A test report records what a laboratory measured on a specific sample of a specific product against a specific edition of a standard, on a specific date. It is evidence about that sample. It is not evidence about production consistency, durability, or any product other than the one named. The four things most often wrong with a report presented by a supplier are that it covers a different model, cites a superseded edition, comes from a laboratory not accredited for that standard, or was never actually read by the person relying on it.
Four documents, four jobs
Before the report itself, it is worth keeping the document types apart. They are frequently sent interchangeably and they are not interchangeable.
| Document | Produced by | Establishes |
|---|---|---|
| Test report | A testing laboratory | What was measured, on what sample, against what standard |
| Test summary | The manufacturer, from the report | A short standardised record, typically for transport |
| Certificate | A certification body or scheme owner | That a product meets a scheme's requirements |
| Declaration of Conformity | The manufacturer | The manufacturer's own statement of legal responsibility |
A supplier sending a certificate when a report was requested may simply be sending what they have. A supplier sending a Declaration of Conformity and describing it as a certificate has misunderstood the document they signed, which is a different and more serious problem.
What a report contains
A properly formed test report identifies the client, names the product with enough detail to distinguish it from similar models, states the standard and its edition, describes the samples and how they were selected, lists the tests performed, records the measurements, and states a pass or fail result for each. It carries the laboratory's identity and accreditation details, and it is signed and dated.
Everything in that list is checkable. Most of it is not checked.
Eight things to look at
1. The product identity. Does the report name the exact model being supplied, or a similar one? "Similar model" coverage is one of the most common gaps in this industry, and it is not a technicality — a change of cell, of protection circuit or of enclosure material can invalidate the basis of the test.
2. The standard and its edition. Standards are revised. A report against a superseded edition may have been entirely correct when issued and be of limited value now. The edition is usually in the report's title block; look for a year.
3. The date. A report from eight years ago may still be valid, or may predate a significant revision of the standard or a significant change in the product. Age alone does not invalidate it, but it prompts the question.
4. The laboratory and its accreditation. Was the laboratory accredited for the specific standard in question? Accreditation is granted per standard, not per laboratory, so a laboratory accredited for one test is not necessarily accredited for another. Accreditation bodies maintain public directories, and accreditation is frequently verifiable through mutual recognition arrangements between national bodies.
5. Sample provenance. How were the samples selected? A report on samples chosen by the manufacturer tells you about those samples. It does not tell you what a randomly selected unit from production would do.
6. Which tests were performed. A report against a standard should cover the tests that standard requires. Partial coverage — where some clauses were tested and others were not — should be stated explicitly. Where it is not stated, read the test list rather than the conclusion.
7. The result, per test. Reports state results test by test. It is worth reading them rather than the summary line at the front, because a report can record passes on most tests and a failure or a deviation on one.
8. Deviations and exclusions. Many reports contain a section noting where the test departed from the standard's method, or where a requirement was not applicable. That section is often the most informative part of the document.
What a report does not prove
This is the part that gets forgotten, and it is where reliance on a report most often goes wrong.
It does not prove production consistency. It proves that the samples tested behaved in a particular way. Whether unit ten thousand behaves the same way is a question about process control, not about testing.
It does not prove durability. Most compliance tests are about safety and interference under defined conditions. They are not life tests, and a product can pass every one of them and fail in the field after a year.
It does not prove performance. Capacity, charging speed, efficiency and thermal behaviour are not what safety and electromagnetic tests measure. A product can be fully certified and still deliver half the capacity its marketing claims.
It does not cover other products. A report is tied to what it names. A report for one model is not a report for a range.
It does not transfer. If the product changes, or the manufacturer changes, the basis of the report changes with them. A buyer inheriting a supplier's report for a product that has since been re-engineered has inherited a document about something else.
How to verify a claim in a few minutes
Most of what matters can be checked independently, and the checks are quick:
- Accreditation. Look up the laboratory in the public directory of an accreditation body, and confirm the scope includes the standard on the report.
- Scheme certification. Where a product claims certification under a scheme — wireless power, USB, Bluetooth — the scheme owner maintains a public database. Check the product is in it.
- Safety listing. Where a product claims a listing, the certification body's own directory is the record. Check the file reference rather than the mark.
- Standards edition. Confirm the edition cited is the current one, from the issuing organisation rather than from the report.
None of this requires technical expertise. It requires reading the document rather than the covering email.
The practical checklist
When a supplier sends a test report, work through this before relying on it:
- [ ] The model in the report is the model being supplied
- [ ] The standard and edition are current
- [ ] The laboratory is accredited for that standard
- [ ] The tests listed cover what the standard requires
- [ ] Each test result has been read, not just the summary
- [ ] Deviations and exclusions have been read
- [ ] The claim it supports is one a report can actually support
Seven lines. In a category where specification sheets are routinely ambiguous, working through them once per supplier is the difference between having documentation and having evidence.