A By Janson Wang , CEO of ASG Dropshipping · Updated 2026-09-10 · 25 min read
Photograph used for illustration; this is not evidence that a particular inspection stage was performed or passed. IPC, DUPRO, PSI and CLC are not four levels of strictness. They are four points where a third party can step into your order: early production, mid-run, finished goods, and the loading event. Which of them are open to you depends on what physically exists right now, where it sits, whether the goods to be checked can be defined, and whether someone can get access at the right moment.
Goods that were not produced for your order do not rule out a pre-shipment inspection. Several factories feeding one shipment do not rule out supervising a container. What decides it is whether you can name the SKUs, lots and quantity to be checked, agree how the sample gets drawn, and put someone on site. So ask the provider to write that scope into the quote. The acronym on its own will not tell you what you bought.
Key Takeaways
The four acronyms mark intervention points, not tiers. QIMA puts its initial production check “from before your production begins up until 20% has been completed”, its during-production check at 20%, and its pre-shipment inspection at 80% (as of 2026-09-10).The during-production number is a parameter, not a constant. Five providers publish figures spanning 10% to 80%. The one that binds anyone is the one written into your quote.Stock goods are not automatically out of scope. The Inspection Company states its pre-shipment inspection is “typically performed at the supplier’s factory or warehouse”. What you have to define is the quantity, the lot, the sampling method and the site access.The stage name does not tell you which tests you bought. QIMA’s pre-shipment procedure page lists pull, fatigue and stretch tests for zippers, buttons and accessories, and also says some safety tests have to be done in a laboratory.A passed sampling inspection is not a defect-free shipment. NIST’s handbook describes an AQL as a probability-based design target carrying risk on both sides, not a ceiling on the defects in an accepted lot. A note on the sources in this article
Every trigger point, service scope and stated limit below comes from a provider’s own published page — QIMA, SGS, Intertek, TÜV SÜD, V-Trust, AmREP, ECQA, SVI Global and The Inspection Company — plus two published terms of service, a US government statistics handbook and two practitioner sites, all read on 2026-09-10. Most carry no publication date, so we record the day we read them. A company’s service page is a first-party record of what that company sells, not a rule the industry has agreed on.
Open an inspection quote and you may see four lines: IPC, DUPRO, PSI, CLC. Each line has a price. Often none has an explanation.
These four terms describe when someone gets access to your goods, not how hard they look. QIMA puts an initial production check “from before your production begins up until 20% has been completed”. Its during-production page starts at 20% of the order. Its pre-shipment page starts at 80%. A container loading check is different again. It sits on a shipping event, not on a production percentage (as of 2026-09-10).
It is easy to read the list as a ladder. Light check, medium check, heavy check, final check. Then you pick the rung that matches how nervous the supplier makes you feel.
That instinct is understandable. It is also the wrong axis.
Here’s why the distinction reaches your wallet. If these were severity tiers, picking one would be a budget decision. Because they are access points, picking one is a question about your order: what exists, where it is, and who can reach it.
The acronym tells you when someone shows up. It does not tell you what they will do when they get there.
So the first move is not comparing prices. It is working out which moments your order still passes through, and what you would have to define before anyone could quote them. The next section does that in one table, and everything after it is the evidence behind the rows.
Takeaway: treat the four acronyms as points of access, then ask which points this order still reaches.
You can run this today without calling anyone. Find the row that matches what physically exists right now, and read across.
The output of this table is a shortlist of services worth quoting, not a purchase. Two rows produce a combination, because QIMA states that an initial production check alone cannot ensure finished-goods quality, and that a container loading check should not be relied on in place of a fuller pre-shipment inspection. Neither statement means two stages are needed on any given order. Take the row, then confirm the scope with a provider.
Which stages fit the order on your desk
What physically exists right now
Stages worth quoting
What you have to define first
Materials staged, the line barely started IPC, with DUPRO booked for later Which materials and first-off units, against which specification, and what site access is needed
The line is running, with work in progress to look atDUPRO, then a finished-goods check later Which processes to observe, who calls the date, what happens if the factory is behind
Goods finished and mostly packed , at the factory or a warehousePSI SKUs, lots, quantity presented, how the sample is drawn, the standard, site access
Goods finished but not produced for your order — allocated from existing stockPSI is still worth asking about. Production history alone is not a reason to rule it outThe same five items. The Inspection Company states its PSI is typically performed at the supplier’s factory or warehouse
Goods from several factories, consolidated at one warehouse Finished-goods inspection at the consolidation point Sampling scope per SKU and per lot. This covers the goods present; it does not audit any factory’s production process
A loading event someone can attend Loading supervision, alongside the finished-goods check Location, goods covered, container and seal numbers, when supervision ends, who may pause it
Courier parcels, with no loading event to attend Finished-goods check on a staged quantity, if one exists Where the goods sit still long enough to be counted (see Stock pulls, several factories, courier bags )
Every provider statement behind these rows is quoted, with a link, in What each stage actually inspects , The percentage that moves with your product and What each stage needs before it can happen . Rows are not exclusive over time: an order in row two today is in row three a fortnight later. Re-run the table when production, packing or loading status changes, and again before any booking deadline.
Note what the table refuses to do. There is no risk score: no frequency multiplied by order value multiplied by complexity, no weighted total, no ranking out of ten. Multiplying three subjective ratings produces a decimal point that only makes a judgement look like a measurement.
Take the row that matches your order and put it in the email you were about to send your supplier. Want a second pair of eyes on which row you are in? Bring the purchase order and the shipping mode and talk to the ASG team .
Takeaway: answer “what physically exists right now”, take the row, and ask the provider to confirm the scope in the third column.
Photograph used for illustration; this is not an independent inspection certificate or proof a specific test was completed. Each of these services answers one narrow question. The providers say so on their own pages. The skill worth having is knowing which question you are buying.
An initial production check looks at materials and the first units off the line. A during-production inspection looks at units while the run can still be adjusted. A pre-shipment inspection looks at finished goods, sampled, visually and functionally. A container loading check combines a product sample with supervision of the agreed loading process. Two of the four pages say plainly that they do not replace the others.
What each stage actually inspects — and what it cannot
Stage
When the provider says it happens
What the page says it looks at
What that page does not promise
IPC — initial production check QIMA: “from before your production begins up until 20% has been completed”. SVI Global : typically around 0–20%. TÜV SÜD : up to 20% produced
Raw materials, the first items produced, workmanship against spec, packaging setup
Finished-goods quality. QIMA’s own page states that an IPC “alone cannot ensure the quality of finished products”
DUPRO — during-production inspection Published wording spans 10%–80%, depending on the provider (see The percentage that moves with your product )
Units in the line, how the run is organised and paced, product specification, packaging
Anything produced after the inspector leaves. The run continues without them
PSI / FRI — pre-shipment or final random inspection SGS : “Conducted when 100 per cent of your goods are produced and at least 80 per cent are packed and ready for dispatch”. QIMA: at least 80% complete. ECQA : same as SGSFinished goods, sampled to an AQL plan — SGS uses ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 (ISO 2859-1). QIMA describes the assessment as visual and functional. The Inspection Company states it is typically performed at the supplier’s factory or warehouse
Anything the agreed checklist leaves out. QIMA states that while some safety checks can be done on site, they “cannot replace tests performed in a laboratory”
CLC / CLS — container loading check or supervision While the goods are being loaded. V-Trust : “normally applicable to the FCL (full container load) shipments”
QIMA describes selecting a product sample and then closely supervising the entire loading process, verifying quantities, barcodes, labelling and packing materialsProduct quality in depth. QIMA says a CLC “should not be relied upon as a substitute for a more thorough pre-shipment inspection (PSI)”
“It cannot check that” is six problems, not one
Listing only what inspection misses would leave the wrong impression — that standing at a packing table catches everything else. The misses sort into levels, and each level needs a different tool.
“It cannot check that” is six problems, not one
What kind of problem
Which of these services can surface it
What it takes to find
Visible on the surface — scratches, colour, print, missing partsAll four, inside their agreed scope
Trained eyes, plus a defect standard agreed beforehand
Checkable against a spec — dimensions, weight, material list, label contentIPC, DUPRO and PSI, where a written criteria sheet exists
A document. Without one, “correct” is an opinion — which is why What to ask a provider before you sign asks who writes it
Functional — does it power on, does the zip run, does the app pairQIMA describes PSI as assessing finished goods visually and functionally; a during-production check tests units in the line
Bench testing of sampled units, against a written pass/fail rule
Durability of components, on site — pull, fatigue, stretch, sharp edges, weak hingesPossible, but only if the checklist names it. QIMA’s pre-shipment procedure page lists pull, fatigue and stretch tests for zippers, buttons and accessories, plus certain mechanical safety checksA named method, sample count and pass/fail rule, written in before the visit
Long-term reliability and compliance — ageing, chemical content, full safety standardsLaboratory work. QIMA states some safety tests have to be carried out in a laboratory, and that on-site checks cannot replace themDefined methods, samples, duration, report and fee — quoted separately
Only appears once a customer uses it — intermittent faults, real-world compatibilityNone of these on-site checks
Field data — returns, warranty claims, support tickets — plus a route back to the batch
Look at the last two rows. That is where the disappointment in this category tends to come from.
A buyer pays for a pre-shipment inspection. The report says pass. Weeks later a hinge fatigues in customers’ hands. Two readings are available, and the report alone will not settle which applies. The failure mode may have sat outside the agreed checklist. Or the checklist covered it, and the method, sample size or execution was not enough. Which one it was decides what you change next.
One naming note. You may also see Pre-Production Inspection or First Article Inspection . On the two QIMA pages I checked on 2026-09-10 those are not separate line items — which is what those two pages show, not a statement that the service does not exist. So read the scope paragraph under the acronym on the quote in front of you.
Takeaway: write down which of the levels above actually worries you for this SKU, then check whether the checklist you are buying operates at that level at all.
During-production inspection is the stage where a fixed number is easiest to assume. Five providers publish five different ones, and they are not all describing the same kind of number.
The completion percentage attached to a during-production inspection is a parameter each provider sets. It is not a certified constant. Published wording runs from 10% to 80%, and some of it states a minimum readiness point while some states a window. The right moment depends on how the product is built and how the run is scheduled, so any percentage quoted without those inputs is incomplete (all figures as of 2026-09-10).
The percentage that moves with your product
Provider
Published timing or readiness wording
What kind of number it is
Intertek “normally when 10-15% of the merchandise is completed”
A typical window
QIMA when at least 20% of the order is complete
A minimum readiness point, not a single moment
TÜV SÜD about 20–40% complete, with packing started
A window plus a packing condition
SGS, via its TIC Mall booking page random check on site when 30–50% of production is finished
A window on that booking page
ECQA approximately 20% to 80% of production completed
A wide execution range
Read that column top to bottom and the tempting conclusion is “these firms disagree”. That is not the honest reading. Each page shows where that firm sets its own default, and in what form.
What moves the right moment is the product and the schedule, not a rule. A single-process moulded run may stabilise early, so catching drift early can make sense. A hand-assembled product fed by many component suppliers may not show its real failure mode until later. Both are examples, not laws — the first row of the quote checklist in What to ask a provider before you sign gives the opposite case, where an early visit suits a multi-component assembly.
QCADVISOR , which provides inspection and audit services and also publishes comparisons like this one, puts the overall range at 10–80%. It says the timing guidance it found rests on product complexity, production schedules and supplier recommendations. That is one aggregator’s summary rather than an independent survey, and it lines up with the provider pages read side by side.
A percentage with no product attached to it is not a standard. It is a default.
So the question to put in an email is not “do you do DUPRO”. Try these three instead:
At what completion point do you send someone, and is that point fixed or set per product?
Who decides the date — you, us, or the factory’s own progress report?
If the factory is behind schedule the morning of the visit, what happens to the booking and the fee?
The third one matters more than it looks. A missed window compresses the time left to correct anything, and it can quietly turn a during-production booking into a very late finished-goods check. V-Trust’s published terms put a price on exactly that case, which is covered in Bookable is not the same as worth buying .
Each figure above is what that provider publishes as its own operating default, read on 2026-09-10. None of those pages cites a standards body behind its number, and none of them is a promise about your product.
Takeaway: get the trigger point written into the quote as a number, plus a rule for who calls the date. A verbal “we usually go around a third of the way” is not something you can hold anyone to.
Photograph used for illustration; this is not evidence that a specific inspection stage was performed or passed. Every one of these services has readiness conditions. They are stated on provider pages, but rarely presented as conditions. Reading them as conditions is what turns a quote into a plan.
A stage is available when three things line up: there is something to look at, someone can get access to it, and the scope has been defined in writing. SGS states that its final random inspection is “Conducted when 100 per cent of your goods are produced and at least 80 per cent are packed and ready for dispatch”. V-Trust states that container loading supervision is “normally applicable to the FCL (full container load) shipments”. Those are readiness statements about those services, not rules about who produced the goods.
What each stage needs before it can happen
Stage
What has to exist
What has to be agreed in advance
IPC Materials and early production that can still be observed
Which materials and first-off units, against which specification, and the site conditions needed
DUPRO Relevant processes actually running, with enough work in progress to examine
Which processes, how the date is called, and what happens if the goods are not ready
PSI A defined quantity of finished goods at a location someone can reach. SGS states 100% produced and at least 80% packed for its final random inspection; The Inspection Company states its PSI is typically performed at the supplier’s factory or warehouse
SKUs and lots, the quantity presented, how the sample is drawn, the standard applied, and access
CLC A loading event someone can attend
Location, goods covered, container and seal numbers, when supervision ends, and who may pause the load
The denominator is the lot, not the run
Read the SGS sentence as engineering rather than marketing copy. “100 per cent of your goods are produced” and “at least 80 per cent are packed” are both percentages, and a percentage needs a denominator.
The denominator is the quantity submitted for inspection. The statistical name for it is the lot. NIST’s handbook describes acceptance sampling as drawing a random sample from a lot in order to decide whether to accept or reject that lot.
A lot is not the same thing as a production run. One run can be submitted as several lots. Several runs can be submitted as one lot. Who defines the lot is something you settle with the supplier and the inspector, and it is worth pinning down before anyone quotes.
That distinction removes a bad exclusion. “These goods were not produced for my order” does not, on its own, put a finished-goods inspection out of reach. What you have to do is point at a quantity, say which SKUs and lots it contains, agree how the sample gets pulled, and get someone through the door.
Supervision, and the authority to act on it
Watching a load is not the same as being able to stop one. Those are settled in the contract, not in the service description.
Two published terms of service make the split visible, and both carry the same exception. QIMA’s conditions of service state that no party other than the client is entitled to give instructions on the scope of the services or delivery of the report, “unless duly authorized by the Client in writing”, and that the client is solely responsible for the accuracy of the specifications it provides and for any actions taken or not taken on the basis of the report. V-Trust’s general terms use the same construction — no party other than the client may instruct V-Trust on the scope of inspection or delivery of report, “unless so authorized by the client” — and add that the report reflects findings at the time and place of service and “does not discharge sellers and/or suppliers from their legal and/or commercial obligations towards the client”.
That exception is the part worth reading twice if anyone else touches your order. A sourcing agent, a buying office or a colleague can direct the inspector — but only through an authorisation you grant. QIMA’s wording requires that authorisation in writing; V-Trust’s does not say. So decide who holds it, and put it in writing whether or not the provider makes you.
Under both sets of terms the inspector reports facts inside a scope you, or someone you authorised, defined. Neither document says who releases a shipment. Where that decision sits — pause, rework, reject, pay, release — is a question for your purchase and payment contracts. Two providers’ published terms are not an industry rule, so read the ones attached to your own quote, and write down in advance who may call a halt, who carries it out, and who signs off on release.
Takeaway: for the order on your desk, write down the quantity to be checked, where it will be, who defines the lot, and who may act on the result. Those four answers turn a stage name into a bookable job.
Photograph used for illustration; this is not evidence of a specific lab test or compliance result. Three common e-commerce shapes do not look like the one-batch, one-sailing-date picture the stage vocabulary is built around. All three can still be verified. What changes is what you define, not whether you are allowed.
Suppose a supplier fills your order from stock that already exists. A during-production inspection has nothing to observe, because that production is finished. A finished-goods inspection is still worth asking about, provided you can define the quantity, the SKUs and lots, the sampling method, the standard and the site access. Identity checks at handover sit underneath that, not instead of it.
The stock pull
You place a reorder. The supplier allocates from what is on the shelf. The goods leave the same week. Nothing was manufactured against your purchase order.
Ask “should I book a during-production inspection” here and the question has no target. That production already happened, possibly months ago.
A finished-goods check is a different matter. Define the quantity to be presented, the SKUs and lots inside it, how the sample gets drawn and against which standard, and where the inspector can reach the goods. Then ask a provider to confirm it. Alongside the visual and functional checks, identity work is worth doing in its own right:
Lot and date code. Confirm which lot this actually is and whether it conforms. A new lot is normal on a reorder, not a warning sign in itself.Packaging version. Artwork, insert, barcode, manual revision. Quiet substitutions show up here first.Physical match to a retained sample. Keep one approved unit sealed. Compare against it, not against memory.Quantity and mix at receipt , before the goods disappear into your fulfilment flow.
Consolidating several reorders into one scheduled run is one way to get a production timeline back, and it is a purchasing decision before it is a QC decision. It also costs something: more inventory, more cash tied up, a longer wait for the first unit. Weigh it as an option, not a step you have to take to earn an inspection. Our sourcing and purchasing page covers how that coordination works.
One order, three factories
How many visits this needs depends on the purpose of the inspection, where the goods are, whether they have already been consolidated, and which lots you need covered. It is not decided by counting factories. If everything is already sitting in one warehouse, a finished-goods inspection can be discussed there, with sampling scope defined per SKU and per lot. What it does not give you is any statement about how each factory ran its production.
Loading supervision survives this shape too. The question is whether there is a loading event someone can attend, with the goods, the container and the seals identified. Where freight is combined with other shippers’ cargo instead, AmREP describes a narrower job at that handover: verifying your count and product identity before the goods go into a shared container. The scope you need follows the event, not the number of plants.
Air express and small parcels
If your goods leave in courier bags, there is no loading event of the kind these services describe, and I did not find a provider offering an equivalent for that channel. A finished-goods check still applies wherever a staged quantity exists before the parcels are broken out — a scheduling question to negotiate with the supplier.
Most published guides on this topic explain each service on its own terms. Matching that scope to one specific order is the work this article is doing.
Takeaway: if this order does not look like one batch and one sailing date, do not stop shopping for a stage. Define the goods, the place and the access first, then ask which services fit.
You paid for the inspection, the report said pass, and six weeks later the complaints started anyway. That is not automatically evidence you bought the wrong stage. It is worth understanding what a sampling method does and does not promise.
The product inspections in this article are sampling-based: they examine the sample the plan defines, not every unit. SGS runs its acceptance sampling to ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 (ISO 2859-1). Other coverage follows the agreed scope rather than the stage name — QIMA describes its container loading check as sampling products and supervising the entire loading process. A lot can be accepted and still carry defects.
Two independent sources say the same thing about what an AQL is. The practitioner blog qualityinspection.org , written by Renaud Anjoran and affiliated with the Sofeast group, states that an AQL limit is a target rather than a maximum. NIST’s handbook on sampling plans puts it in statistical terms: an AQL is a design target where the plan gives a high probability of accepting a lot at or below that defect level, and every plan carries a producer’s risk and a consumer’s risk.
Anjoran’s second sentence is the harder one: “A statistical QC approach does nothing to reduce the defects in the first place.”
A sampling plan sorts lots into accept and reject. It does not change what the line produced. The report is a screen, not a repair.
What actually moves the number
Three things do move it, and none is a bigger inspection line item.
Move the check to where the fault is still fixable. QIMA describes a during-production inspection as reviewing the product while the factory is still completing stages of the run. Finding a fault at 30% increases the chance of stopping it, adjusting the process or reworking cheaply. Whether that happens depends on the corrective action, who has authority to order it, and whether it gets carried out.Buy the test the sampling does not cover. Agree which checks happen on site and which need a laboratory, with methods, sample counts and fees attached to each.Route field failures back to a lot number. Returns and warranty tickets add real-world information that on-site and laboratory checks did not cover. Without lot traceability you lose the ability to locate the affected scope and trace the cause, though the data can still support SKU, use-case and design analysis.
None of that produces a defect-free shipment, and I would be sceptical of anyone offering you one. It shortens the gap between a fault being made and a fault being found.
Takeaway: a final acceptance report is the acceptance step at the end of a plan, not the plan itself. Put the criteria sheet and the earlier checkpoint in place first.
“We’re too small for third-party inspection” is an objection that blends three separate questions into one. Pulling them apart is more useful than reassurance.
Three different questions hide inside “can I get this inspected”. Can the work be done on site? Will a company take the booking on these terms? Does the inspection change a decision worth its fee on this order? A published note that small orders may not repay the cost answers the third question only. It does not tell you whether the first two are settled.
Bookable is not the same as worth buying
The question
What it actually asks
Technical feasibility Is there something to check, is it accessible, is it ready, and are the equipment and time available?
Commercial bookability Will the provider accept this site, product, date and scope — and on what terms for minimum fees, travel, rescheduling and abortive visits?
Economic value For this order, what decision does the inspection change, and is that worth the cost?
SVI Global writes that an initial production inspection “may provide limited value for very small orders where the inspection cost outweighs the potential quality risk.” That is a value judgement about one stage on one order, published by a company that sells it. It belongs in the third row, and it is worth taking seriously there.
The second row has published evidence too, and it cuts the other way from “just book it”. V-Trust’s general terms state that where an inspection has to be cancelled on the intended day because of wrong information from the client or the factory, the man-day is considered spent and charged as a “missed inspection” fee. QIMA’s conditions of service require the client’s instructions and specifications to be clear and accurate. Bookability comes with conditions, and readiness is one of them.
When a provider says the service suits big orders
ECQA lists large-volume orders among the cases its during-production service suits. The Inspection Company calls that service “Best for new factories and big orders.”
Both statements describe how those providers position their own service. Neither tells you whether size makes the visit unworkable for you, so ask that directly in the sales call. Ask what specifically about the size is the obstacle — travel, minimum fee, quantity available to sample, or scheduling. Then ask whether it changes if two reorders arrive as one scheduled batch. If it dissolves at the second question, it was a scheduling problem wearing a size costume.
The strongest case for starting with PSI
If a small seller already has a clear, unchanged specification and a known finished good, starting with a PSI quote can be a reasonable, narrower entry point rather than rebuilding the whole sequence from scratch. Even then, the same questions still need answers before the quote means anything: which lot is being confirmed, what access and timing the inspector actually has, which tests apply to this product, and who is positioned to act on what the inspection finds. IPC, DUPRO, PSI, and CLC exist to keep those answers tied to the specific goods in front of you — otherwise a service that is simply available gets treated as one that fits, which is a different mistake.
Takeaway: before you accept “your order is too small”, ask which of the three rows above it belongs to. The answer decides whether you negotiate, reschedule, or skip the check on purpose.
Editorial checklist graphic; not an inspection certificate and not a severity ladder for inspection stages. Every provider page cited here is a sales page, including the honest ones. The questions below are the ones you cannot read off a website. Someone has to write the answers down for you.
Before you sign a quality control inspection contract, settle five things. What completion percentage triggers a during-production visit. Which tests are in the quote and where each is performed. Which loading arrangement fits your shipping mode. What a failed report does to your payment and your shipment. And who drafts and approves the acceptance criteria.
What to ask a provider before you sign
Ask this
Why it is worth asking
What a clear answer sounds like
“What completion percentage triggers your during-production visit, and will it go into the quote?” Five providers publish wording between 10% and 80%, and not all of it means the same kind of number
A figure, plus the rule for moving it — say 20%, brought forward for multi-component assemblies, agreed in writing per purchase order
“Which tests are included, which are excluded, and which need a laboratory?” The stage name settles neither question (see What each stage actually inspects )
A list of included and excluded tests, each marked on-site or laboratory, with method, sample count, duration, report scope and fee
“I ship LCL or by air express. What can be supervised, and at which event?” V-Trust scopes its full service to full container loads; AmREP describes a narrower handover check
The provider names the event, the location, the goods covered, and who is present
“If the inspection fails, does that hold the balance payment or stop the shipment by itself?” Published terms answer the neighbouring question, not this one. See below
Whatever they say, in writing, cross-read against the payment terms in your purchase contract
“Who drafts the inspection criteria and who approves them for this order?” Without an agreed criteria sheet, “conforms” is a matter of opinion
A named drafter, a named approver, and a document you have seen before the first visit rather than after the first dispute
The percentages in the first row come from the five provider pages in The percentage that moves with your product . The terms referred to in rows four and five are QIMA’s conditions of service and V-Trust’s general terms, both linked in What each stage needs before it can happen .
What the published terms do and do not settle
On who writes the criteria, QIMA’s pre-shipment page states that you may use its pre-designed checklists, modify them, or create completely custom checklists to match your specifications, regulatory requirements or brand standards. Its conditions of service state that no party other than the client may instruct it on scope, unless the client authorises that party in writing. The default therefore sits closer to you than the acronym suggests, and “you may customise it” is not the same as “somebody has”.
On what a failed report does to your money, the two sets of terms I read do not answer it. They say the report reflects findings at the time and place of service, does not discharge the supplier’s obligations to you, and leaves you responsible for actions taken on it. Whether your balance payment is held lives in your purchase contract, so ask both sides and get it in writing.
A compact quote checklist
Comparing two quotes for “PSI” compares two acronyms. Compare these seven lines instead, and you are comparing the same job.
A compact quote checklist
Quote element
What has to be stated
Goods and location
SKUs, lots, quantity, site, access conditions
Readiness
Completion and packing requirement, who confirms it, what happens if the goods are not ready
Method
Sampling plan or other coverage, standard applied, decision rule, any specific tests
Test resources
Equipment, fixtures, time required, destructive samples, laboratory arrangements
Deliverables
Report contents, what the result covers, photographs and records
Cost boundaries
Man-days, travel, extra tests, rescheduling, abortive visit, re-inspection
Authority afterwards
Who decides rework, pause, payment and final release
Where ASG fits, and what it does not replace
I run a sourcing company, so take the boundary first. ASG is a party to your order. We take part in sourcing and fulfilment, so our internal QC is not an external independent inspection, and we do not claim that role.
What we do carry: a purchase order attached to a named factory, a sealed retained sample, QC on what leaves our warehouses, and the supplier-side work of turning scattered reorders into one batch that can be presented for inspection.
If you want independent inspection, book one of the firms named in this article. We will work to the criteria sheet approved for your order, hand over the lot, packaging and shipping records they ask for, and schedule the visit against the run’s real progress rather than the factory’s optimism. Decisions on payment, holding a shipment, rework and final release stay where your contracts put them. See our shipping solutions page and our quality control page .
Send us the purchase order and shipping mode for the order on your desk. We will tell you which rows of Which stages fit the order on your desk apply, and which independent inspector we would book against it — start here .
Takeaway: put all five questions plus the seven-line checklist in one email before you sign. Two quotes for the same acronym can describe very different jobs.
The vocabulary on a quality control inspection quote describes the provider’s process, not your order. Each service has readiness conditions, a defined scope, and a set of decisions it does not make for you.
Comparing four line-item prices feels like diligence. It is the cheapest part of the decision. The parts that move money sit further down: which goods are being presented, which tests are actually in the quote, and who signs off on what the report triggers.
You do not need a quality department to run this. You need one row from Which stages fit the order on your desk , the seven-line quote checklist in What to ask a provider before you sign , and the willingness to make a provider write its answers down.
I’m Janson Wang, Founder and CEO of ASG Dropshipping, a China-based supply chain and fulfilment partner serving ecommerce sellers worldwide since 2019, built on 8 years of hands-on China sourcing experience. We run a 200+ team and 4 warehouses in Shenzhen and Dongguan. I write from the supplier side of an order, not from a standards committee.
Quick Answers About Inspection Stages
Are IPC, DUPRO, PSI and CLC four levels of strictness?
Who decides whether your goods ship after an inspection?
Is there one industry-standard percentage that triggers a during-production inspection?
Does a passed sampling inspection mean the shipment is defect-free?
Can a container loading check replace a pre-shipment inspection?
What is the difference between DUPRO and PSI?
Timing, and what can still be changed afterwards. A during-production inspection lands while the run is unfinished: Intertek publishes 10–15% completed, QIMA at least 20%, SGS’s booking page 30–50%. A fault it finds can still be corrected on the line, if someone has the authority to order that and it gets done. A pre-shipment inspection lands after the run: SGS conducts its final random inspection when 100% of the goods are produced and at least 80% are packed. By then your options are accept, rework or reject.
Can I book a pre-shipment inspection for goods that were not produced for my order?
It is worth asking, and production history alone is not a reason to rule it out. The Inspection Company states its pre-shipment inspection is typically performed at the supplier’s factory or warehouse. What you have to define is the quantity to be presented, the SKUs and lots inside it, how the sample is drawn, the standard applied, and site access. If you sell on Shopify and reorder the same SKU every few weeks, that is exactly the case where the goods exist but the timeline does not, so the definition work moves to the front.
Does a pre-shipment inspection include durability or laboratory testing?
The stage name does not settle it; the checklist and the quote do. QIMA’s pre-shipment procedure page lists pull, fatigue and stretch tests for zippers, buttons and accessories, plus certain mechanical safety checks such as sharp edges and weak hinges, as things that can be done during a pre-shipment inspection. The same page states that some safety tests need a laboratory and that on-site checks cannot replace laboratory testing. So ask for the list of included and excluded tests, each marked on-site or laboratory, with method, sample count and fee.
Do I need a container loading check if my order ships LCL or by air express?
It depends on the loading event, not on how many factories made the goods. V-Trust states that container loading supervision is normally applicable to full container load shipments. Where freight is combined with other shippers’ cargo, AmREP describes a narrower job at handover: verifying quantity and product identity before the goods enter a shared container. For courier and air express I found no provider offering a matching product — a statement about my search, not about the market.
How do I check that an inspection report is what it claims to be?
Decide what the report must contain before the visit, not after it. Ask for the site name and address attended with the date, the sampling standard and level applied, the quantity presented against the quantity sampled, and photographs of the goods and packing. Then read the report against the criteria sheet. Those four fields test completeness, not authenticity — for an order that matters, confirm the report number directly with the issuing company through its own channel. This is a working rule, not a published standard.
Every page listed here was opened on 2026-09-10. Sources are grouped by what kind of record they are.
Provider service pages — first-party statements of what that company sells
Published terms of service — what the contract documents say
QIMA — Conditions of Service — only the client instructs on scope, “unless duly authorized by the Client in writing”; client responsible for specifications and for actions taken on the report
V-Trust — General Terms of Inspection — clause 1.3, only the client instructs on scope “unless so authorized by the client”; client obligations; missed-inspection fee; report does not discharge supplier obligations
Statistical method — non-commercial reference
Practitioner sites — opinion and comparison, authorship stated
qualityinspection.org (Renaud Anjoran, affiliated with Sofeast) — What is the AQL? — an AQL limit is a target rather than a maximum
QCADVISOR — During Production Inspection — 10–80% aggregate range; inspection and audit provider
This article contains no ASG performance figures — no defect rate, no on-time rate, no order volume, no service-level number of any kind. The only ASG figures on the page sit in the author line: the year we started, the personal sourcing experience behind it, our team size and our warehouse count. Those come from ASG’s own company records rather than from any source above. What the “Where ASG fits, and what it does not replace” note says ASG does and does not do is a statement of scope, not a measured result.
