Company-mineral profile

Cisco Systems

Tungsten · Manufacturer

Method 0.4 · Release 11 · deployed September 13, 2026, 00:07 UTC (September 12, 8:07 p.m. ET)
Dataset last updated: September 12, 2026

← Back to benchmark
Mineral
Tungsten
Role
Manufacturer
Product niche
Electronic hardware (company-level)
Period
2025
Level
Company
Country
United States
Score
92
Band
A
Coverage
100%
Confidence
Moderate
Dataset source date
2025-12-31
Research review date
2026-09-03

Company-level 3TG disclosure; not a product, shipment, direct-supplier or facility-performance assessment.

Current issuer disclosure benchmark. Product mix differs within this initial cohort, and issuer-reported figures are not independently verified by Highbrow.

Named companies have not endorsed or participated in this research.

Release 11 records source and review dates once per profile, shown above. Method 0.5 will record them for each criterion.

Six criteria and their evidence

  1. Sourcing policy

    ✓ Supported

    Policy and supplier expectations are described.

    Source:
    sec.gov ↗
    Page / section:
    II.1, Responsible Minerals Policy
  2. Accountable oversight

    ✓ Supported

    Named team, steering committee and management reporting are described.

    Source:
    sec.gov ↗
    Page / section:
    II.1, Internal Management Structure
  3. Upstream transparency

    ✓ Supported

    Mineral-level potential SOR totals and possible origin countries are disclosed with supplier-data limitations.

    Source:
    sec.gov ↗
    Page / section:
    II.2; III, Table 1; Addendum A
  4. Assessment evidence

    ◐ Partial

    RMI audit statuses are reported, but Cisco states that its own report did not receive an independent private-sector audit.

    Source:
    sec.gov ↗
    Page / section:
    II.4; III; V, Conclusion
  5. Risk response

    ✓ Supported

    Escalation, mitigation, supplier scorecard and potential removal are described.

    Source:
    sec.gov ↗
    Page / section:
    II.3; IV, Risk Mitigation Efforts
  6. Reporting & limitations

    ✓ Supported

    The annual filing states scope, results, forward-looking limits and the absence of an audit of the report.

    Source:
    sec.gov ↗
    Page / section:
    Reporting period; III–V; Addendum A

Issuer-reported metrics

  • In-scope supplier responses

    276; approximately 99% of relevant direct-material spend

    Issuer-reported 3TG-wide coverage; not a tungsten-only response rate.

    sec.gov ↗ · III, In-Scope Supplier Survey Responses · As of 2025-12-31

  • Potential tungsten SORs

    42

    Potential sources reported through accepted supplier CMRTs; not confirmed Cisco procurement routes.

    sec.gov ↗ · III, Table 1 — Tungsten · As of 2025-12-31

  • Issuer-classified low-risk SOR share

    100%

    Cisco's covered-country method combines conformant/active SORs with certain recyclers or SORs reported outside covered countries; not a Highbrow risk rating.

    sec.gov ↗ · III, Table 1 — Tungsten · As of 2025-12-31

Upstream relationships

H.C. Starck Tungsten GmbH — Germany

Reported possible upstream · 2026-04-09

The reporting company identifies this facility as a possible source somewhere in its supplier-reported network. This does not establish a direct supplier, exact tier, shipment or product link.

cisco.com ↗ · PDF p.8; facility name

Reporting profile · Upstream profile

Kennametal Huntsville — United States

Reported possible upstream · 2026-04-09

The reporting company identifies this facility as a possible source somewhere in its supplier-reported network. This does not establish a direct supplier, exact tier, shipment or product link.

cisco.com ↗ · PDF p.8; facility name

Reporting profile · Upstream profile

Kennametal Fallon — United States

Reported possible upstream · 2026-04-09

The reporting company identifies this facility as a possible source somewhere in its supplier-reported network. This does not establish a direct supplier, exact tier, shipment or product link.

cisco.com ↗ · PDF p.8; facility name

Reporting profile · Upstream profile

A “reported possible upstream” relationship is not a “confirmed direct” relationship.

Report a correction

CMMS-BS assesses what public sourcing disclosures establish. It is not a certification, an audit or legal advice.