Category rating — not an assessment of any specific brand
This rating covers a typical, mass-market
home fragrance 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 →
Category baseline
2.3 HIP
Below Standard
Category ceiling: 5.8 HIP
Regenerative Index
-7.0
Depleting
Category ceiling RI: +2.0
What this score means
The score shown is the current market baseline for home fragrance — what the HIP methodology can confirm from
publicly available specification data alone, before any manufacturer evidence is reviewed. The category ceiling
shown in small text below the score is what the methodology rewards when materials, supply chain, repairability,
and end-of-life pathways are fully evidenced. Manufacturers close that gap by applying for verified assessment.
Manufacturer? Verified assessment closes the gap.
The current market baseline for this category is 2.3 HIP.
The category ceiling — what the methodology rewards when materials, supply chain, repairability, and end-of-life
pathways are fully evidenced — is 5.8 HIP.
The first verified product in our programme demonstrated 6.9 HIP and earned the HIP Mark.
If your product can evidence the methodology dimensions, verified assessment gives it the score it has earned.
Apply for verified assessment
Score Breakdown
Material Scarcity Index
20% weight
4.0
The product contains metal components which may include critical raw materials, and the assembly in China introduces supply concentration risks given the country's dominance in processing many scarce metals. With zero recycled content and missing data on material percentages, the score is conservatively placed in the Scarce range.
Supply Chain Risk
18% weight
3.5
The product is a scented candle assembled in China, a country with moderate governance risks and high concentration for wax and fragrance sourcing. Due to the lack of submitted due diligence standards or alternative suppliers, and the reliance on a single tier-1 supplier, the supply chain faces high concentration risk without verified mitigation measures.
Recyclability & Circularity
18% weight
1.0
The product is a scented candle, which is a consumable item with no practical recycling infrastructure for its primary materials (wax, wick, container) in standard municipal streams. Assuming a glued assembly and no take-back scheme, less than 20% of the product weight enters a practical recycling stream, placing it in the non-recyclable category.
Repairability
13% weight
1.0
The product is a scented candle, a disposable item designed for replacement rather than repair. It is assumed to be glued or sealed with no fasteners, and no spare parts or service manuals are available for this category of goods.
Social & Environmental Impact
8% weight
3.5
The product is manufactured in China, a moderate-to-high risk jurisdiction, with no submitted third-party audits or environmental certifications. While ILO compliance is not claimed, the absence of verified evidence such as RBA audits or ISO 14001 places this in the elevated risk category.
Product Longevity
8% weight
1.0
The product is a scented candle with a stated design life of only 1 year and no warranty, classifying it as a disposable item designed for single-use replacement. It lacks any IP rating, modular design, or repairability features, and the short lifespan aligns with the lowest tier of the scoring rubric for ultra-low-cost or single-season products.
Regenerative Index
15% weight · scale −10 to +10
-7.0
The product is scored in the Depleting band (-7) because it relies on virgin mined materials with zero recycled content and no take-back scheme. Not Depleting because recycled content >= 50% with verified take-back does not apply, as the product has 0% recycled content and no end-of-life programme.
MSI 20% · SCR 18% · RC 18% · R 13% · SEI 8% · PL 8% · RI 15% = 100%
About the HIP Methodology ▸
Generic ratings are intentionally conservative. They represent only what the HIP methodology can confirm from
publicly available specification data, before any manufacturer-supplied evidence is reviewed. Most categories sit
in the 2–4 range at the pre-verification baseline. This is the methodology working as designed: it makes the gap
between current market practice and demonstrable resilience legible to consumers, manufacturers, and procurement
buyers. Verified assessment is the path across that gap, and the HIP Mark is the proof of crossing it.
Read the full methodology →
Consumer Summary
This scented candle has a HIP Score of 2.3 out of 10, indicating significant environmental challenges in its production and lifecycle. Its Regenerative Index is -7.0, meaning it relies entirely on new, mined materials rather than recycled content. Overall, the product is designed as a disposable item with limited potential for reuse or recycling.
What This Means For You
When buying home fragrance, look for candles made with recycled glass containers and plant-based waxes to support a circular economy. Avoid products that use virgin plastics or metals without clear recycling programs, as these contribute to resource depletion. Choosing items with warranties or repairable designs can help extend their useful life and reduce 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 LLM training knowledge:
material_percentagescountry_of_primary_extractionprimary_sourcing_countriestier1_supplier_countdue_diligence_standardalternative_supplier_existsdisassembly_typerecyclable_streams_pctrecycling_label_complianttakeback_schemedesign_for_disassemblyfastener_typespare_parts_availablespare_parts_years_committedservice_manual_publicifixit_scoreecodesign_in_scopemanufacturing_countriesenvironmental_certificationsthird_party_certificationrba_audit_completedmodern_slavery_statementilo_compliance_claimedip_ratingmodular_designsoftware_support_yearsprimary_material_originrecycled_content_pcttakeback_schemeregenerative_certificationsclosed_loop_programmeend_of_life_programmematerial_origin_certifiedregenerative_practicesthird_party_certification
A verified rating uses manufacturer-submitted data and produces a more accurate, product-specific score.
Material Watch Points
- Metal — potential EU Critical Raw Materials
- China — high supply concentration risk for metal processing
- Recycled content at 0%
- No due-diligence programme documented
- Single primary supplier with no alternative
- Sourcing from China (moderate governance risk)
About This Rating
Produced under Resourcehip Methodology v1.3 (CC BY-NC 4.0). Assessed: 2026-04-26. Next scheduled review: 2027-04-26.
Dispute this rating · Our methodology · All ratings
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) · LLM training knowledge (for assumed fields — no manufacturer submission)
All sources are public domain or published under open data licences.
Full source list →
About this rating:
HIP scores are based on publicly available data at the assessment date.
They are estimates of material resilience — not guarantees of product performance, safety, or future supply conditions.
Resourcehip accepts no liability for decisions made in reliance on these ratings.
Scope:
This is a category rating for Scented Candles and does not assess any specific brand or manufacturer.
Individual products may perform better or worse than this baseline.
Produced under Resourcehip Scoring Methodology 1.3.
AI disclosure:
This rating was produced using an AI scoring pipeline (local, no cloud — no data shared externally) and reviewed and approved by a human assessor before publication.
Scoring model: qwen3.5:35b.
The model's training data influences the findings — see the methodology for caveats.
AI transparency notice →
Not financial or investment advice.
Ratings are for consumer information only.
Dispute this rating · Our methodology · All ratings
Assessed: 2026-04-26 · Next review: 2027-04-26 · Methodology 1.3
