Comparison · evidence map · 11 October 2026

DPP providers for fashion in 2026: compare the evidence

A documented comparison of Reeco and 17 other Digital Product Passport platforms for fashion and textiles. The dossier tests what is visible in the evidence: material support and data consistency, product LCA, alerts, unit identity, supply-chain traceability and the standards around them.

Selected Italian, Italy-facing and international providersEvidence is not a market rankingEnglish page · public sources and documented scope

18platforms in the selected sample

11criteria, from UNTP to operator identity

50%assigned to material evidence and data consistency

10 × 5%the other criteria, equally weighted

How to read the conclusion: Reeco is the best documented alignment in the selected Italian and Italy-facing group for this use case. That is a documented fit, not an independent ranking of real-world performance and not a worldwide first place. TrusTrace is included in the public provider context, while its detailed technical analysis remains separate from the current scored dossier.

Method before matrix

Evidence, not equal-looking scores

As an explicit analytical assumption, the report gives the material-consistency criterion C3 half of the analytical weight because a textile claim is only as useful as the evidence supporting its declared composition. The remaining ten criteria receive 5% each: UNTP 0.7.0, CEN DPP norms, PEF/LCA, inconsistency alerts, CIRPASS-2 participation, unit verification, applicable ESPR coverage, supply-chain identity, GS1 Digital Link and LEI/vLEI/EUBW.

The matrix does not turn different kinds of evidence into a false 0–100 score. D means a concrete capability is documented in the stated scope; P means partial, narrower or integration-dependent coverage; ND means not determined by the sources reviewed. EA, B and A mark Early Access, beta and announced status. For C6 only, D means the provider is listed in the supplied public CIRPASS-2 rosters and NO means it is not listed there; this binary presence check is not a test of every technical capability.

Important boundary: provider declarations, public registers, limited test reports and product pages are different kinds of evidence. The dossier does not claim independent validation of all eleven criteria for any provider, and it does not publish Reeco's private formulas or internal source material.

The chain behind a claim

What must connect before a garment claim is defensible?

A certificate, a QR code or an individual ID is a useful input, but none proves a recycled-content claim by itself. The public comparison therefore looks for a consistent connection between supporting evidence, production records, product records and the exact claim attached to the garment.

Supporting evidenceRelevant source records and documented provenance.

Material dataDocumented material input and composition.

Production recordRecorded product composition and production context.

Consistency checkProduct and production records remain aligned.

Product groupConnection to the relevant product and production context.

Unit + claimIndividual identity and the version of the public claim.

Do not collapse these layers: an individual ID supports identity or resolution; it does not by itself substantiate fibre content. The public comparison distinguishes product identity, supporting evidence and claim wording. The brand still decides whether an alert, a block or human review is appropriate.

Questions buyers should ask

Three answers that change the provider comparison

Question 01 · material data

Who controls the supporting evidence and product data?

The useful control is a connected, reviewable set of source and product records. It should make inconsistencies visible and distinguish invalid data that blocks a calculation or validation from discrepancies surfaced to the brand. Reeco documents an internal control layer for this connection; it does not promise a universal automatic block for every inconsistency.

Question 02 · identity vs content

What does an individual ID actually prove?

A serial, QR, NFC or Digital Link can identify, resolve or help authenticate one unit. That is different from substantiating what is in that unit. A certificate or QR alone does not prove the claim, and a unit check alone does not prove the claim's content. The two controls should be shown separately in a DPP test.

Question 03 · LCA and ESG

How do reconciled data feed PEF and ESG reporting?

Reconciled material, process and production data can feed a product environmental calculation and company indicators when boundaries, factors, versions and assumptions remain visible and consistent. Reeco documents a 16-category, cradle-to-gate calculation with stated assumptions; that is not a claim of a complete certified PEFCR. CSRD does not universally require a PEF for every product or automatically cover every listed company: product evidence can support company-level indicators only within a coherent reporting perimeter.

Documented comparison

18 platforms across 11 criteria

The two tables preserve all eleven criteria without forcing a desktop-wide matrix onto a phone. On small screens, swipe the table horizontally; use the filters to narrow the sample to geography or to the two controls most often confused: material consistency (C3) and individual unit identity (C7).

Filter labels describe the comparison lens, not a performance grade. Rows remain evidence snapshots, not vendor certifications.

C1–C6 · standards, quantities and CIRPASS presence

Documented scope for UNTP, CEN, material evidence and data consistency, PEF/LCA, alerts and CIRPASS-2 presence. C3 carries 50% of the report's weight.
Platform	C1 UNTP	C2 CEN	C3 Material · 50%	C4 PEF/LCA	C5 Alerts	C6 CIRPASS
ReecoItaly · selected lead	P	P	P	D*	D	D
EZ Lab DPP StudioItaly · dppstudio.it	ND	ND	P	P	P	NO
RenoonItaly-facing · NL entity	ND	ND	P	P	P	D
MyLimeItaly · premium sector	ND	ND	P	ND	ND	D
TemeraItaly · traceability	ND	ND	P	ND	ND	D
CertilogoItaly · secure identity	ND	ND	ND	ND	P	NO
RINAItaly · verification services	ND	ND	P	P	ND	D
RetracedInternational · EA in C3	ND	ND	P EA	P	D	NO
Fairly MadeInternational · LCA focus	ND	ND	P	D*	P	NO
EONInternational · partner data	ND	ND	P	ND	D	NO
Avery Dennison atma.ioInternational · item identity	ND	ND	P	P	D	NO
ArianeeInternational · compliance engine	ND	P	P	ND	P	NO
TextileGenesisInternational · fibre to retail	ND	ND	P	P	D	NO
AWAREInternational · tokens	ND	ND	P	P B	P	D
Trace For GoodInternational · certificate checks	ND	ND	P	P	D	NO
CirculariseInternational · ISCC benchmark	ND	ND	P	P	D	NO
KezzlerInternational · batch identity	ND	ND	P	ND	P	NO
VerisavInternational · UNTP declared	P	ND	ND	ND	P	NO

D* indicates a documented 16-category calculation with stated boundary and assumptions; it is not a complete certified PEFCR. P EA and P B preserve the Early Access and beta limits from the report.

C7–C11 · unit, ESPR, supply chain and identity

Documented scope for individual-unit verification, applicable ESPR requirements, supply-chain identity, GS1 Digital Link and LEI/vLEI/EUBW.
Platform	C7 Unit	C8 ESPR	C9 Supply chain	C10 GS1 DL	C11 Identity
ReecoItaly · selected lead	P	P	D	D	P
EZ Lab DPP StudioItaly · dppstudio.it	P	P	P	P	ND
RenoonItaly-facing · NL entity	P	P	P	P	ND
MyLimeItaly · premium sector	D	P	P	P	ND
TemeraItaly · traceability	D	P	D	ND	ND
CertilogoItaly · secure identity	D	P	P	ND	ND
RINAItaly · verification services	P	P	P	ND	ND
RetracedInternational · EA in C3	P	P	D	ND	ND
Fairly MadeInternational · LCA focus	P	P	D	ND	ND
EONInternational · partner data	D	P	D	D	ND
Avery Dennison atma.ioInternational · item identity	D	P	D	D	ND
ArianeeInternational · compliance engine	P	P	P	D	ND
TextileGenesisInternational · fibre to retail	P	P	D	P	ND
AWAREInternational · tokens	P	P	D	P	ND
Trace For GoodInternational · certificate checks	P	P	P	ND	ND
CirculariseInternational · ISCC benchmark	P	P	D	P	ND
KezzlerInternational · batch identity	D	P	D	D	ND
VerisavInternational · UNTP declared	P	P	P	D	A

C6 is binary in this comparison: D means the provider is listed in the supplied CIRPASS-2 rosters; NO means it is not listed there. Reeco's D records its public presence in EWG1, EWG3 and the Community of Practice; C6 is not an independent technical test or certification. C7 identifies a concrete unit-authentication or identity mechanism; it does not certify the fibre content in every item. C8 is coverage of documented applicable requirements, not future textile compliance. C11 distinguishes current LEI or attestations from a complete vLEI/EUBW implementation.

Relevant organisations in the supplied CIRPASS-2 rosters

The following selection covers providers and textile-data stakeholders named in the supplied EWG1, EWG3 and Community of Practice rosters. It is participation context, not an extension of the 18-provider technical matrix. TrusTrace has roster presence D; its technical analysis remains separate. Organisations not present in these rosters have C6 NO, without any inference about their capabilities.

Selected roster members and recorded groups
Organisation	Groups in the supplied roster
Reeco	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
Renoon	EWG1, CoP
MyLime	CoP
Temera	EWG3, CoP
RINA	CoP
AWARE	EWG3, CoP
TrusTrace	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
FibreTrace	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
Fabacus	EWG3, CoP
InforNexus	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
Seamless Source	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
r-pac	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
PSQR	EWG3
Laava ID	EWG1
Blue Room Innovation	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
Quifactum	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
Maison Neyret	EWG1, EWG3, CoP
Lenzing Aktiengesellschaft	EWG3, CoP

Sources: EWG1 roster · EWG3 roster · Community of Practice roster. Membership is not certification or proof of complete technical compliance.

Separate analysis: TrusTrace is included in the public provider context, but its detailed technical analysis remains separate. It is not assigned a score in this 18-platform dossier because the reviewed evidence was not normalised into the same 11-criterion record. No deficiency is inferred.

C3 · 50% of the analysis

The material-consistency question deserves five separate checks

The report uses five proposed sub-checks of 10 points inside C3 to keep the high-priority criterion testable. They are not scores awarded in this page and they are not a universal definition of DPP quality.

Evidence coverage

Review whether the supporting evidence is relevant and current.

Data continuity

Check whether records remain consistent across the chain.

Production alignment

Compare production information with the declared product composition.

Data attribution

Review how material information is connected to product records.

Claim consistency

Check whether the public claim matches the documented evidence.

The same wrong input can produce an alert, a blocking validation error or a request for human review. The appropriate action depends on the brand policy and the type of inconsistency; the comparison does not assume a universal block.

What the evidence says

Strengths and boundaries by provider

These notes preserve the report's distinctions: a provider can be strong at item identity, certificate checking, LCA, supply-chain genealogy or material-data consistency without proving every other control.

Reeco

Documents an internal control layer for material and product consistency, supply-chain identity, alerts and a 16-category cradle-to-gate calculation. The remaining proof work is common-case coverage, live tests across every relevant scheme and the precise treatment of each claim exception.

The official CIRPASS-2 rosters list Reeco in Expert Working Group 1, Expert Working Group 3 and the Community of Practice. This documents stakeholder participation and project engagement; it is not by itself a certification, a passing test or proof of every capability. EWG1 · EWG3 · CoP

Documented fit · selected Italian group

TrusTrace

Included here as a relevant upstream traceability and supplier-data platform. The supplied CIRPASS-2 rosters list TrusTrace in EWG1, EWG3 and the Community of Practice. This presence check is not a technical assessment or certification. A separate technical analysis is planned, so this page does not infer a score or deficiency.

Public context · separate analysis

Buyerdock

Included here because it appears in the earlier Italian provider guide. The supplied CIRPASS-2 rosters do not list Buyerdock; that binary roster fact is not a technical assessment. The current dossier does not contain a normalised evidence record for the other criteria, so no score or capability conclusion is inferred.

Public context · not scored

EZ Lab / DPP Studio

Strong comparison on supplier data, document validation and gap analysis. The product is DPP Studio at dppstudio.it; the reviewed public material does not establish the full textile data-control scope or a reproducible PEF method.

Italy · partial / not determined

Renoon

Documents validation of transactions, parties and certificate authenticity, plus links between supply chain, LCA and product data. The reviewed evidence leaves the full quantitative control scope to verify; the legal entity is Dutch although the activity is Italy-facing.

Italy-facing · partial

MyLime · Temera · Certilogo

MyLime and Temera document concrete item or journey authentication; Certilogo documents secure product identity and anti-fraud signals. These are meaningful unit controls, not substitutes for supporting evidence of fibre content in the product.

Italian unit identity strengths

RINA

Offers DPP and verification services, item or lot granularity and LCA services. Audit capability and ISO-referenced services are not by themselves proof of a native textile ledger or an integrated PEF calculation in the DPP.

Italy · service boundary

Retraced · Fairly Made

Retraced documents reconciliation and inconsistency handling, with CMM in Early Access. Fairly Made is the most direct declared LCA comparison in the sample, with 16 indicators; neither statement is treated as a complete independent validation of all eleven criteria.

International · EA / declared scope

EON · Avery Dennison atma.io

Both document genealogy, supporting documents, anomalies and GS1 Digital Link; atma.io also documents article-tag authentication. The reviewed evidence does not establish the same product-level material consistency scope as the C3 test.

International · genealogy / identity

Arianee · Kezzler · Verisav

These platforms document compliance or product identity mechanisms and, for Verisav, a declared UNTP 0.7.0 implementation. A compliance engine or readiness statement is not a verified material ledger, complete vLEI chain or certified PEF.

International · scope varies

TextileGenesis · AWARE · Circularise

They are useful quantitative comparisons for this use case, with documented functionality in different scopes. Equivalence of evidence, source verification and garment-claim propagation still need a common test.

International · quantitative comparisons

Trace For Good

Documents automated authenticity and validity checks for certificates and alerts for incoherent data. That is more than a certificate archive; full product-level quantitative evidence was not determined in the reviewed material.

International · certificate verification

Why claim granularity matters

Enforcement has focused on the claim being broader than the proof

The cases below are included to clarify the risk, not to accuse DPP providers of their customers' conduct. They do not establish a legal duty to serialize every piece or analyse every garment. They show why a claim needs clear scope, relevant evidence and a traceable connection to the product being described.

ASA decision · 24 June 2026

UNIQLO “Recycled Materials”

The ASA upheld the complaint about a paid Google ad. The evidence showed recycled material in the listed products, but not that all fabrics were entirely recycled; the unqualified wording was therefore misleading. This was an ASA decision and an instruction not to run the ad in that form, not a fine.

Read the ASA ruling

Reported enforcement

Calvin Klein, Adidas and Uniqlo

Ecotextile News reported the wider set of ASA bans on fashion ads making recycled or responsible-sourcing claims without adequate substantiation. The article is secondary coverage; the individual ASA rulings remain the primary evidence.

Read the Ecotextile report

CMA guidance · UK

Put the basis of a claim close to the claim

The CMA says environmental claims should be clear, accurate and substantiated, with important qualifications prominent rather than hidden behind a scan or extra action. That is directly relevant to DPP claim wording and mobile product pages.

Read the CMA guidance

AGCM decision · Italy

Shein green claims

Italy's AGCM announced a €1 million sanction in 2025 for misleading and omissive environmental claims. This is a fine imposed on the company named in the decision; it is not a finding about any DPP provider.

Read the AGCM release

Related guidance: ACM and its Norwegian counterpart warned that Higg MSI data should be described as general average data with no direct link to the specific product, and that four-category cradle-to-gate analysis is not a comprehensive product impact analysis. The guidance also records commitments and recommendations, not a provider ranking or universal product certification. Read the ACM/NCA guidance.

Regulatory status

What is known, and what must stay open

The EU Textile Strategy sets a policy direction on recycled fibres. This page does not establish a current universal textile recycled-content minimum under ESPR. Applicable legal acts must establish any binding requirements, thresholds, scope, methods, documentation and application dates. A DPP should therefore carry data supported by appropriate evidence, not only a declared percentage. The treatment of recycled-content requirements remains under review; no universal minimum or confirmed application date is asserted here.

EU Textile Strategy COM(2022) 141 · ESPR Regulation (EU) 2024/1781, Articles 4–8 · Directive (EU) 2025/1892 context.

The textile delegated-act timing remains indicative in the current policy roadmap; it is not a confirmed application date. The 27 September 2026 date belongs to Directive (EU) 2024/825 on consumer empowerment and environmental claims, not to the start date of the textile DPP. The registry, a provider's implementation and a future legal obligation are three different layers.

Primary sources in this page

Trace the claims back to the evidence

ASA ruling on UNIQLO — decision dated 24 June 2026.
Ecotextile News — secondary reporting on the wider ASA action.
CMA fashion claims guidance — clear, prominent, substantiated claims.
AGCM Shein release — €1 million sanction, 4 August 2025.
ACM/NCA clothing guidance — average material data and product-specific substantiation.
EZ Lab DPP Studio — the domain used for this comparison entry.

Provider notes are evidence snapshots from the 11 October 2026 dossier. Commercial claims, independent tests, implementation status and Early Access functions are kept distinct. Payments, advertising visibility or inclusion in this selected sample do not determine placement.

FAQ

Questions and precise answers

Does a certificate or QR code prove a recycled-content claim?

No. A certificate or QR can identify a document or unit, but the claim needs consistent supporting evidence linking source records, production data, product records and the claim attached to the unit. The public comparison does not publish an implementation recipe.

Does an individual product ID prove what is in the garment?

No. An individual ID can support identity, resolution or authentication. It is a separate control from substantiating material content and the wording of the claim attached to the unit.

Does Reeco block every discrepancy automatically?

No universal block should be assumed. The documented control layer distinguishes invalid data that blocks a calculation or validation from inconsistencies surfaced to the brand. Whether to block, alert or request human review depends on the error and the brand policy.

Is Reeco's environmental calculation a certified PEFCR?

No such claim is made here. The dossier describes a 16-category, cradle-to-gate calculation with explicit assumptions. That is different from claiming a complete certified PEFCR, and it does not cover every life-cycle effect by itself.

Does CSRD require a PEF for every product or every listed company?

No. CSRD reporting scope and product-level environmental methods are not the same thing. Reconciled product data can feed company indicators when the reporting boundaries, methods and assumptions are coherent; it does not create a universal product-by-product PEF obligation.

When will textile recycled-content thresholds apply?

The EU Textile Strategy sets a policy direction on recycled fibres. Any binding textile requirements, thresholds, scope, methods, documentation and application dates must be established by the applicable legal acts. Any future threshold or portfolio target must still be distinguished from the evidence supporting a claim for an individual article. The current roadmap is indicative. This page does not turn the roadmap into a confirmed application date.

How is TrusTrace treated in this comparison?

TrusTrace is included in the public provider context. The supplied CIRPASS-2 rosters list it in EWG1, EWG3 and the Community of Practice; the remaining technical analysis is separate. It is not assigned a score in the current 18-platform dossier because the reviewed evidence was not normalised into the same 11-criterion record; no deficiency is inferred.