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
- Component supplier
- Product niche
- Electronic components (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
Sourcing policy
✓ SupportedResponsible-minerals policy and supplier expectations are described.
- Page / section:
- I, Company overview and policy
Accountable oversight
✓ SupportedA cross-functional team, executive sponsorship, tracking and grievance channels are described.
- Page / section:
- III.a, Company management systems
Upstream transparency
✓ SupportedThe report lists potential facilities and acknowledges that it depends on multi-tier supplier data.
- Page / section:
- II; III.b; facility list dated May 28, 2026
Assessment evidence
◐ PartialFacility statuses are reported using RMI-related information, while the issuer expressly states that its report is not audited.
- Page / section:
- III.c; IV.c; report audit statement
Risk response
✓ SupportedRed flags, supplier engagement, escalation and possible termination are described.
- Page / section:
- III.c, Risk management
Reporting & limitations
✓ SupportedThe annual filing states scope, quantitative results, data limits and planned actions.
- Page / section:
- Reporting period; II–IV; results and limitations
Issuer-reported metrics
In-scope procurement represented by responses
99% by dollar value
Issuer-reported coverage across 3TG, not a tungsten-only response rate.
ir.vishay.com ↗ · II, RCOI Process and Results · As of 2025-12-31
Potential 3TG SORs
210
Reported by suppliers; not confirmed product-level sourcing.
ir.vishay.com ↗ · II, RCOI Process and Results · As of 2025-12-31
Issuer-validated conflict-free SORs
203 (97%)
Issuer terminology and 3TG-wide total; Highbrow does not convert it into a supplier-risk rating.
ir.vishay.com ↗ · IV.c, Results · As of 2025-12-31
Upstream relationships
H.C. Starck Tungsten GmbH — Germany
Reported possible upstream · 2026-05-28
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.
ir.vishay.com ↗ · Facility list dated May 28, 2026 — H.C. Starck Tungsten GmbH, CID002541
Reporting profile · Upstream profile
Kennametal Huntsville — United States
Reported possible upstream · 2026-05-28
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.
ir.vishay.com ↗ · Facility list dated May 28, 2026 — Kennametal Huntsville, CID000105
Reporting profile · Upstream profile
Kennametal Fallon — United States
Reported possible upstream · 2026-05-28
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.
ir.vishay.com ↗ · Facility list dated May 28, 2026 — Kennametal Fallon, CID000966
Reporting profile · Upstream profile
A “reported possible upstream” relationship is not a “confirmed direct” relationship.
Report a correctionCMMS-BS assesses what public sourcing disclosures establish. It is not a certification, an audit or legal advice.