A supplier's website is a marketing document; its registry entry is a record written for another purpose. Placing them side by side is one way to test a company's self-description without visiting it. This page is about that comparison and what its mismatches do and do not mean.
We take the claims a site makes: legal name, address, year of founding, activity, size, ownership and certifications. Each is paired with the matching registry field where one exists. The output is a table of three kinds of rows: match, difference, and unavailable because the registry does not publish that field. Differences are listed with both values and are never turned into accusations.
A difference can be ordinary: a trading name, an old address kept on a footer, an activity described more broadly than its recorded code. The report distinguishes those from the ones that bear on your order.
The site's footer or terms may hold the legal name; it is set against the register. A missing legal form on the site is noted, as it limits what can be matched.
A site may show a showroom or a warehouse while the registry holds an office. The report states which the register records and does not treat the gap as an error by itself.
A claim of long standing is compared with the registration date. A younger record can reflect a re-registration, so it is flagged as a question, not a finding.
The described business is compared with the recorded activity classification, with the note that a recorded classification may be broader or older than the activity today.
A brand name, an address move, or a group structure where the site speaks for the group and the record for one member. Marked as inference with the likely reason.
A different legal entity from the one invoicing, or an activity that excludes the goods offered. Marked for you to raise directly with the supplier.
Where only the supplier can clarify, the point sits in the open-points list with the question to ask.
The comparison reflects the pages as they were when read, since a website is not an archive.
A register may publish officers and filings, or only name and status. Fields not published are reported as unavailable.
Two sources can agree and both be wrong, or both reflect the supplier's own filing. The report says consistency, not accuracy.
Research reports what can be established from public and provided sources. It is not a guarantee about a counterparty's future conduct and not legal advice.
The comparison covers the pages that state factual claims about the company, and the source log lists the pages read.
No. The report lists the difference and the likely ordinary explanations, and leaves the conclusion to you.
No. You send the supplier details; the sources are read and cited in the log.
No obligation. We read your request and reply with a straight answer.
Tell us what you need to find out and by when. We confirm scope before any work starts.
Request research