67 to 236: A Better Benchmark for Your DPP Provider

When fashion brands evaluate Digital Product Passport providers, they often start with interface design, consumer engagement and QR code aesthetics. The better question is whether the passport follows an open standard, whether the EU registry accepts it, and whether every data point can be traced to evidence.

The passport sample the EU DPP Registry accepted from us on 20 July 2026 carried 67 data points. A UNTP-conformant passport can carry up to 236, and the textile delegated act will decide which of those become mandatory. Symolem-ID issues passports that are both UNTP-conformant and accepted by the EU DPP Registry.

What the registry accepted

Acceptance matters because it proves that the identifier, data carrier and passport structure can pass through the live EU DPP Registry. The accepted sample carried 67 data points: enough to demonstrate a functioning, standards-based passport without pretending that the final textile requirements are already known.

Registry acceptance is not the same as textile compliance. The textile delegated act has not yet fixed the mandatory data set. The accepted sample is proof that the passport works with the registry; it is not a prediction that 67 will be the final requirement.

What the UNTP standard allows

A UNTP-conformant passport can carry up to 236 data points. That capacity covers far more than a registry identifier: product identity, materials, provenance, conformity evidence, environmental information, circularity, credentials and the history of updates to the record.

Capacity is not obligation. A passport should carry the data required for the product and market, backed by evidence, rather than filling every available slot. Open standards matter because the record can grow as delegated acts and commercial requirements develop without being rebuilt in a proprietary format.

What the gap means for brands

The gap between 67 and 236 is not a target to fill indiscriminately. It is room for product-specific rules, stronger evidence and additional information required by retailers, customs authorities, repairers and recyclers. The delegated act will determine the mandatory textile subset.

Brands should collect the stable core now: product identity, composition, origin, suppliers, care, repair and end-of-life information, together with the certificates and source records that support each claim. The work is to know where each fact comes from, who owns it and when its evidence expires.

How to benchmark a provider

Ask a provider to show a live UNTP-conformant passport, its successful EU registry submission and the evidence trail behind its claims. Ask which of the 236 available data points it supports, how the record changes when a requirement changes, and whether data can move between systems through GS1 Digital Link and W3C Verifiable Credentials.

A large number on a sales page proves nothing by itself. A smaller record with current, attributable evidence is stronger than a larger one filled with unverified, outdated or self-declared data.

The practical benchmark

Use 67 as evidence of what has already passed through the registry and 236 as the capacity of the UNTP passport schema. Use neither as a claim about the final textile obligation. The regulation, not a vendor, will determine what becomes mandatory.

The useful question for a brand is therefore not how many fields a platform advertises. It is whether the product record is interoperable, registry-accepted and supported by evidence that can survive scrutiny.