PPWR software compared 2026: the 7 best solutions put to the test

PPWR implementation: What matters since 12 August 2026

The PPWR, the regulation on packaging and packaging waste, entered into force on 11 February 2025 and has applied, in principle, in all EU member states since 12 August 2026.

For your company, what matters most now is bringing packaging data, responsibilities, and evidence together in a structured way. If you place packaging on the market in the EU, you should check which information is already available, where data gaps exist, and how you can reliably manage technical documentation and declarations of conformity going forward. A suitable PPWR tool can support you significantly in this. But which functions and features are actually relevant for your selection? Our PPWR software comparison provides the answer.

What should PPWR software deliver?

How PPWR software solutions can differ

Our PPWR software comparison shows that the various solutions on the market set different priorities. When choosing the right solution for you, there are a few distinguishing features you should pay particular attention to. PPWR software can differ fundamentally in scope of functionality, target audience, and approach.

The following key distinguishing features are relevant for a PPWR software comparison:

• Software type and segment: Some solutions focus on product data and packaging management. Others are designed as compliance, ESG, or ERP-adjacent solutions. There are also analysis and optimisation solutions, as well as managed service models.
• Scope of functionality: Depending on the software provider, the scope of functionality ranges from pure data capture to full compliance mapping and optimisation and analysis features.
• Target audience: PPWR software is suitable, for example, for consumer goods manufacturers with many SKUs and packaging variants. ESG and compliance platforms tend to suit companies with existing ESG and ISO management systems. Other solutions are aimed primarily at innovation teams in product development.
• Operating model: With a self-service platform, the company works independently in the system on an ongoing basis. With a managed or hybrid service model, the provider takes over at least part of the data collection, assessment, or implementation.

PPWR software comparison: the ranking

Rank 1: leadity

Software type: Compliance, ESG, and ERP-adjacent solution

leadity centrally consolidates packaging data, supplier evidence, and technical documentation, and lets you create EU declarations of conformity directly within the platform. PPWR requirements can be covered as a standalone topic or linked to your ESG and ISO management system. This makes it easy for smaller companies to get started with leadity, while growing businesses can integrate PPWR directly into a broader compliance system. If you want to clarify your current status before deciding on a software, you can do so with the free PPWR readiness check.

Scope & features:

• Central capture of packaging and material data across products, markets, and packaging types
• Creation of technical documentation and EU declarations of conformity (DoC) directly within the platform
• Embedding PPWR requirements into existing ESG and ISO processes and responsibilities
• Central evidence and document management across multiple compliance topics

Typical use cases:

• A company wants to manage packaging data, supplier evidence, and technical documentation centrally and connect them to existing ESG, ISO, or compliance processes.
• A company already uses ESG, ISO, or other compliance processes and wants to clarify how PPWR data, evidence, and responsibilities can be mapped within them.
• A compliance team needs to continuously track PPWR requirements, open actions, and evidence, without building a separate standalone system alongside its existing management processes.

Price & payment model:

Costs depend on various factors, such as the scope of functionality and the size of your company. However, you can ask about pricing individually in the PPWR readiness check, a personal and free consultation on PPWR.

Strengths:

• PPWR can be embedded into existing roles, actions, and evidence.
• The overall view for management and compliance officers extends beyond PPWR into ESG, ISO, and risk processes.
• The clea AI feature can read documents and establish links between packaging data and other compliance topics, instead of having to capture information manually multiple times.

Weaknesses & limitations:

• leadity focuses on cross-functional compliance management. For companies that want to capture and optimise packaging in detail down to component, material, and weight level, a specialised packaging data solution may be better suited.
• For companies with a strong focus on design and material optimisation, an additional analysis solution may still be worthwhile.

Best suited for:

leadity is suitable for companies of any size that want to implement PPWR either as a standalone topic or manage it together with ESG, ISO, and management processes. If you are looking for a managed model, you might want to consider PwC, for example.

Rank 2: CONSUST

Software type: Compliance and ESG-adjacent solution with a CO₂ and supply chain focus

CONSUST positions itself primarily as CO₂ and supply chain software. PPWR is integrated as a separate module alongside the core product, covering everything from packaging data capture through role analysis and obligation derivation to conformity documentation. However, the platform’s focus remains on emissions and supply chain data.

Scope & features:

• CO₂ and supply chain management as a core function
• PPWR aspects as an additional module of the platform
• A guided PPWR process from packaging data capture through role and obligation derivation to conformity documentation

Typical use cases:

A company sources packaging from numerous suppliers and doesn’t know which PPWR roles and obligations apply to each packaging item. How can it centrally capture missing packaging data and evidence while also linking it to CO₂ and supply chain information?

Price & payment model:

No specific price or public standard pricing model is available. You should request the actual costs individually from CONSUST.

Strengths:

• PPWR can be connected well to existing CO₂ and supply chain processes.
• The CONSUST PPWR software is especially useful if you want to view PPWR in the context of broader climate data.

Weaknesses & limitations:

• Since PPWR is treated only as a partial aspect alongside the core product, there is potentially less depth on PPWR specifics.
• For companies without a CO₂ and supply chain focus, the platform may be too broad.

Best suited for:

CONSUST’s solution is best suited for companies that want to consider PPWR as part of a broader CO₂ and supply chain approach, rather than looking at PPWR in isolation.

Rank 3: VERSO

Software type: Product data and packaging management

VERSO is a provider with a clear product data focus. The focus is on capturing products, packaging components, and supplier data, as well as creating declarations of conformity. This means the PPWR compliance tool goes beyond a pure packaging database, while remaining closely aligned with product master data, procurement, and supplier communication.

Scope & features:

• Capture of packaging components and materials
• Automated requests to suppliers for missing packaging data and evidence
• Automated creation and sharing of declarations of conformity and technical documentation

Typical use cases:

A company places many products with different packaging components on the market but has not yet received all material data and evidence from its suppliers. How can it centrally capture packaging data, request missing information in a structured way, and then create and share declarations of conformity?

Price & payment model:

No specific price for the PPWR solution is publicly available. VERSO refers you to an individual demo and contact request.

Strengths:

• High level of detail for packaging components and materials
• Close integration with the packaging development and procurement departments

Weaknesses & limitations:

• ESG, ISO, or climate topics are covered only to a limited extent.
• Implementation can fail, or require additional clean-up effort, if product, packaging, and supplier master data are incomplete or inconsistent.

Best suited for:

VERSO’s solution is particularly suited to companies with many SKUs and packaging variants that primarily need in-depth product data management, such as FMCG manufacturers who want to treat PPWR deliberately as a standalone specialist topic, separate from ESG reporting or ISO processes.

Rank 4: Tanso

Software type: Product data and packaging management

Tanso follows a broad platform approach, connecting PPWR with ESG, CO₂, and supply chain topics. Its PPWR module focuses on central management of packaging and material data, automated compliance checks, supplier involvement, and the creation of declarations of conformity. The solution is therefore aimed in particular at manufacturing companies with extensive packaging portfolios.

Scope & features:

• Comprehensive packaging data capture and management
• Comparative overview of multiple providers within its own content
• Automated checks of packaging against PPWR requirements such as minimisation, recyclability, hazardous substances, and recycled content

Typical use cases:

A manufacturing company with an extensive packaging portfolio wants to take over bills of materials, materials, and components directly from its ERP system, automatically check them against PPWR requirements, and request missing evidence from suppliers. How can the information then be used centrally for declarations of conformity and technical documentation?

Price & payment model:

The provider does not state a specific standard price; costs depend on the scope and complexity of your company.

Strengths:

• Tanso offers a high level of detail for packaging data and links it to products, suppliers, and other sustainability data.
• Automated PPWR checks and an integrated supplier portal reduce manual effort.

Weaknesses & limitations:

• Tanso is designed primarily for companies with extensive packaging portfolios and many suppliers. For companies with few packaging variants or a small portfolio, the platform is likely oversized.

Best suited for:

Tanso’s PPWR compliance software is best suited for companies focused on packaging data management that are looking for a specialised solution rather than a system connected to further compliance topics.

Rank 5: PwC

Software type: Managed service model (hybrid consulting and software model)

With “Check Your Value Chain”, PwC offers a hybrid model combining consulting and software-supported assessment. Companies do not operate their own software instance in the classic sense; instead, large parts of data collection and assessment are guided by PwC experts.

Scope & features:

• Expert-led assessment of the value chain, including PPWR-relevant aspects
• A combination of consulting services and digital evaluation
• Structured collection and consolidation of PPWR-relevant packaging data and documents through role- and product-specific questionnaires

Typical use cases:

A company needs to become PPWR-compliant at short notice but has neither complete packaging data nor sufficient internal capacity. How can it collect and verify the required information and evidence along the value chain in a structured way, and have the necessary documentation created from it?

Price & payment model:

No public standard pricing model is available. The price is therefore likely to depend on the project.

Strengths:

• PwC takes over large parts of data collection and assessment, relieving the burden on your internal teams.
• PwC’s offering can be particularly helpful if you lack expertise or capacity at short notice.
• PwC’s solution brings valuable consulting know-how beyond pure software.

Weaknesses & limitations:

• With the managed model, knowledge and process responsibility lie more heavily with the service provider.
• Little self-direction for companies that want to work in the system themselves.
• Your company builds up little know-how of its own. Since PPWR is not a one-off project, repeated external support, potentially at significant cost, is likely to be needed in future.

Best suited for:

PwC’s solution is particularly suited to companies with a lack of a reliable internal data foundation or limited internal capacity. The PPWR tool is of interest if you are looking for a guided readiness build-up rather than a software implementation.

Rank 6: cubemos

Software type: Compliance and product data solution with supply chain integration

cubemos maps PPWR requirements in a central software and connects packaging data with adjacent topics such as CO₂ accounting and ESG reporting.

Scope & features:

• Import and structured management of packaging and material data
• Management of supplier evidence as well as creation and documentation of declarations of conformity

Typical use cases:

A company with several packaging units wants to take over packaging master data from its ERP system, request missing supplier evidence in a structured way, and use the information for declarations of conformity and, where applicable, EPR filings. How can this process be mapped centrally?

Price & payment model:

cubemos does not publish a standard pricing model. You should therefore ask the provider directly about prices, module scope, implementation effort, and possible costs for interfaces or additional consulting services.

Strengths:

• Packaging data, material information, supplier evidence, and PPWR assessments combined in one central data foundation
• Links PPWR data to further ESG, CO₂, and supply chain processes, so information can be reused multiple times

Weaknesses & limitations:

• Less suitable for companies with modest PPWR needs
• Functions are focused mainly on compliance, data management, and evidence documentation

Best suited for:

cubemos is particularly interesting for companies with many packaging units, suppliers, and evidence obligations that need a central data foundation and automated documentation processes.

Rank 7: Greenable

Software type: Product data and packaging management

Greenable structures packaging, material, and supplier data for PPWR evidence. The solution is part of a platform for product-related sustainability data but only covers broader compliance and EPR processes to a limited extent.

Scope & features:

• Hierarchical capture of packaging, components, materials, and weights
• Management of supplier data and missing evidence
• Creation of technical documentation and declarations of conformity

Typical use cases:

A manufacturing company wants to link primary, secondary, and transport packaging with materials, weights, suppliers, and the respective products. How can it capture missing evidence in a structured way and use the data for PPWR documentation as well as further product-related sustainability requirements?

Price & payment model:

No public standard prices are given. You can request exact prices individually on enquiry.

Strengths:

• Structured data foundation for packaging, materials, and evidence
• Links with PCF, LCA, and DPP data

Weaknesses & limitations:

• Limited product scope; not suitable as a comprehensive ESG or ISO management platform
• Limited scope of functionality focused on data capture and documentation; automated EPR processes are not explained in detail

Best suited for:

Greenable’s solution is particularly suited to manufacturing companies that first want to build a structured data foundation for PPWR evidence. For extensive EPR processes or in-depth compliance and optimisation requirements, you should compare further solutions.

Software instance or managed service – the fourth decision factor

Besides software segment and ranking position, PPWR solutions also differ in who operates the system during day-to-day use.

With a self-service software platform, your company works independently with the solution on an ongoing basis. This model is suitable if you want to establish PPWR as its own process involving several departments, with data, evidence, and responsibilities managed internally. Setting up this type of platform requires more effort, but this can be significantly eased with some onboarding support. leadity therefore supports you in building processes through guided implementation. In addition, the software is browser-based and ready to use immediately, with no separate installation required.

With a managed or hybrid service model, the provider takes over substantial parts of data collection, assessment, or implementation. One example is the PPWR software “Check Your Value Chain” by PwC. This approach can make sense for you if you lack internal capacity or PPWR expertise at short notice. In return, process knowledge and responsibility remain more heavily with the service provider. Before signing a contract, your company should therefore clarify who owns the data, how it can be exported, and whether you can continue the processes independently later on.

Which option is the better fit for you depends mainly on your internal resources, the degree of self-direction you want, and the long-term importance of PPWR in your company.

PPWR software compared at a glance

Legend for your PPWR software comparison: ✅ very strong | ☑️ well suited | ⚠️ limited | ❌ not centrally listed

	leadity	CONSUST	VERSO	Tanso	PwC	cubemos	Greenable
Scope/functionality	✅	✅	☑️	☑️	☑️	☑️	⚠️
Packaging data depth	☑️	☑️	✅	✅	☑️	✅	✅
Declarations of conformity	✅	✅	✅	✅	✅	✅	☑️
ERP integration	✅	☑️	✅	✅	⚠️	☑️	⚠️
Suitability for small portfolios	✅	☑️	⚠️	⚠️	✅	⚠️	⚠️
Scalability	✅	✅	✅	✅	☑️	☑️	☑️
Score	9.4/10	8.3/10	8.3/10	8.3/10	7.2/10	7.2/10	5.6/10

What does PPWR software really cost? ROI and total cost of ownership

The licence or subscription is only part of the bill for PPWR software. Depending on the solution, further costs arise for implementation, data migration, ongoing data maintenance, and more. That’s why it’s important to look at the ROI and the total cost of ownership (TCO).

ROI stands for Return on Investment and, put simply, describes what the software delivers compared to what it costs. TCO stands for Total Cost of Ownership and describes the total costs of a solution over its entire period of use — in other words, the costs of the licence or subscription, plus implementation, interfaces, training, and ongoing maintenance.

For the total cost of ownership (TCO), you should consider at least these cost items:

• Licence or subscription: depending on your users, modules, data volume, products, or locations
• Setup and data migration: for example, for data cleansing, mapping, and importing your existing packaging data
• Consulting and customisation: for example, for process design, role models, or custom analyses
• Interfaces and IT effort: for example, for ERP, PIM, or other system integrations
• Training: including the time needed for coordination, testing, and approvals
• Ongoing data maintenance: especially when your products, packaging, suppliers, and evidence change
• Extensions: when further countries, locations, product areas, or users are added
• Additional specialist tools: if your chosen solution does not cover certain analysis, optimisation, or reporting tasks

A simple ROI and TCO logic is enough for an initial economic assessment of a PPWR tool.

The annual benefit can result from time saved internally, avoided duplicate work, avoided additional costs, and a monetisable risk benefit:
Annual benefit = time saved internally + avoided duplicate work + avoided additional costs + monetisable risk benefit

Besides the licence, the total costs also include implementation, interfaces, training, ongoing maintenance, and additional tools:
TCO = licence + implementation + interfaces + training + ongoing maintenance + additional tools

The choice is economically worthwhile if the annual benefit exceeds the total costs.

Which PPWR software is right for you?

The right solution for your company depends less on its ranking position in our PPWR software comparison and more on your starting situation:

• If you have existing ESG, ISO, or compliance management, then an integrated solution like leadity is a good fit, since PPWR can be embedded into overarching responsibilities, actions, and evidence.
• If you have limited internal capacity, a managed model like PwC can make sense. This lets you prioritise data collection, assessment, and readiness building first.
• If you have many SKUs and deep packaging bills of materials, product data and packaging management solutions like VERSO or Tanso can be particularly interesting.
• If your focus is mainly on CO₂ and supply chain data, CONSUST can be a particularly interesting PPWR software for you.
• If you are looking for material and design optimisation, cubemos could be the right solution for you. The platform is particularly relevant for innovation teams and product development with a strong analytical focus.

Before making a decision, you should run a concrete product demo using your own use case. A typical packaging item, a real product data set, and a specific evidence process are well suited for this. This quickly reveals whether the solution actually works for your company in everyday use, or only sounds convincing on the product page.

Conclusion & recommendation

You should not choose a PPWR tool based solely on the longest feature list. What matters is whether the solution fits your portfolio, your existing data quality, your current management systems, and your internal implementation capacity.

In our PPWR software comparison, PPWR software from leadity ranks first. With the software, PPWR can be handled as a standalone topic as well as embedded in a broader ESG, ISO, and compliance context. This makes the modular platform particularly interesting for small and medium-sized companies, as well as for larger companies that don’t want to manage responsibilities, actions, and evidence in yet another standalone system.

Other solutions may be a better fit for specific requirements: PwC for companies that initially need external support, VERSO or Tanso for a strong packaging data focus, cubemos for analysis and optimisation tasks in product development, and CONSUST for a primary focus on CO₂ and supply chain topics.