiable review of that finding is recorded. No finding, label or state changed.

Eight quotations now link to the language version they were read from

25 Sep 2026

Eight Supplier Fit findings, seven for Tilkal and one for Stefano Cipriani Studio (reeco.eco), quoted a sentence correctly but linked to the English version of the page, where that sentence does not appear. The quotations were read from the French (?lang=fr) and Japanese (ja.reeco.eco) versions of the same pages, because our crawl saved language versions of one page under the same name. Each finding now links to the page the quotation was actually read from, with that page's hash. No finding, label or state changed.

Quotations carry normalised punctuation

24 Sep 2026

Quotations shown on supplier profiles have em dashes replaced with commas, following yellow3's own writing rule. 100 quotations across 34 suppliers are affected. No word is changed and no meaning is altered, but these are therefore not character-for-character reproductions. The page each quotation came from is recorded with its address, the date it was read and a hash of its contents, so anyone can check the original wording at source.

Company statements are not quoted

24 Sep 2026

Every one of the 280 findings recorded as 'Company states' names the page the company said it on, and none of them records the company's own sentence. Five of the 44 findings supported by an artefact are in the same position. These findings have not been withdrawn, because the source is recorded and can be read. They are now marked on each profile so that a reader can tell a finding that rests on a company's own words from one that rests on yellow3's summary of them.

Every negative capability finding withdrawn

24 Sep 2026

yellow3 withdrew all 1,216 findings that read 'No public evidence found by yellow3' across 154 suppliers, and reset them to 'Not yet assessed'. They were not adjusted and they were not deleted. They were withdrawn because the searches behind them were not good enough to support a public statement about a named company. The sweep that produced them guessed at addresses rather than reading each supplier's own sitemap, did not open documents such as PDFs, and recorded no quotation of the closest material it did find. In one case a supplier's own published pages directly contradicted two of the findings we had published about them. Across the whole register only 44 of 1,540 findings, 2.9 per cent, rested on an artefact yellow3 had opened and tested, and 130 of 154 suppliers had none at all. A statement that can damage a named company was the only one this register allowed to be made without evidence. That was the wrong way round. From 24 September 2026 the sentence 'No public evidence found by yellow3' may only be published where the search behind it read the supplier's own sitemap, recorded the pages it opened, looked for and opened documents including PDFs, and quotes the closest material found. The rule is enforced in the build, so a future sweep cannot publish a negative without meeting it. The 44 findings supported by an artefact and the 280 statements made by the companies themselves were not affected and remain published.

↗ External link indicates the company’s own website.