Category rating — not an assessment of any specific brand
This rating covers a typical, mass-market
sports and fitness product based on publicly available data.
It does not name or assess any specific manufacturer or product.
Individual products may perform better or worse.
Learn about verified ratings →
Below HIP Mark threshold
Score 2.5/10 — Standard mark requires 6.0
Standard
Silver
Gold
Category best achievable: 6.5
Depleting — materials are being used up with no way to replace them
This is what a typical electric scooter looks like today. You can fix it when something goes wrong. If the maker shares their data, the score usually goes up.
Category baseline
2.5 HIP
Below Standard
Category ceiling: 6.5 HIP
Regenerative Index
-7.0
Depleting
Category ceiling RI: -2.0
What this score means
This is the starting score for Electric Scooters, based only on public data. No maker has sent us
their own data yet. The ceiling score (shown below) is what a product can reach when the maker
shares real evidence. To close the gap, makers apply for a verified rating.
Make this product? You can raise this score.
The starting score for this category is 2.5 HIP.
With full evidence, a product in this category can reach 6.5 HIP.
Our first verified product scored 6.9 and earned the HIP Mark.
Share your product data and we score what you can prove.
Apply for verified assessment
What to Check Before You Buy
- Confirm the battery is available as a named spare part. Battery degradation is the leading cause of scooter retirement; a replaceable battery is the single most important durability feature.
- Check the tyre type and parts availability. Solid tyres need no replacement; pneumatic tyres need tube and tyre replacement. Confirm replacement tubes and tyres are stocked before buying.
- Look for IP54 water resistance as a minimum. Lower-rated scooters corrode the battery management system and motor controller in wet conditions; IP54 extends life meaningfully.
- Confirm the rear brake disc and pads are stocked as standard spares. Brake wear is normal and predictable; a scooter without available brake parts is both a safety and a durability risk.
Score Breakdown
How rare are the materials?
MSI · 20%
1.5
Why this score ▸
The product relies heavily on critical raw materials including lithium, cobalt, and neodymium, all listed on the EU Critical Raw Materials list with high supply risk. The absence of recycled content and the high likelihood of single-country concentration for these materials in China results in a critically scarce rating.
Where do the materials come from?
SCR · 18%
2.5
Why this score ▸
The electric scooter relies on rare earth magnets and lithium batteries, materials heavily concentrated in China (high-risk for supply chain disruption) and the DRC (cobalt), with no due diligence or alternative suppliers documented. The lack of third-party audits and single-country dependency for critical components places this product in the critical risk category.
Can it be recycled?
RC · 18%
2.0
Why this score ▸
The product is assumed to be glued with no take-back scheme, making material separation impractical without specialist equipment. Only an estimated 20% of the weight (likely metals) enters practical recycling streams, while the majority of plastics and composite components are effectively landfilled. This aligns with the 'Non-Recyclable' category for sealed consumer electronics lacking disassembly features.
Can you fix it?
R · 13%
4.0
Why this score ▸
The product is an electric scooter with mixed fasteners assumed to include adhesive due to missing data, and spare parts are available but not committed for a specific duration. While parts exist, the lack of a public service manual and unknown fastener details (assumed glued) places it in the difficult-to-repair category typical of mass-market small appliances.
Is it made fairly?
SEI · 8%
3.5
Why this score ▸
The product is manufactured in China, a moderate-to-high risk jurisdiction for labour and environmental issues, with no submitted evidence of third-party audits, environmental certifications, or modern slavery statements. While ILO compliance is not claimed, the absence of any verified mitigation measures or independent audits places this assessment in the elevated risk category.
How long will it last?
PL · 8%
4.0
Why this score ▸
The product has a 2-year warranty and an estimated design life of 5 years based on electric scooter category norms, placing it in the below-average lifespan band. It lacks a stated IP rating or modular design features, and no software support data is available for this non-connected assessment.
Does it give back to nature?
RI · 15% · scale −10 to +10
-7.0
Why this score ▸
The product is classified as Depleting because it relies on virgin mined materials with zero recycled content and no take-back scheme, fitting the criteria for conventional electronics. It does not qualify for the Extractive band minimum of -3 because the required 50% recycled content and verified take-back program are absent. The score reflects the standard depletion of finite geological reserves typical for electric scooters manufactured without regenerative inputs.
MSI 20% · SCR 18% · RC 18% · R 13% · SEI 8% · PL 8% · RI 15% = 100%
About the HIP Methodology ▸
Starting scores are low on purpose. We only count what we can confirm from public data,
so most products sit between 2 and 4 out of 10 before a maker shares their own evidence.
That gap between the starting score and what a product could reach is the whole point.
When a maker proves what their product is really made of, the score goes up.
The HIP Mark shows it has been checked.
Read the full methodology →
Consumer Summary
This electric scooter has a HIP Score of 2.5 out of 10, indicating significant challenges with its environmental impact and durability. Its Regenerative Index is -7.0, which means the product relies heavily on new raw materials and lacks a system to recycle or reuse its components at the end of its life. Overall, this item is difficult to repair and does not support a circular economy.
What This Means For You
When shopping for electric scooters, look for models that offer spare parts, clear repair instructions, and a take-back program for recycling. Avoid products that are glued together or made with materials that cannot be easily separated, as these are designed to be discarded rather than reused. Choosing items with longer warranties and modular designs helps extend the product's life and reduces waste.
Data Transparency
This is a category rating based on publicly available data. The following data fields were not submitted by a manufacturer and have been estimated conservatively using open reference data and the category default assumptions table v0.1 (provisional — sources pending full citation):
material_percentagesrecycled_content_pctcountry_of_primary_extractionprimary_sourcing_countriestier1_supplier_countdue_diligence_standardalternative_supplier_existsdisassembly_typerecyclable_streams_pctrecycling_label_complianttakeback_schemedesign_for_disassemblyfastener_typespare_parts_years_committedservice_manual_publicifixit_scoreecodesign_in_scopemanufacturing_countriesenvironmental_certificationsthird_party_certificationrba_audit_completedmodern_slavery_statementilo_compliance_claimedip_ratingmodular_designsoftware_support_yearsprimary_material_originregenerative_certificationsclosed_loop_programmeend_of_life_programmematerial_origin_certifiedregenerative_practices
A verified rating uses manufacturer-submitted data and produces a more accurate, product-specific score.
Material Watch Points
- Lithium — EU Critical Raw Materials list
- Cobalt — EU Critical Raw Materials list
- Neodymium — EU Critical Raw Materials list
- China — High concentration of global supply for key battery and magnet materials
- Rare earths and lithium — high concentration in China, no diversification
- Cobalt — potential DRC sourcing, no RBA audit
- No due-diligence programme documented
- No alternative supplier documented
How this score was calculated
The HIP Score is a weighted average of seven dimensions measuring material
resilience, supply chain integrity, and end-of-life characteristics.
| Code |
Dimension |
Weight |
Score |
| MSI |
Material Scarcity Index |
0.20 |
1.5 / 10 |
| SCR |
Supply Chain Risk |
0.18 |
2.5 / 10 |
| RC |
Recyclability and Circularity |
0.18 |
2.0 / 10 |
| R |
Repairability |
0.13 |
4.0 / 10 |
| SEI |
Social and Environmental Impact |
0.08 |
3.5 / 10 |
| PL |
Product Longevity |
0.08 |
4.0 / 10 |
| RI |
Regenerative Index |
0.15 |
-7.0 (raw) |
Regenerative Index note: RI scores on a unique scale of -10 to +10.
Before weighting, the raw score is normalised: RI normalised = (RI raw + 10) / 2.
This product's RI band is Depleting.
Weighted HIP Score: 2.5 / 10
· Methodology v1.5
Base weights shown. Some product types use category-specific weight profiles —
see full methodology for details.
Read the full methodology →
Data Sources
This rating draws on the following public sources:
USGS Mineral Resources Program (public domain) · EU Critical Raw Materials List 2023 (CC BY 4.0) · World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators (CC BY 4.0) · Category default assumptions table v0.1 (provisional — sources pending full citation)
All sources are public domain or published under open data licences.
Full source list →
About this rating:
HIP scores are based on public data at the date shown.
They show how well a product holds up over time — not a promise about safety or future supply.
Resourcehip is not liable for choices made based on these ratings.
Scope:
This is a category rating for Electric Scooters and does not assess any specific brand or manufacturer.
Individual products may perform better or worse than this baseline.
Produced under Resourcehip Scoring Methodology 1.5 (CC BY-NC 4.0).
AI disclosure:
An AI model scored this rating on our own hardware — no data was sent to the cloud.
A human reviewer checked and approved it before it went live.
Model: qwen3.5:35b.
AI transparency notice →
Not financial or investment advice.
Ratings are for consumer information only.
Dispute this rating · Our methodology · All ratings
Assessed: 2026-06-17 · Next review: 2027-04-26 · Methodology 1.5
