We compared 16,978 test results from four European consumer testing organisations. Three of our studies in a nutshell: how much agencies agree, whether higher prices mean higher quality — and why the market rewards brands more than tested performance.
Why we compare agencies
Independent testing organisations (dTest in Czechia, Stiftung Warentest in Germany, and others) exist to reduce the information asymmetry between manufacturers and consumers. But that role only works if different agencies reach comparable conclusions. If every agency produced a different quality ranking, which one should you trust? Three of our studies examine this question empirically — on the largest harmonised test dataset assembled in our region.
1. Cross-agency quality convergence across four European organisations
The core of our research: the harmonised QualityTest dataset with 16,978 test results and 125,978 sub-criterion ratings from four European consumer testing organisations. The study measures how strongly agencies agree in overall verdicts, which sub-criteria drive final grades, and how objectively tested quality maps onto market prices.
Why it matters: if independent agencies converge on quality, their tests are a credible public standard — and aggregating them into a single score, like ours, is methodologically sound. Our data shows the convergence is measurable and demonstrable.
2. Do you pay for quality, or for the brand?
This study links independent test results with market prices and firm-level panel data in the European home appliance industry. The finding: price premiums often attach to strategic brand position, not objectively measured quality. Premium prices persist even where differences in tested quality are modest.
Why it matters: "more expensive = better" is the most widespread purchasing heuristic. Our data shows it works only weakly for appliances — and that consumers without access to test results systematically overpay for brands.
3. A bifurcated market: quality mismatch in the global appliance industry
A hedonic pricing analysis linked to independent quality scores, framed by vertical differentiation theory and the rise of Chinese manufacturers. Tested quality translates weakly into prices, and the market is splitting in two: the premium segment sells brand architecture, challengers compete on price — and objective quality sits somewhere in between.
Why it matters: market bifurcation means consumers need an objective quality signal more than ever. The price tag won't provide it.
The takeaway
Independent testing works — agencies agree enough that their results can be aggregated into a single signal. But the market doesn't yet reward that signal: people pay for brands, not for measured quality. That is exactly why we display repairability and quality scores directly on products — so objective data is visible at the point of decision.
Další čtení
Jak dlouho doopravdy vydrží spotřebiče? Shrnutí našeho výzkumu životnosti
Pět našich studií o životnosti spotřebičů v kostce: co čekají čeští spotřebitelé, jak dlouho pračky skutečně vydrží, proč věříme na plánované zastarávání — a kam mizí vysloužilé spotřebiče.
Hvězdičky lžou: co náš výzkum říká o recenzích a vracení zboží v e-commerce
Analyzovali jsme 2,1 milionu produktů na Amazonu a 31 000 produktů středoevropského e-shopu. Čtyři naše studie v kostce: inflace hodnocení, strop predikce vratek, opravitelnost jako signál — a kdy reputace selhává.