End-to-End Traceability: What Data Brands Need at Each Supply Chain Stage

Most brands trace at lot level. They know which batch left which plant. They rarely know which individual item reached which shelf, or what happened to it afterwards.

The gap has commercial weight. The OECD and EUIPO estimate that counterfeit trade reached USD 467 billion in 2021, up to 2.3% of global trade (OECD/EUIPO, Mapping Global Trade in Fakes 2025). Counterfeit imports into the EU alone reached USD 117 billion, or 4.7% of EU imports.

Several drivers keep traceability fragmented:

• Data sits in separate systems: ERP, warehouse management, supplier portals, retail point of sale.
• Identifiers change at each handover, so records cannot be joined.
• Batch codes identify a group, not an item.
• Printed codes can be copied, so a scan proves little.
• Nothing connects the supply chain record to the owner after the sale.

The distinction that matters: a record that says “batch 4471 shipped” is logistics. A record that says “unit 000812 was applied on line 3, shipped to a named distributor and first scanned by a consumer in Lyon” is traceability.

End-to-end product traceability is the ability to follow a single item, with verified data, from its components to its owner. It rests on three elements: a unique identifier, a record of events linked to that identifier, and a way to verify that the identifier was read from the real product.

The identifier is typically a GTIN plus a serial number, expressed as a GS1 Digital Link. The events are the data points described below. The verification is where the carrier matters.

Our guide on product traceability for premium brands covers the broader framework. This article focuses on the data itself.

Each stage answers a different question. Collecting more than the stage requires adds cost. Collecting less leaves a blind spot.

Three of these stages deserve a closer look.

Production and encoding. This is the point where identity is created. If the chip is encoded and verified on the line, every later record inherits that trust. If it is encoded later, the chain starts with an assumption.

Distribution. Aggregation links items to cartons and pallets. A scan of the pallet then resolves to every item inside. This is where vicinity-class chips under ISO 15693 or UHF labels are often used for bulk reads, while phone-readable NFC serves authentication.

After-sale. This is the stage most traceability programmes stop short of. Yet it generates the signal brands lack: where the product actually is. Scan location data shows when a product surfaces in a market it was never allocated to, which is the first indicator of diversion.

An NFC tag turns the product into a data point that can prove itself. The process runs in six steps.

1. Assign the identity. Each product receives a GTIN and a unique serial, held in a central platform.
2. Encode the chip. On the production line, the chip is written with its identity and its cryptographic keys. Chips in the NTAG 424 DNA class (ISO/IEC 14443-A, NFC Forum Type 4, AES-128) are the usual choice for phone-tap authentication.
3. Apply and bind. The tag is fixed to the product, closure or packaging. The platform records that this chip belongs to this serial.
4. Record the journey. Production, shipping and retail events are logged against the serial as the item moves.
5. Tap to verify. When a person taps the product, the chip generates a unique signed message using Secure Unique NFC (SUN) messaging. The counter increments with every tap, so a captured URL cannot be replayed.
6. Return the result. The platform checks the signature and counter, then shows the owner a verified response and logs the event with time and location.

An analogy helps. A printed code is a photograph of a signature. A secure NFC chip is a person signing in front of you, with a different signature every time.

Phone compatibility is rarely a barrier. iPhone XS and XR and later read tags in the background, without an app. Android phones read natively with the screen on.

Both can carry a serial. They differ in what a scan proves.

The practical position for regulated products is NFC for trust, visible carrier for compliance. The ESPR (Regulation (EU) 2024/1781) is carrier-neutral, but a GS1 Digital Link QR is emerging as the default visible carrier. NFC adds the authentication a printed code cannot give.

For a deeper comparison across technologies, see NFC vs QR vs RFID vs digital watermarks.

QR wins in several real situations.

• Very high volumes of low-value goods, where a few cents per unit matter.
• Products with no meaningful secondary market and no counterfeit exposure.
• Cost-constrained lines where adding a tag step is not feasible.
• Cases where the only need is to link to product information, not to prove authenticity.

A printed QR adds roughly zero marginal print cost. The real cost is serialisation and the platform behind it (industry sources, 2026). For a mass-market item with low fraud risk, that is often enough.

Many brands run both: a QR for compliance and information, an NFC tag where authenticity and the owner relationship carry value.

Cost depends on the security class and volume.

• Standard, non-secure NFC tags (NTAG213 class) list around €0.19 to €0.23 per unit at 1,000 to 10,000 units (public catalogues, 2026).
• Secure NTAG 424 DNA class labels cluster around $0.45 to $0.65 per unit at five-figure volumes. On-metal variants add 7% to 30%. Quantities of 50,000 and above are quote-only (public catalogues, 2026).

The cheaper tag is the door with a key hanging next to it. It identifies, but it can be cloned. The secure tag is the one that supports authentication.

Total cost also includes encoding, application and the platform. The tag is usually the smallest line.

Standard NFC tags detune on metal. Cans, metal caps and watch cases need on-metal tags with a ferrite layer. Liquids can also affect read range, so placement matters on bottles and cosmetics.

For wine and spirits, the TagTamper variant of the NTAG 424 DNA family sits on the closure. Opening the bottle breaks the tamper loop, and the next tap reports it. The data then covers not just identity but the sealed state of the product.

Read reliability reaches 99% in Selinko deployments when the tag type and placement are matched to the product.

The data priorities shift with the product.

Wine and spirits. Closure integrity, cellar and warehouse custody, market allocation. Provenance claims sit at the centre. Our article on how wine brands protect provenance with NFC goes into detail.

Luxury watches. Serial-level identity, service history, ownership transfer. The secondary market is large, so a verified owner record carries weight.

Cosmetics and fragrance. Batch and expiry, market allocation, diversion between regions. The grey market is the primary exposure.

Leather goods and fashion. Material origin and workshop data. Clothing, footwear and leather goods account for 62% of seized counterfeits (OECD/EUIPO, 2025). Textiles are also the first expected product group for the DPP, indicatively 2027, with enforcement around 2028 to 2029.

Cigars. Lot, humidity-controlled storage, authenticity at box level.

Furniture and premium audio. Serial, warranty, ownership transfer and repair history.

The central EU DPP registry has been live since 20 July 2026 (European Commission). Application of each product group’s rules starts at least 18 months after its delegated act. Batteries follow their own passport from 18 February 2027. In France, AGEC adds consumer-information obligations.

Brands that capture structured data per item at each stage are positioned for these requirements. Brands that rely on lot-level records will have to rebuild.

Compliance is a by-product of good data. The commercial return comes from using it: first-party product data tied to real owners.