Research / Digital Product Passport / Supplier register
The global DPP supplier landscape.
A research map of every organisation we could identify supplying Digital Product Passport capability. Every headquarters is sourced, dated, and open to inspection.
Global supplier map
Where the market is taking shape
Loading register
0 organisations have a publicly sourced headquarters location. 0 remain unplaced because no public headquarters source was found.
Read the research method →Supplier directory
Evidence-led profiles of the global Digital Product Passport market.
Durable RFID and secured QR for textile ↗
Unnamed entity · retained as market evidence
This record is separated from the supplier results because no public supplier identity was established.
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.
How we work
Researched by agents, reviewed by a human, dated at finding level.
The research in this register is conducted by AI agents under human supervision and review. The agents inspect public sources, capture the relevant evidence and record when it was found. A human defines the research questions, establishes the evidence rules, reviews material findings and remains accountable for the published result.
That is why 190 organisations carry the same ten checks with assessment dates separated by only a few days: the research was conducted systematically in batches, rather than one company at a time over months. Explaining that is worth more than creating the impression of something slower.
What the system is not permitted to do. A finding cannot be recorded without supporting evidence. A demonstrated finding must carry the text that supports it, because a description of a page is not a substitute for the evidence on it. The system cannot turn an interpretation into a quotation, and it cannot conclude that a supplier fails a check merely because public evidence was not found. The strongest negative we publish is that no relevant public evidence was established - a statement about published evidence, not about the supplier's underlying capability.
When we find nothing, we show where we looked. Each such finding records the domain inspected, the pages reviewed and what each returned, the terms searched, and why the search was concluded. You can judge whether we searched the wrong place or applied the method badly.
What the original method missed. Until 5 August 2026 we considered only evidence published on a supplier's own domain, so work published through an open-source organisation or an external documentation repository could be excluded by rule. That restriction was wrong. It was identified by a reader rather than by us, and it is fixed: relevant public evidence outside a supplier's own domain now counts.
Findings are not permanent. A supplier may publish tomorrow what it had not published today. Records are reviewed in later sweeps and updated when the evidence changes. We would rather publish a correction than defend an outdated conclusion.
Our interest, declared
We work in this market. You should know that before relying on our research.
yellow3 lab is not a neutral observer of the Digital Product Passport market. We advise companies on DPP strategy, publish research about the market, and are building a paid service that helps buyers evaluate and select suppliers using the evidence in this register. That gives us a commercial interest in the market we assess, and hiding it in a footer would not meet the standard we expect of others.
Suppliers do not pay us. Ever. Not to appear, not to improve their position, not to change how they are described, not for faster assessment, and not for verification. There are no sponsored placements and no paid findings, and there never will be. The moment a finding can be purchased it loses its value - for buyers, and for every supplier that chose not to pay.
Buyers pay us to research their specific requirements and support their procurement decisions. That work does not alter the evidence standard and does not change 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. We research and assess the evidence available about them.
Our independence does not rest on asking you to trust our intentions. Every finding carries a source and a date, so you can inspect the evidence, challenge the conclusion and tell us when we are wrong.
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 →