The 2025 beauty industry presents “a tale of two extremes”: in the first half of the year, the number of newly registered products fell by 11.7% year-on-year, while top-tier factories saw a 19% 逆势增长 (year-on-year increase) in new product output. Meanwhile, over 950 small and medium-sized factories closed down. For brands, choosing the right factory has become a survival-critical decision—top brands rely on self-built factories or premium OEMs, white-label brands are rushing to build their own facilities, and micro-brands are struggling with OEM pitfalls. Based on the latest industry data, this guide analyzes the characteristics of three mainstream factory types and provides actionable factory-selection tools and risk-avoidance solutions to help you accurately match the right factory.
I. 2025 Cosmetic Factory Landscape: 3 Core Trends Amid Polarization
- Orders Concentrating on Top-Tier and Specialized Factories
Among the top 10 factories by new product output, micro-factories dominate the nail care category (occupying 6 spots), with Mitan Biotech topping the list by launching 2,775 new products in the first half. Meanwhile, the top 10 most popular factories are dominated by CCI (China Cosmetics Ingredients) and Yunfeishi, which serve major brands like L’Oreal and PROYA. This polarization stems from: top-tier factories’ technical barriers (e.g., CCI’s aerosol technology) and specialized factories’ in-depth category focus (e.g., Beihao Biotech’s patented mask fabric).
- Intensified Geographical Clustering
Guangdong province hosts 3,784 cosmetic factories, accounting for 63.77% of the national total, forming advantages in cost and efficiency. Among the top 10 popular factories, 3 are based in Guangdong, 2 in Jiangsu, and 2 in Zhejiang-Shanghai. Geographic selection directly impacts supply chain response speed.
- Production Model Evolution: From OEM to In-House Control
White-label brands are breaking free from OEM dependence: over 60% of PUCO’s products are manufactured by Cosmax, while brands like Meishi and Dishiaipu have built self-owned factories to escape low-price tags through in-house production control. Top brands have long laid out this strategy—PROYA’s 5G intelligent factory was put into operation in 2024.
II. In-Depth Analysis of 3 High-Value Cosmetic Factory Types (with Brand Adaptation Table)
| Factory Type | Representative Enterprises | Core Advantages | Adapted Brand Types | Cooperation Cases |
| High New Product Output | Mitan Biotech, Chenhao Biotech | Nail care specialization, fast SKU updates | Emerging nail brands, live-stream white-labels | Miss Mitan, Xinyuan Xiansheng |
| Stable Cooperation-Oriented | CCI, Yunfeishi | Complete international certifications, mature craftsmanship | Well-known domestic brands, international giants | L’Oreal, Winona |
| Category-Specialized | Kaimei Cosmetics, Beihao Biotech | Special qualifications for baby care/masks, patented technology | Efficacy-focused brands, vertical-segment enterprises | Xiuzheng Pharmaceutical, viral mask brands |
Data Source: H1 2025 Cosmetic Product Registration Data, Meixiu Index Ranking
Typical Case Analysis:
- Zhongshan Zhongyan: After a 3-year absence, it returned to the top 10 popular factories by serving medical aesthetic-derived brands with plant-based anti-aging formulas. Its “72-hour sample delivery” capability meets e-commerce replenishment needs.
- Bawei Co., Ltd.: The “first cosmetic manufacturing stock on Beijing Stock Exchange” implements 36 inspection procedures for maternal and infant products, with a 100% approval rate for special-purpose cosmetic registration. It has become the first choice for pharmaceutical companies like Xiuzheng to enter the beauty sector.
III. Practical Factory-Selection Guide for Brands: 3 Steps to Avoid 90% of Pitfalls
- Qualification Verification: Focus on 2 Types of Rare Permits
Beyond basic certifications (GMPC, ISO 22716), baby care categories require special production permits (e.g., Guangzhou Kaimei), and efficacy products depend on the number of special-purpose certifications (e.g., Mingyu Cosmetics has over 10,000 whitening formulas with special certifications). You can verify the validity of factory qualifications via the “Cosmetic Supervision” APP.
- Experience Matching: Screen by “Category Expertise”
Choose Intercos for color cosmetics (one-step molding for gradient powder compacts), Beihao for masks (pioneer of silk mask fabrics), and Dongfang Biotech for natural skincare (28,000 plant-based formulas). Avoid “full-category factories”—data shows that specialized factories have a 62% lower quality control complaint rate.
- Capacity Assessment: Match Based on Development Stage
Startups should choose factories supporting small-batch customization (e.g., Intercos); brands with sudden order surges can cooperate with Beihao (60 million masks produced daily); scaled brands may refer to white-labels’ self-built factories (with an investment threshold of approximately 20 million RMB).
IV. 2026 Outlook: 2 New Battlefields for Factory Competition
- Sustainable Production Certifications
100% Vegan certification has become a new threshold, requiring animal-free raw materials and packaging throughout the supply chain, plus transparent ingredient list disclosure (e.g., Ethy certification standards). Top factories have taken the lead—Yunfeishi launched a production line for biodegradable single-use packaging.
- Technology Visualization Capability
Consumer demand for “transparent factories” is rising: Cosmax offers real-time production live streams, and PROYA’s 5G factory enables raw material traceability. Brands cooperating with such factories have a 37% higher repurchase rate.
Conclusion
Choosing a cosmetic factory is essentially the implementation of supply chain strategy: micro-brands rely on specialized factories to scale quickly, mid-tier brands need to bind with stable-cooperation factories, and top brands build barriers through self-owned factories. Remember the “qualification-experience-capacity” three-dimensional verification method and match factory types with category characteristics—this is the key to standing firm amid industry polarization.
