A scored comparison of five verified Chinese manufacturers offering third-party contract production of sheet masks and serums, for brand owners sourcing a mask-specialist partner in 2026.
Sheet Mask & Serum OEM Guide · written and researched by Nguyen Minh Anh, OEM Business & Brand Development Analyst · fact-checked by Feri Hardi Utami, Cosmetic R&D Manager & Formulator · last reviewed October 8, 2026
Quick answer: Nox Bellcow, Rixin Cosmetics, Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics, Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology, and TY Cosmetic are the five Chinese manufacturers that cleared this 2026 screen for third-party OEM/ODM production of sheet masks and serums, each verified through a securely-reachable corporate website offering contract manufacturing rather than only an owned-brand catalogue. Nox Bellcow scores highest at 91/100 on dedicated mask-line scale (6.5 million+ pieces a day), followed by Rixin Cosmetics at 82, Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics at 81, Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology at 74, and TY Cosmetic at 68.
Who should use this list
This list is for cosmetics and personal-care brand owners sourcing a third-party Chinese manufacturer specifically for sheet masks and/or serums — not a general “China cosmetics OEM” roundup. A company with broad cosmetics manufacturing capability but no disclosed sheet-mask or serum line, or one that could not be independently verified through a securely-reachable official website, was left out regardless of scale (see Considered but Not Listed, below). If your brand is still deciding between OEM, ODM and private-label structures before approaching any of these five factories, our OEM vs ODM vs private label comparison is useful background reading first.
How companies qualified
To qualify, a company had to be an operating manufacturer with a verifiable corporate registration and a securely-reachable, independently verifiable official website, offering third-party OEM/ODM contract manufacturing of sheet masks and/or serums specifically — not solely an owned-brand company. Research ran in August 2026 across company-official websites and general web search for sheet-mask OEM manufacturers in China; several additional leads surfaced but were dropped before scoring rather than added with weak evidence — one (Guangzhou Xujohn Bio-Technique) had two candidate domains that both returned TLS certificate errors on direct fetch, and two others (a company claiming India rather than China headquarters, and one with no verifiable company presence at all) could not be confirmed as genuine China-based contract manufacturers. Five candidates cleared the screen and are scored editorially; this is not a paid placement and no listed manufacturer paid for inclusion or position.
Quick comparison
| Name | Best for | Main advantage | Main limitation | Key fact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nox Bellcow Cosmetics | High-volume mask programmes | 6.5M+ mask pieces/day, 4 current certifications | Company-stated MOQ/lead time not disclosed | Zhongshan, Guangdong · founded 2004 · score 91/100 |
| Rixin Cosmetics | Mid-volume brands wanting a disclosed MOQ | MOQ stated from 2,000 pieces/product; 4 certifications | Founding year not disclosed | Zhuhai, Guangdong · score 82/100 |
| Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics | Fast turnaround on standard formulations | Lead time as fast as 2 weeks; 5 certifications incl. CPNP | Mask-specific MOQ starts at a higher 30,000 pieces | Founded 2013 · score 81/100 |
| Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology | Brands wanting a large pre-built formula library | 6,000+ mature formulas; 500+ brands served/year | No MOQ or lead time disclosed | Guangzhou · founded 2006 · score 74/100 |
| TY Cosmetic | Smaller first-run orders | MOQ from 1,000 pieces/product — lowest of the five | Fewest disclosed certifications (2) of the five | Guangzhou · score 68/100 |
The five Chinese sheet mask & serum OEM/ODM manufacturers
1. Nox Bellcow Cosmetics Co., Ltd. — 91/100
Nox Bellcow’s differentiator on this list is sheer dedicated mask-production scale: a disclosed 120,000 sqm of GMP workshop space, over 5,000 employees, and a stated capacity of more than 6.5 million mask pieces a day, exporting to 40+ countries. Founded in 2004, the Zhongshan-based manufacturer lists face masks as a dedicated, core business line rather than one product among many, alongside wet wipes and general skincare. Its certification set is the broadest tied for first on this list — ISO 9001:2008, ISO 13485-2003, GMPc-EU and GMPc-US — spanning both general quality-management and cosmetics-specific good-manufacturing-practice standards.
Best suited for: brands planning a high-volume mask programme that needs a manufacturer already running at industrial mask-specific scale. Not ideal for: a brand testing a small first batch, since neither MOQ nor lead time is disclosed publicly and the company’s scale points toward larger production runs. Company-stated vs verified: the 120,000 sqm facility size, employee count and daily output figure are company-published on Nox Bellcow’s own site; certifications are listed on a specific product page rather than a dedicated certifications page, which was reviewed as published but not independently re-audited. (Evidence: hknbc.com)
2. Rixin Cosmetics — 82/100
Rixin’s standout trait is transparency on order size: it is the only one of the five to publish a general sheet-mask-and-serum MOQ figure on its homepage (starting from 2,000 pieces per product), rather than leaving order-size questions for direct inquiry. The Zhuhai-based company states roughly 25 years of expertise and more than 1,000 brands supported, operating a 10,000+ sqm, 100,000-level GMPC dust-free workshop across five automated lines producing 50,000+ pieces a day. Its certification set — GMPC, ISO 22716:2007, FDA and BSCI — covers cosmetics-manufacturing quality, US market registration, and a social-compliance audit standard, a different mix from Nox Bellcow’s more quality-management-weighted set.
Best suited for: mid-volume brands that want order-size clarity before making first contact. Not ideal for: brands that specifically need a confirmed founding year or long-run track record documentation, since Rixin’s own site does not disclose one despite the stated 25 years of expertise. Company-stated vs verified: the 2,000-piece MOQ, “~25 years” and “1,000+ brands” figures are all company-published on Rixin’s own site and were not independently re-verified beyond confirming the page’s content. (Evidence: rixincosmetics.com)
3. Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics Co., Ltd. — 81/100
Xiran’s differentiator is speed and certification breadth combined: the Baiyun District, Guangzhou-based company states production turnaround as fast as two weeks and holds the widest certification set of the five — ISO, GMPC, FDA registration, BSCI, and CPNP (the EU cosmetic product notification mark, relevant for brands with European retail ambitions). Founded in 2013, Xiran states sheet-mask-specific capacity of more than 10 million pieces a year within a broader 10,000,000-piece-a-month overall output across its full product range (skincare, body care, hair care, makeup). Its stated mask-specific MOQ of 30,000 pieces is the highest of the five, a trade-off against its disclosed speed and certification depth.
Best suited for: brands with EU retail plans that value CPNP-relevant notification experience and can commit to a higher starting order size in exchange for faster turnaround. Not ideal for: a brand wanting the smallest possible first-run order, since Xiran’s 30,000-piece mask MOQ is six to thirty times higher than the other four companies’ general MOQs. Company-stated vs verified: the 2-week lead time, 30,000-piece MOQ and 10-million-piece annual mask capacity are all company-published figures, cross-referenced against Xiran’s own externally-published “top 10” industry article rather than independently audited. (Evidence: xirancosmetics.com)
4. Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology Corporation — 74/100
Bawei’s differentiator is formulation breadth rather than raw production scale: the Baiyun District, Guangzhou-based company states 60 invention patents and more than 6,000 mature formulas on file, serving 500+ brands a year — the deepest pre-built formula library disclosed among the five, useful for a brand that wants to select from existing formulations rather than commission a fully custom one. Brands evaluating which actives to specify in a custom or library formulation may find our Madecassoside vs Centella extract cica guide useful, since cica-family actives are common in both soothing sheet masks and serums. Founded in 2006, its product scope covers sheet and clay face masks alongside face, body and hair care and makeup. Its certification set — US GMPC, ISO 22716, ISO 9001, CMA Qualification and CNAS — adds two China-specific testing/accreditation marks (CMA, CNAS) not held by any of the other four companies on this list.
Best suited for: brands wanting to launch quickly from an existing formula rather than commissioning new R&D. Not ideal for: brands that need a stated MOQ or lead time before budgeting, since Bawei discloses neither publicly. Company-stated vs verified: the patent count, formula-library size and brands-served figures are company-published on Bawei’s own site and were not independently re-verified. (Evidence: baweicosmetic.com)
5. TY Cosmetic — 68/100
TY Cosmetic’s differentiator is accessibility for a smaller first order: its stated MOQ of 1,000 pieces per product is the lowest of the five, alongside a stated approximate 35-day lead time cited for one project (the company notes this varies). The Guangzhou-based manufacturer states 13 years of industry experience, 2,000+ brand clients, 160 million skincare products produced a year and 8,000+ developed formulas, with facial masks sitting as one line within a broader scope spanning skincare, sunscreen, hair care and mom-and-baby care. Its certification set is the narrowest of the five — GMPC and ISO 22716 only — which is the main driver of its lower score relative to the other four.
Best suited for: brands wanting the lowest barrier to a first production run among the five. Not ideal for: brands whose retail market requires a wider certification set than GMPC and ISO 22716 alone. Company-stated vs verified: the 1,000-piece MOQ and ~35-day lead time are company-published, with the lead-time figure explicitly flagged by TY Cosmetic itself as project-specific rather than a fixed promise. (Evidence: tyoemcosmetic.com)
What separates them
All five passed the same screen, but they split into distinct operating profiles once scale, order size and certification are compared side by side. Scale separates Nox Bellcow from the rest most clearly: its 6.5-million-piece daily output and 120,000 sqm of workshop space are an order of magnitude beyond what the other four disclose. Order-size accessibility runs almost in reverse of pure scale — TY Cosmetic’s 1,000-piece MOQ and Rixin’s 2,000-piece MOQ sit at the accessible end, while Xiran’s 30,000-piece mask-specific MOQ sits well above both, a trade made in exchange for Xiran’s two-week turnaround and the widest certification set (five marks, including the EU-relevant CPNP).
Certification composition also differs by purpose, not just count: Nox Bellcow and Rixin lean toward quality-management and US-market marks (ISO 9001/13485, GMPc-EU/US, FDA), Xiran adds the EU-specific CPNP notification mark, and Bawei is the only one holding China-specific CMA and CNAS accreditation — relevant if a brand’s own compliance documentation needs to reference Chinese national testing standards specifically. Formulation depth is Bawei’s clearest edge, with 6,000+ mature formulas against competitors that emphasise either scale (Nox Bellcow) or speed (Xiran) instead. Company-stated figures throughout — MOQ, lead time, capacity, formula counts — come from each company’s own website and were not independently audited beyond confirming the page content as published.
Matching a manufacturer to your needs
Choose Nox Bellcow if you are planning a high-volume mask programme and want a manufacturer already operating at industrial mask-specific scale with a broad quality-certification set. Choose Rixin Cosmetics if you want MOQ transparency up front at a mid-volume order size. Choose Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics if you have EU retail ambitions, value CPNP-relevant experience, and can commit to a 30,000-piece starting order in exchange for a two-week turnaround. Choose Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology if you want to launch from an existing formula out of a 6,000+-item library rather than commissioning new development. Choose TY Cosmetic if your priority is the smallest possible first production run among the five.
Brands weighing a Chinese sheet-mask partner against a Malaysian alternative closer to home may also want to compare OEM2YOU’s own Skin Care product range, which covers facial treatment formats under the same safety and documentation expectations without the cross-border shipping lane.
China’s CSAR Notification Pathway — What It Means for a Sheet Mask Buyer
One regulatory distinction specific to China shapes how quickly any of these five manufacturers can actually get a new sheet-mask formulation to market, and it’s worth understanding before a brand locks in a launch timeline. Since January 1, 2021, China’s cosmetics industry has operated under the Cosmetic Supervision and Administration Regulation (CSAR), administered by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA), which splits products into two regulatory tracks: “special cosmetics” (such as sunscreens, hair dyes, and products making anti-hair-loss or whitening-via-registered-ingredient claims) must go through the slower, stricter NMPA registration process, while “general cosmetics” — the category most standard sheet masks and serums fall into — only require notification, a comparatively faster filing route.
This distinction matters directly for the five manufacturers above because none of their public certification lists discloses which regulatory track a specific formulation has cleared. A sheet mask marketed with a plain hydrating or soothing claim will typically move through China’s general-cosmetics notification pathway; the same mask reformulated with a registered whitening active, or with a medical-sounding efficacy claim, can be pushed into the special-cosmetics registration track instead — a materially slower and more document-heavy process. A brand working with any of Nox Bellcow, Rixin, Xiran, Bawei or TY Cosmetic should raise this classification question before finalising a formula’s marketing claims, not after, since it is the claim on the label — not the product category itself — that decides which NMPA pathway applies. (Source: NMPA, Provisions for Registration and Filing of Cosmetics, official English translation.)
Frequently asked questions
Which Chinese manufacturer has the largest sheet mask production capacity in 2026?
Nox Bellcow Cosmetics states the largest disclosed sheet-mask production capacity among the five manufacturers reviewed for 2026, at more than 6.5 million mask pieces a day across 120,000 sqm of GMP workshop space, exporting to 40+ countries. This scale is roughly an order of magnitude above what the other four companies on this list disclose, making Nox Bellcow the clearest fit for a brand planning a high-volume mask programme rather than a smaller first run.
What is the lowest minimum order quantity (MOQ) among Chinese sheet mask OEM manufacturers?
TY Cosmetic states the lowest minimum order quantity of the five manufacturers reviewed for this 2026 list, at 1,000 pieces per product, followed by Rixin Cosmetics at 2,000 pieces per product. By contrast, Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics states a mask-specific MOQ of 30,000 pieces, and Nox Bellcow and Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology do not disclose an MOQ figure publicly at all, so a brand prioritising a small first-run order should start with TY Cosmetic or Rixin and confirm current terms directly.
Does any manufacturer on this list hold EU-relevant cosmetic certification?
Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics is the only one of the five manufacturers reviewed for 2026 to disclose CPNP (Cosmetic Products Notification Portal) relevance among its certifications, alongside ISO, GMPC, FDA registration and BSCI — the broadest certification set of the five. Brands with European retail plans should confirm Xiran’s current CPNP notification status directly, since a listed certification mark reflects what the company’s own website states as of August 2026 research rather than an independently re-verified live registration.
How does China’s cosmetics notification system affect sourcing a sheet mask OEM?
Under China’s Cosmetic Supervision and Administration Regulation (CSAR), in force since January 1, 2021, general (non-special-use) cosmetics such as most sheet masks are subject to notification rather than the stricter registration process reserved for special-use cosmetics like sunscreens or hair dyes, meaning a standard sheet mask typically clears China’s domestic regulatory pathway faster than a special-use product would. A brand should still confirm with its chosen manufacturer whether any planned active-ingredient or efficacy claim (such as a whitening or anti-ageing claim) would push a specific sheet-mask formulation into a stricter classification requiring registration instead of notification.
Can a brand outside China order a small first batch from any of these five manufacturers?
TY Cosmetic (1,000-piece MOQ) and Rixin Cosmetics (2,000-piece MOQ) are the two manufacturers on this 2026 list that publicly disclose an order size accessible to a brand testing a first small batch; the other three either state a higher minimum (Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics, 30,000 pieces for masks) or do not disclose an MOQ figure at all (Nox Bellcow, Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology). None of the five discloses export-specific shipping terms or documentation requirements publicly, so a brand outside China should confirm these directly with the manufacturer before committing to an order.
Considered but not listed
Guangzhou Xujohn Bio-Technique, a masks and lip-masks specialist with 15+ years in the category, surfaced as a promising candidate during research but was excluded: its two candidate domains (xujohn.com and xujohnbio.com) both returned TLS certificate errors on direct fetch — one resolved to an unrelated third-party certificate, the other presented a self-signed certificate — so the company’s official site could not be independently and securely verified at the time of this research. A brand should still consider Xujohn if it can verify the company’s current official domain and certificate status directly (for example, through a live video call or a third-party trade-directory listing with verifiable contact details), since the specialisation itself (15+ years, mask-category focus) would otherwise be a strong fit for this list. Two further names — one claiming India rather than China headquarters despite appearing in China-manufacturer search results, and one with no locatable verifiable company presence at all — were dropped during discovery and never added as scored candidates, since neither reached the baseline of “a real, verifiable company website was found.”
How this list was built
This list was built from company-official websites verified by direct fetch and screenshot capture (research run research-20260826-1208, captured 2026-08-26), cross-checked against general web search for China sheet-mask and facial-mask OEM manufacturers, which also surfaced two self-published competitor “top 10” listicles used only to confirm candidate names for further independent verification, not as a data source in themselves. Each candidate was screened for: operating manufacturer status, a verifiable corporate registration, a securely-reachable and independently verifiable official website (not one returning a TLS/certificate error), and third-party OEM/ODM contract manufacturing of sheet masks and/or serums specifically. Five candidates cleared screening and are scored editorially across four weighted dimensions — certification (30%), product specialisation (25%), scale and capacity (25%) and track record (20%) — normalising to a 100-point scale; ties would be broken by earlier founding year, though no tie occurred here. What this research did not do: contact any manufacturer directly to verify MOQ, lead time or pricing, and did not independently audit any listed certification beyond confirming it appears on the company’s own current webpage. For brand owners new to the OEM/ODM/private-label distinction referenced throughout this list, see our guide to exclusive formulation in cosmetics OEM.
Sources and references
- Nox Bellcow Cosmetics — hknbc.com
- Rixin Cosmetics — rixincosmetics.com
- Guangzhou Xiran Cosmetics — xirancosmetics.com
- Guangdong Bawei Biotechnology — baweicosmetic.com
- TY Cosmetic — tyoemcosmetic.com
- NMPA (National Medical Products Administration) — Provisions for Registration and Filing of Cosmetics, official English translation
Limitations
This list reflects what each manufacturer discloses on its own official website as of August 2026 and does not include direct-contact verification of MOQ, lead time, pricing or current certification validity; a brand should confirm all of these directly before signing. The screen required a securely-reachable official website and a disclosed sheet-mask or serum manufacturing line — any Chinese OEM meeting these criteria but not surfaced by this research’s search terms would not appear here, and Guangzhou Xujohn Bio-Technique specifically was excluded only for a website-verification failure, not for any disqualifying business fact.
Update history
2026-10-08: First published.