BSCI vs Sedex vs WRAP: Which Audit You Need

BSCI, Sedex SMETA and WRAP are different kinds of social-compliance evidence. amfori BSCI produces a monitoring result with ratings and corrective actions. SMETA produces an audit report and corrective-action record, with no pass or fail. WRAP is a certification programme that issues a certificate for an individual facility.

That difference changes the file a buyer should request. A BSCI result is not a certificate. Sedex membership is not an audit result. A WRAP certificate is meaningful only for the facility named on it and for the period printed on it. Treating the three labels as interchangeable can approve an audit report where a certificate is required, or accept a current document for a site that will not make the order.

The working comparison starts with four questions: which site is covered, what did the assessment examine, what did it find, and what evidence shows the result is still current? This guide complements reading a compliance audit, which explains how to work through findings and closure evidence.

What is the difference between BSCI, SMETA and WRAP?

The difference is the output. BSCI gives a rated monitoring result, SMETA gives a site-audit report and CAPR, and WRAP gives a facility certification when its process is successfully completed. None should be read as a general statement about every site used by a supplier.

Scheme	What it is	Principal document	What it does not establish on its own
amfori BSCI	A social-audit and improvement programme	Monitoring report with an A-to-E result, findings and corrective action plan	That every production site used by the supplier has the same result
Sedex SMETA	A site-audit methodology used through the Sedex platform	SMETA audit report and Corrective Action Plan Report, or CAPR	A certification, pass or fail result
WRAP	A production-facility certification programme	Certification of Compliance	Coverage of a parent company, another unit or an unlisted site

The report type determines the next question. A BSCI review asks how to read the overall rating alongside the performance-area results. A SMETA review asks what its pillar scope and non-compliances say. A WRAP review starts with the certificate, then checks the facility identity and expiry date. The labels are useful shortcuts, but the underlying document is the evidence.

What does an amfori BSCI result evidence?

amfori BSCI is a member-led programme. A responsible amfori member requests and approves the audit process for a producer, so a social audit commissioned outside that process is not converted into a BSCI result by using the same checklist or language.

The overall A-to-E result summarises monitoring across the programme's performance areas. It is a result for the assessed facility and scope, with the performance-area ratings, findings and corrective action plan showing how the result was reached. Read those pages before accepting the headline grade.

For BSCI, A and B results are valid for up to 24 months. C, D and E results are valid for up to 12 months and have a follow-up route under the scheme. Record the audit date and the relevant result period, then check any follow-up document against the original findings. A later document should show what was reviewed and what has been closed.

The BSCI output records what an assessment found at a defined site. It does not demonstrate that a purchase order will stay there. Production-site approval, subcontracting controls and the order's own traceability records remain part of the sourcing process.

What does a Sedex SMETA report evidence?

Sedex membership gives an organisation access to Sedex tools and its platform. It does not prove that a site has completed a SMETA audit. Sedex also states that neither membership nor SMETA is a certification, and SMETA has no pass or fail result. Request the audit record, not a document described as a Sedex certificate.

A SMETA audit is site-level evidence. Its findings help companies identify conditions, practices, workers and risks at the worksite assessed. The report and CAPR are therefore more useful than a binary status: they identify non-compliances and create the record for corrective-action follow-through.

SMETA may be carried out to two-pillar or four-pillar scope. The report must state the scope used. The pillar count is not a quality grade, so it should sit beside the findings when the buyer compares two reports.

SMETA check	What to read	Practical decision it supports
Site identity	Legal entity, address and audit location	Whether the proposed production site is covered
Pillar scope	Whether the report is two-pillar or four-pillar	Whether its scope matches the compliance programme
CAPR	Non-compliances, action owner and due status	Which matters remain open
Closure evidence	Auditor review or other documented follow-up	Whether a stated action is complete or still proposed

Audit frequency should be set by the businesses in the supply chain, taking account of factors such as earlier findings and risk. A report date alone does not settle whether the evidence is usable for an order. Compare it with the buyer's review cadence and the status of the findings.

What does current WRAP certification evidence?

WRAP issues an annual Certification of Compliance after a facility passes the WRAP audit process. From 1 March 2026, WRAP no longer issues certificates with Gold or Platinum levels; existing Platinum certificates remain valid to their printed expiry dates.

WRAP's facility handbook describes certification against its 12 Principles, using accredited third-party monitoring firms and WRAP's review process. Certification is generally for one year, and the certificate applies to the individual facility, not a parent company or brand. Certified facilities may also receive unannounced post-certification assessments during the certificate period.

WRAP check	What it confirms	What to compare it with
Facility name	The entity named on the certificate	The supplier's contracting details
Physical address	The individual location covered	The site proposed for production
Issue and expiry dates	The current certificate period	The planned production period
Certificate format	Whether it reflects WRAP's current annual programme	Any legacy certificate presented in the file

For a WRAP file, match the certificate's name and address to the site proposed for the order, then record its issue and expiry dates. If the compliance programme needs information on particular findings, ask for the relevant audit and corrective-action records as well. The certificate alone answers a narrower question: it records WRAP's certification decision for the named facility.

How should a buyer compare the three documents?

Start with site coverage. A commercial supplier name may appear across several production units, but each audit or certificate is tied to its stated scope. Match the legal name and physical address, then confirm that the quoted production route uses that location. This is part of vetting a textile supplier, not a substitute for it.

Next, compare each document on the evidence it is designed to provide. A BSCI rating compresses several assessed areas into a result. A SMETA report has no pass or fail, so the CAPR carries much of the decision-making detail. A WRAP certificate confirms a scheme decision for a facility during a defined period. No common score can turn these into identical documents.

Comparison question	BSCI	SMETA	WRAP
What is the main output?	Rated monitoring result	Report and CAPR	Facility certificate
Is there a pass or fail?	No single certification decision	No	Certification decision is recorded on the certificate
What should be checked below the headline?	Performance-area results and corrective actions	Scope, non-compliances and CAPR	Site identity, dates and any supporting records required
What must match the order?	Named audited site and scope	Named audited site and scope	Named certified facility and certificate period

Where a programme accepts more than one scheme, use one review sheet for every supplier file. Put the site name and address first, then the document type, assessment date, scope, findings, action status and next review date. That format does not force unlike schemes into one grade. It makes the evidence comparable at the points that decide whether it can support the order.

Do the comparison before the purchase order is committed. A mismatch found at enquiry or sampling can be resolved while the production plan is still being set. The same mismatch found when bulk work is under way can affect the approved site, require further evidence or delay a release decision. The document should have an owner, a renewal date and a clear link to the facility on the production plan.

The audit pack does not by itself confirm product quality, material traceability, capacity, commercial performance or that an order remained at the approved site. Keep those checks in the supplier review and in the order controls. A compliance document is one part of the file, not the whole supplier decision.

What should go in the supplier compliance file?

Keep the evidence tied to the facility, not simply to the supplier account. A reviewer should be able to identify the proposed production site, see the document that covers it and understand what remains open without asking the original assessor to reconstruct the decision.

File item	Purpose	Common gap to avoid
Current full BSCI or SMETA report, or WRAP certificate	Establishes the scheme output	Keeping only a logo, scorecard or certificate image
Exact legal name and physical address	Connects evidence to a facility	Matching a trading name without confirming the site
Audit scope and date	Shows what was assessed and when	Treating an old report as current without review
Findings and corrective action plan	Shows the work identified by the audit	Filing the report without its CAPR or action plan
Follow-up or closure evidence	Shows which issues have been reviewed since	Calling a proposed action a verified closure
Order-site approval record	Connects the compliance file to the production plan	Assuming any site under the supplier name is covered
Next review or expiry date	Keeps the file current	Leaving renewal ownership and timing unclear

This structure avoids a false comparison between unlike schemes. It also catches a common mismatch early: a current certificate may exist, but for a facility that will not handle the order.

Short FAQ

Is amfori BSCI a certification?

No. It is a social-audit and improvement programme that produces a monitoring report and an A-to-E result. Request the report, findings and corrective-action status.

Does Sedex membership mean a site has passed an audit?

No. Membership provides access to Sedex. SMETA is the audit methodology, and Sedex issues no pass, fail or certification through SMETA.

Is a WRAP certificate equivalent to a BSCI A result?

No. A WRAP certificate and a BSCI result are different scheme outputs. Compare the named site, date, scope, findings and closure evidence before accepting either document.

How long are the documents current?

BSCI A and B results may be valid for up to 24 months; C, D and E results may be valid for up to 12 months. Current WRAP certificates are annual. For SMETA, set the review period through the supply-chain compliance programme and read the audit date alongside its findings.

Which scheme should a supplier have?

Use the scheme required by the applicable compliance programme or customer. If more than one is accepted, compare the site coverage, document date, scope, findings and verified corrective actions before approving the evidence.

The decision behind the label

BSCI, SMETA and WRAP can all contribute evidence about conditions at a production site, but they do not confer the same status. BSCI provides a rated monitoring result. SMETA provides an audit report and corrective-action record without a pass or fail. WRAP provides facility certification for its stated period.

Approve the document only after five facts are clear: the exact site, assessment date, scope, open findings and closure status. That is the practical test. It distinguishes evidence that applies to the order from a current-looking document that covers the wrong place or says less than its label suggests.