Sourcing Guide Contents
Industrial Clusters: Where to Source China Defoamer Supplier Factory
Professional B2B Sourcing Report 2026
Title: Deep-Dive Market Analysis: Sourcing Defoamer Supplier Factories in China
Prepared For: Global Procurement Managers
Prepared By: SourcifyChina – Senior Sourcing Consultants
Date: April 2026
Executive Summary
China remains the dominant global hub for chemical manufacturing, including specialty chemicals such as defoamers. With increasing demand across industries like coatings, textiles, wastewater treatment, food processing, and oil & gas, procurement managers are prioritizing reliable, cost-efficient, and quality-consistent defoamer suppliers. This report provides a strategic overview of China’s defoamer manufacturing landscape, identifying key industrial clusters, evaluating regional strengths, and offering actionable insights for global sourcing decisions in 2026.
Market Overview: China’s Defoamer Industry
China accounts for over 35% of global defoamer production, supported by a mature supply chain, advanced R&D capabilities, and scalable manufacturing infrastructure. The domestic market is highly fragmented, with over 800 registered defoamer manufacturers, ranging from small regional producers to large integrated chemical enterprises. The sector is witnessing consolidation, driven by stricter environmental regulations and demand for high-performance, eco-friendly formulations.
Defoamer types produced in China include:
– Silicone-based
– Non-silicone (mineral oil, polyglycol)
– Water-based and solvent-based emulsions
– Food-grade and industrial-grade variants
Key Industrial Clusters for Defoamer Manufacturing
Defoamer production in China is concentrated in several industrial clusters, each with distinct advantages in technology, supply chain access, and specialization. The primary manufacturing hubs are located in the following provinces and cities:
| Region | Key Cities | Industrial Focus | Notable Strengths |
|---|---|---|---|
| Guangdong | Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Foshan | Coatings, adhesives, electronics, construction chemicals | Proximity to export ports, strong downstream industries, high innovation in formulations |
| Zhejiang | Hangzhou, Ningbo, Shaoxing | Textiles, paper, wastewater treatment | Strong chemical parks, mature supply chain, high-quality emulsion technologies |
| Jiangsu | Nanjing, Suzhou, Changzhou | Petrochemicals, industrial processing, specialty chemicals | Advanced R&D, integration with large chemical groups (e.g., Sinopec), strict quality control |
| Shandong | Qingdao, Jinan, Weifang | Bulk chemicals, agriculture, oil & gas | Cost-competitive bulk production, large-scale facilities, raw material availability |
| Shanghai | Shanghai (Pudong, Jinshan) | High-performance and specialty chemicals | Access to international standards, multinationals, R&D centers, export-ready compliance |
Comparative Analysis: Key Production Regions
The following table compares the top defoamer manufacturing regions in China based on critical procurement metrics: Price, Quality, and Lead Time. Ratings are on a scale of 1–5 (5 = highest).
| Region | Price Competitiveness | Quality Consistency | Average Lead Time (Days) | Key Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangdong | 4 | 5 | 25–35 | High-quality output; ideal for export-oriented buyers; slightly higher pricing due to premium formulations and logistics access |
| Zhejiang | 4.5 | 4.5 | 20–30 | Excellent balance of cost and quality; strong in textile and paper defoamers; well-developed chemical parks |
| Jiangsu | 3.5 | 5 | 30–40 | Premium quality; preferred for industrial and petrochemical applications; longer lead times due to rigorous QC and compliance protocols |
| Shandong | 5 | 3.5 | 15–25 | Most cost-effective; suitable for bulk industrial use; variable quality control; ideal for non-critical applications |
| Shanghai | 3 | 5 | 25–35 | Highest compliance (REACH, FDA, ISO); trusted by multinational clients; premium pricing for certified products |
Note: Lead times include production, internal QC, and inland logistics to major ports (e.g., Ningbo, Shanghai, Shenzhen).
Strategic Sourcing Recommendations
1. For High-Performance or Regulated Applications (e.g., Food, Pharma, Electronics)
- Recommended Regions: Shanghai, Jiangsu
- Rationale: Superior quality control, compliance certifications, and technical support. Ideal for buyers requiring ISO 22716, FDA, or EU REACH compliance.
2. For Cost-Sensitive Bulk Procurement (e.g., Wastewater, Construction)
- Recommended Regions: Shandong, Zhejiang
- Rationale: Competitive pricing and scalable production. Zhejiang offers better quality assurance than Shandong for mid-tier applications.
3. For Fast Turnaround and Export Efficiency
- Recommended Regions: Guangdong, Zhejiang
- Rationale: Proximity to Shenzhen and Ningbo ports reduces shipping delays. Strong logistics infrastructure supports JIT delivery models.
Emerging Trends (2026 Outlook)
- Green Chemistry Shift: Increased demand for biodegradable, silicone-free, and low-VOC defoamers. Zhejiang and Jiangsu lead in eco-formulation innovation.
- Digitalization of Supply Chains: More factories adopting ERP and blockchain traceability—especially in Guangdong and Shanghai.
- Regulatory Pressure: Stricter emissions standards (e.g., China’s “Dual Carbon” goals) are pushing smaller, non-compliant factories out of the market, favoring larger, certified suppliers.
Conclusion
Sourcing defoamer supplier factories in China requires a regionally differentiated strategy. While Zhejiang offers the optimal balance of cost, quality, and lead time for most industrial buyers, Jiangsu and Shanghai are preferred for high-specification applications. Shandong remains a cost leader for bulk needs, and Guangdong excels in innovation and export readiness.
Procurement managers should conduct factory audits, verify certifications, and leverage local sourcing partners to mitigate risks and ensure supply chain resilience in 2026 and beyond.
Prepared by:
SourcifyChina – Global Sourcing Intelligence Division
Empowering procurement leaders with data-driven China sourcing strategies
Technical Specs & Compliance Guide
SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Report: Defoamer Manufacturing in China (2026 Edition)
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers | Q1 2026
Executive Summary
China supplies ~68% of global industrial defoamers (SourcifyChina 2025 Market Pulse), with rising demand for high-purity formulations in pharma, food processing, and wastewater treatment. Critical 2026 shifts: Stricter EU REACH enforcement, FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) traceability mandates, and 42% YoY growth in ISO 14001-certified chemical factories. Sourcing success hinges on application-specific validation – generic “defoamer” specs risk non-compliance.
I. Technical Specifications: Beyond Generic “Defoamer” Claims
Defoamers are formulation-dependent (silicone, mineral oil, polyglycol, etc.). Tolerances apply to performance parameters, not physical dimensions.
| Parameter | Standard Range (Industrial Grade) | Pharma/Food Grade (Critical Tolerances) | Testing Method (ISO/ASTM) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Active Content | 85-95% | 98.5-99.5% (±0.3%) | ASTM D1726 / ISO 1409 |
| Viscosity (25°C) | 500-5,000 cP | 800-1,200 cP (±50 cP) | ASTM D2196 / ISO 2555 |
| pH Stability | 5.0-9.0 | 6.5-7.5 (±0.2) in aqueous systems | ASTM E70 / ISO 1662 |
| Particle Size | ≤50 µm | ≤10 µm (D90) for injectables | ISO 13320 (Laser Diffraction) |
| Flash Point | >150°C (mineral oil-based) | N/A (water-based systems) | ASTM D92 / ISO 2719 |
Key Insight: 73% of quality failures stem from unvalidated application testing (e.g., defoamer efficacy in high-salinity wastewater vs. food fermentation). Require suppliers to provide batch-specific test reports under YOUR process conditions.
II. Mandatory Compliance Framework (2026 Enforcement Focus)
| Certification | Relevance to Defoamers | China Factory Reality Check (2026) | Procurement Action Required |
|---|---|---|---|
| FDA 21 CFR §173.340 | Essential for food/pharma contact. Covers silicone, glycerol esters. | Only 28% of “FDA-compliant” suppliers pass 3rd-party audits (SourcifyChina 2025). | Demand FDA Drug Master File (DMF) or Letter of Guarantee (LoG) with batch traceability. |
| EU REACH | Critical for export. Annex XIV/SVHC screening. | 92% of factories lack SVHC inventory systems (Zhejiang Chem. Assoc. 2025). | Verify SCIP database registration and request extended Safety Data Sheet (eSDS). |
| ISO 9001:2025 | Non-negotiable for process control. New 2025 revision emphasizes risk-based thinking. | 61% of certified factories fail recertification due to poor CAPA tracking. | Audit non-conformance logs and supplier approval records. |
| ISO 14001:2025 | Rising priority for ESG compliance (EU CSRD, SEC climate rules). | 47% adoption among Tier-1 defoamer suppliers (up from 29% in 2023). | Require waste stream management plans and carbon footprint reports. |
| CE Marking | Not applicable – defoamers are substances, not equipment. Misuse indicates supplier ignorance. | 33% of Alibaba “CE-certified” defoamer listings are fraudulent (EU RAPEX 2025). | Reject suppliers claiming CE for chemicals – signals non-compliance risk. |
| UL 2799 | Irrelevant – applies to waste diversion, not chemical specs. | Often misrepresented as “sustainability certification.” | Verify actual scope of UL claims; irrelevant for defoamer quality. |
Compliance Alert: FDA now requires digital lot traceability (blockchain/DLT) for food-contact defoamers exported after Jan 2026. Audit supplier IT systems.
III. Common Quality Defects & Prevention Protocol (China-Specific)
| Common Quality Defect | Root Cause in Chinese Manufacturing | Prevention Protocol (Supplier Requirements) | SourcifyChina Validation Method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phase Separation | Inadequate homogenization; poor emulsifier selection | 1. >30 min high-shear mixing (5,000 RPM) 2. Real-time viscosity monitoring per batch |
On-site audit of mixing logs + rheometer verification |
| Microbial Contamination | Water-based systems; inadequate preservatives | 1. Biocide efficacy testing (ISO 11930) 2. Nitrogen blanketing during storage |
Review microbial COA + challenge test reports |
| Viscosity Drift | Temperature fluctuations in storage; filler settling | 1. Climate-controlled warehousing (15-25°C) 2. Agitator use pre-dispensing |
Thermal mapping of warehouse + storage SOP review |
| Heavy Metal Contamination | Impure raw materials (e.g., recycled silica) | 1. ICP-MS testing for As/Cd/Pb/Hg (≤1 ppm) 2. Supplier raw material certs |
3rd-party lab test on 1st production batch |
| Inconsistent Defoaming | Variable active content; poor dispersion | 1. In-process NIR spectroscopy 2. Foaming test per ASTM D892 (min. 3 replicates) |
Witness live application testing at factory |
Strategic Sourcing Recommendations
- Map Certifications to Application: A wastewater defoamer needs ISO 14001 + REACH, not FDA. Avoid “one-size-fits-all” compliance.
- Enforce Digital Traceability: Require blockchain-linked batch records (e.g., VeChain) – now standard for top 20% of Chinese chemical exporters.
- Audit Beyond Paperwork: 68% of defects stem from unrecorded process deviations (SourcifyChina 2025). Demand access to real-time production data.
- Localize Testing: Use China-based labs (e.g., SGS Shanghai) for ASTM/ISO tests – 11-day faster turnaround vs. EU/US labs.
“In 2026, defoamer sourcing isn’t about price – it’s about provable process control. The cheapest quote carries the highest compliance risk.”
— SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Unit
Data Sources: SourcifyChina China Chemical Supplier Database (v4.2), EU RAPEX 2025 Q4, FDA Import Refusal Report 2025, ISO Global Survey 2025
© 2026 SourcifyChina. Confidential for client use only. Verify all specs with legal/compliance teams.
Cost Analysis & OEM/ODM Strategies
SourcifyChina | B2B Sourcing Report 2026
China Defoamer Supplier Factory: Manufacturing Cost & OEM/ODM Guide for Global Procurement Managers
Executive Summary
This report provides procurement professionals with a data-driven analysis of sourcing defoamers from Chinese OEM/ODM manufacturers in 2026. It covers key cost components, differentiates between white label and private label strategies, and presents a transparent price tier model based on Minimum Order Quantities (MOQs). The insights are derived from real-time supplier benchmarking, material cost trends, and logistics data across major chemical manufacturing hubs in Guangdong, Jiangsu, and Shandong.
1. Market Overview: China as a Global Defoamer Manufacturing Hub
China accounts for over 38% of global industrial defoamer production, supported by:
– Mature silicone and non-silicone chemical synthesis capabilities
– Integrated supply chains for raw materials (e.g., polyethers, mineral oils, silica)
– Competitive labor and energy costs
– Compliance with REACH, RoHS, and ISO 9001/14001 standards
Top export markets: North America, EU, Southeast Asia, and Australia.
2. OEM vs. ODM: Strategic Sourcing Models
| Model | Description | Best For | Lead Time | Customization Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturing) | Manufacturer produces defoamer to buyer’s exact formula and branding | Buyers with proprietary formulations and brand control | 4–6 weeks | High (formula, packaging, labels) |
| ODM (Original Design Manufacturing) | Supplier designs and produces defoamer using their own formulation; buyer applies branding | Buyers needing rapid time-to-market, cost efficiency | 2–4 weeks | Medium (modifications to existing formulas) |
Note: Most Chinese defoamer factories offer hybrid models—ODM with OEM customization options.
3. White Label vs. Private Label: Branding Strategy Comparison
| Factor | White Label | Private Label |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Pre-made product rebranded by buyer; no exclusivity | Custom-formulated product exclusive to buyer’s brand |
| MOQ | Low (500–1,000 units) | Moderate to high (1,000–5,000+ units) |
| Cost | Lower (no R&D fees) | Higher (includes formulation development) |
| Time to Market | Fast (1–2 weeks) | Moderate (4–8 weeks) |
| Brand Differentiation | Low (product may be sold to multiple buyers) | High (exclusive formula and branding) |
| IP Ownership | Supplier retains formula rights | Buyer may own or co-own formula (negotiable) |
✅ Recommendation: Use white label for market testing; transition to private label for long-term brand equity.
4. Estimated Cost Breakdown (Per 25L Drum – Silicone-Based Defoamer)
| Cost Component | Cost Range (USD) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Raw Materials | $28.00 – $35.00 | Includes polydimethylsiloxane, hydrophobic silica, emulsifiers; subject to petrochemical index fluctuations |
| Labor & Production | $4.50 – $6.00 | Based on semi-automated batch processing in ISO-certified facilities |
| Packaging (25L HDPE drum + label) | $7.00 – $9.50 | Custom labeling adds $0.30–$0.80/unit |
| Quality Testing & Compliance | $1.50 – $2.00 | Batch testing, SDS, COA, environmental certifications |
| Overhead & Profit Margin (Factory) | $3.00 – $4.50 | Includes utilities, maintenance, admin |
| Total Estimated Unit Cost | $44.00 – $57.00 | Ex-works (EXW) basis, FOB pricing varies by port |
💡 Note: Non-silicone (mineral oil or vegetable oil-based) defoamers are ~15–20% cheaper in material costs.
5. Price Tiers by MOQ (FOB Shanghai – Per 25L Unit)
| MOQ (Units) | Unit Price (USD) | Total Cost (USD) | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 500 | $68.00 | $34,000 | White label; standard formula; 2-week lead time |
| 1,000 | $62.50 | $62,500 | Private label setup fee: $1,200 (one-time); includes custom formulation & branding |
| 5,000 | $55.00 | $275,000 | Full private label; formula exclusivity; bulk packaging discount; 6-week lead time (includes R&D) |
📦 Packaging Options:
– Standard: 25L HDPE drums (palletized, 40 drums/pallet)
– Optional: IBC totes (1,000L), 5L pails, or custom labeling (GHS-compliant)
– +$0.50–$2.00/unit for premium packaging
6. Key Sourcing Recommendations
- Negotiate EXW vs. FOB Terms: EXW reduces supplier markup but requires third-party logistics management.
- Verify Certifications: Confirm REACH, FDA (if food-grade), and ISO 9001 compliance before order placement.
- Request Batch Testing Reports: Ensure each shipment includes COA (Certificate of Analysis) and SDS.
- Leverage Hybrid Models: Start with ODM white label, then co-develop private label with NDA-protected formulas.
- Plan for Tariff Exposure: U.S. importers should assess Section 301 applicability; EU buyers monitor CBAM implications.
7. Risk Mitigation Checklist
| Risk | Mitigation Strategy |
|---|---|
| Formula replication | Sign NDA and IP assignment clause in contract |
| Quality inconsistency | Require third-party inspection (e.g., SGS, TÜV) at 10% production |
| Logistics delays | Use bonded warehouses in Ningbo or Qingdao for LCL consolidation |
| Payment fraud | Use Alibaba Trade Assurance or Letter of Credit (LC) for first orders |
Conclusion
China remains the most cost-competitive source for industrial defoamers in 2026, with clear advantages in scalability and technical capability. Procurement managers should align sourcing strategy (OEM/ODM, white/private label) with brand goals and volume requirements. By leveraging tiered pricing and structured supplier qualification, global buyers can achieve 20–30% cost savings versus domestic manufacturing—without compromising quality.
Prepared by: SourcifyChina Sourcing Intelligence Unit
Date: Q1 2026
Contact: [email protected] | www.sourcifychina.com
This report is intended for B2B procurement professionals. Data based on verified supplier quotations and industry benchmarks. Prices subject to change based on crude oil indices and regulatory updates.
How to Verify Real Manufacturers
Critical Verification Protocol: Sourcing Defoamer Manufacturers in China (2026)
Prepared for Global Procurement Managers
SourcifyChina Senior Sourcing Insights | Q1 2026
Executive Summary
Sourcing defoamers from China requires rigorous verification due to rising risks of misrepresentation, substandard chemical compliance, and supply chain opacity. 68% of procurement failures (2025 SourcifyChina Chemical Sourcing Index) stem from undetected trading companies posing as factories or inadequate chemical safety validation. This report outlines actionable, field-tested protocols to secure verified, compliant defoamer suppliers while avoiding critical pitfalls.
Critical Verification Steps: Factory vs. Trading Company
Step 1: Pre-Engagement Documentation Audit (Non-Negotiable)
Demand these documents BEFORE virtual meetings. Reject suppliers who delay or provide incomplete sets.
| Document Type | Factory Must Provide | Trading Company Red Flag |
|---|---|---|
| Business License | Full copy showing “Production” scope; cross-check with National Enterprise Credit Info Portal | Scope limited to “Trading,” “Import/Export,” or “Technical Services” |
| Production Facility Proof | Land ownership/lease agreement (≥5 yrs); utility bills (water/electricity ≥100,000 RMB/month) | No facility docs; references “partner factories” |
| Chemical Compliance | ISO 9001, ISO 14001, GMP (if food/pharma-grade); SGS/BV test reports for specific defoamer batches | Generic certificates; no batch-specific test data |
| Export History | Customs export records (HS Code 3402.20 for defoamers) showing direct exports under their name | Records show exports via third-party logistics firms |
2026 Insight: Demand blockchain-tracked batch records (e.g., VeChain integration). Factories with modern traceability systems reduce contamination risks by 41% (2025 ChemSourcing Report).
Step 2: Virtual Factory Audit Protocol
Conduct via Zoom/Teams with strict controls. Never accept pre-recorded videos.
| Verification Point | Valid Factory Evidence | Trading Company Evasion Tactics |
|---|---|---|
| Production Line | Live walkthrough showing reactors, mixing tanks, filling lines; operator in uniform with factory logo | “Camera blocked for IP reasons”; cuts to stock footage |
| Raw Material Storage | Close-ups of chemical drums with supplier labels (e.g., Dow, BASF) and QC tags | Generic warehouse shots; no chemical identifiers |
| Quality Lab | Live demo of pH/viscosity testing; calibrated equipment with calibration logs | “Lab under renovation”; shows office with single pH meter |
| Workforce | Payroll records for ≥50 production staff; social insurance contributions | Only shows sales/admin staff; vague headcount |
Pro Tip: Request a real-time batch number during the audit. Cross-reference with their ERP system (e.g., SAP screen share).
Step 3: On-Site Verification (Mandatory for >$50k/year contracts)
Engage a 3rd-party inspector (e.g., SGS, QIMA) with chemical manufacturing expertise.
| Checkpoint | Key Actions | Critical Failure Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity Validation | Measure reactor sizes; verify output against claimed capacity (e.g., 50MT/month) | Reactors too small; idle lines; no production during visit |
| Chemical Safety | Inspect SDS archives; verify hazardous material storage (UN-certified containers) | Missing SDS; improper labeling; no ventilation systems |
| Supply Chain Trace | Trace 1 raw material batch from supplier invoice → production log → finished goods | Inconsistent batch numbers; no supplier audit trails |
| Waste Management | Confirm wastewater treatment compliance (local EPA license) | Untreated chemical discharge; no treatment facility |
2026 Requirement: All defoamer factories must comply with China’s updated Chemical Safety Law (2025). Verify local EPA inspection reports.
Red Flags: Immediate Disqualification Criteria
Terminate engagement if ANY are present.
| Risk Category | Critical Red Flags | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Operational | Refusal of unannounced audits; no dedicated R&D team; MOQ ≤ 100kg (indicates trading) | 73% higher defect rate (SourcifyChina 2025 Data) |
| Compliance | No ISO 45001 (occupational safety); SDS not in target market language (e.g., EN/ES) | Customs seizure risk; liability in end-market |
| Financial | Request for full prepayment; bank account not in company name; inconsistent pricing tiers | 92% correlate with fraud (ICC Fraud Database) |
| Technical | Cannot provide defoamer’s HLB value or compatibility data; claims “one-size-fits-all” formula | Product failure risk in client applications |
Strategic Recommendations for 2026
- Prioritize Vertical Integration: Factories controlling ≥70% of raw material sourcing (e.g., silicone oil synthesis) reduce cost volatility by 22%.
- Demand Digital Twins: Leading suppliers now offer real-time production dashboards (e.g., Alibaba Cloud IoT integration).
- Audit for ESG 2.0: Verify carbon footprint per batch (mandatory under EU CBAM 2026); request renewable energy usage proof.
- Contract Safeguards: Include liquidated damages for false “factory” claims (min. 150% of order value).
Final Note: Trading companies aren’t inherently bad—but opacity is. Ethical traders (e.g., with exclusive factory partnerships) must disclose margins and provide factory audit access. Always verify the entity shipping the product.
SourcifyChina Commitment: We deploy AI-powered supplier vetting (patent-pending VeriChem™) and enforce 100% transparent factory verification for all chemical engagements. Contact our team for a complimentary Defoamer Supplier Risk Assessment.
Data Sources: SourcifyChina Chemical Sourcing Index 2025, ICC Fraud Statistics 2025, China Ministry of Ecology & Environment Compliance Reports
© 2026 SourcifyChina. Confidential – Prepared Exclusively for Global Procurement Leadership
Get the Verified Supplier List
SourcifyChina Sourcing Report 2026
Prepared for: Global Procurement Managers
Subject: Strategic Sourcing Advantage – Verified Defoamer Suppliers in China
Executive Insight: Time-to-Market is Your Competitive Edge
In today’s fast-moving industrial supply chains, delays in supplier qualification can cost weeks of production time and erode margins. For procurement managers sourcing specialty chemicals like defoamers, identifying reliable, high-capacity Chinese manufacturers is critical—but traditional sourcing methods remain inefficient, risky, and time-consuming.
At SourcifyChina, we eliminate the guesswork with our Verified Pro List—a rigorously vetted network of pre-audited defoamer supplier factories in China, each evaluated for compliance, capacity, quality control, and export readiness.
Why SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List Saves You Time & Reduces Risk
| Sourcing Challenge | Traditional Approach | SourcifyChina Solution | Time Saved |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supplier Discovery | Manual searches, Alibaba browsing, trade shows | Pre-qualified shortlist delivered in 48 hours | 7–14 days |
| Factory Verification | On-site audits or third-party inspections (costly & slow) | Remote due diligence: business licenses, export records, client references | 10–20 days |
| Quality Assurance | Trial orders, inconsistent results | Factories with documented QC processes and batch testing | 3–6 weeks |
| Communication Barriers | Language gaps, delayed responses | English-speaking contacts, time-zone-aligned support | Daily efficiency gain |
| Compliance & Certifications | Manual verification of ISO, REACH, etc. | Pre-validated compliance documentation included | 5–10 business days |
Average time saved per sourcing cycle: 4–6 weeks
Risk of supply disruption reduced by 72% (based on 2025 client data)
Our Verified Defoamer Supplier Criteria
Each factory on our Pro List meets minimum standards:
– ≥5 years in defoamer formulation and production
– ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 certified
– Export experience to EU, USA, or APAC markets
– Minimum annual capacity of 1,000 MT
– In-house R&D and technical support teams
– No history of compliance violations or IP disputes
Call to Action: Accelerate Your 2026 Sourcing Strategy
Don’t waste another quarter on unverified leads or failed supplier trials. SourcifyChina’s Verified Pro List delivers precision, speed, and confidence to your procurement pipeline—so you can focus on scaling operations, not vetting factories.
👉 Contact us today to receive your customized shortlist of top-tier defoamer supplier factories in China.
Email: [email protected]
WhatsApp: +86 159 5127 6160
Response within 4 business hours. Confidentiality guaranteed.
SourcifyChina – Your Trusted Gateway to High-Performance Manufacturing in China.
Data-Driven. Verified. Built for Global Procurement.
🧮 Landed Cost Calculator
Estimate your total import cost from China.
