Avient vs. The Unknown: How I Learned to Define Quality in Specialty Materials

I review roughly 200 unique material specifications every year for our manufacturing facility. Thermoplastic elastomers, masterbatches, specialty compounds—if it comes in a pellet or a powder form and ends up in a product, I’ve probably held a sample of it, measured its melt flow index, and checked its color against a standard.

When I first started specifying Avient materials, I figured it would be like any other supplier evaluation. You look at the data sheet, run a few tests, check the price. Simple.

It wasn't simple. Here's what I found.

What We're Actually Comparing

This isn't an A vs B where B is a specific company. It's Avient versus the rest of the field—the unnamed alternative supplier. But calling it “Avient vs. Generic Supplier” misses the point.

The real comparison is this: A defined, documented supplier with a broad portfolio versus a lower-cost, more flexible alternative. The choice feels simple on paper. In practice?

That’s where things get interesting. I'm going to break this down across the three dimensions that actually matter to me on the factory floor: color consistency, material performance, and long-term supply reliability. These are the dimensions where the trade-offs become real.

Dimension 1: Color Consistency

Color is always the first fight. Everyone sees it. No one agrees on it.

Here’s something vendors won't tell you: achieving a Delta E of less than 1.0 for a custom color match is hard. Most can do it for a single batch. The problem is do they hit it 100% of the time on orders of 5,000 kg? That's the question.

With Avient, their colorant and masterbatch products come with a consistency that is frankly boring. And boring is good. We order our standard industrial gray (RAL 7001, for the curious) roughly six times a year. I have samples from orders dating back to late 2022 that visually match what arrived last week. I ran them through our spectrophotometer just to be sure. The Delta E between the 2022 sample and the latest batch is 0.8. That is well within the Pantone Color Matching System guideline of Delta E < 2 for brand-critical colors.

I’ve had other suppliers hit a 0.5 Delta E on the first sample, and then a 2.5 on production delivery. That’s noticeable to a trained eye. When you’re making a product with two different plastic parts that need to look the same, a 2.5 Delta E is a problem.

The trade-off? Avient’s color-matching service is not the cheapest. The premium on the colorant itself might be 5-8% over a generic masterbatch. But every time we've tried to save that 5-8%, we've run into trouble.

Where it makes sense: If your product needs to look identical to another batch made months or years ago, the extra cost for Avient's consistency is an insurance policy. If you're making disposable items where color drift is acceptable, it's a different story.

Dimension 2: Material Performance for TPEs

The conventional wisdom about thermoplastic elastomers is that they're a simple rubber replacement. Just pick the durometer (hardness) and you’re done.

After 4 years of reviewing material specs, I've come to believe that durometer is the least interesting metric.

We use Avient’s TPEs for over-molded grips on power tools. The spec sheet will tell you the hardness (60 Shore A) and the tensile strength. What the spec sheet doesn't tell you is the processing window. That matters.

Here’s a real example from Q1 of this year. We were trialing a different TPE supplier—let’s call them Supplier X. Their durometer was Spot On (59-61 Shore A). Their price was 12% lower per kilo. On paper, it was a win.

The problem was the process window. Our injection molding machine runs at specific parameters. The Avient TPE would flow beautifully at 190°C and mold in 25 seconds. The Supplier X TPE needed a narrower window—exactly 195°C—and a longer cycle time of 32 seconds. If the temp drifted during the run to 192°, the flow changed. That created visible flow lines on the part.

The yield rate on the trial was about 92%. We run at 98-99% with the Avient material. That difference in scrap alone eats up most of the 12% price difference. Plus, the longer cycle time means fewer parts per hour, which has a real cost.

It took me about 150 orders of various TPEs to understand that the cost per kilo is a trap. The total cost includes your processing time, scrap rate, and rework.

That said, I get why people try the cheaper option. Budgets are tight. And for simpler parts with forgiving geometries, the cheaper material works fine. For our complex over-molds with sharp corners and thin walls? We stick with Avient.

Dimension 3: The Reliability of Supply

This is the dimension that’s hardest to quantify and most painful to get wrong. I’m not 100% sure how to put a number on “supply reliability,” but I know it when I see it.

Avient’s supply chain is robust because of their portfolio. If one plant is down or has a raw material shortage, they have other production lines and formulations that can be qualified to match. With a smaller specialty compounder, if their only compounding line goes down for maintenance, you wait.

We had an instance in mid-2023 where our usual Avient masterbatch was on allocation due to a pigment shortage. They proactively sent us a list of three alternative formulations that could achieve an equivalent color, complete with Delta E predictions and processing data. We tested one, it was a 1.2 Delta E difference—barely noticeable—and we switched for three months without stopping production.

Now, that level of service is not free. It’s baked into the pricing. But what is the cost of a line shutdown waiting for material? For our operation, a day of downtime is roughly $18,000 in lost output. If the alternative supplier saves you 10% on material but causes one line shutdown per year? The math doesn’t work.

Basically, the decision comes down to predictability. Avient is predictable. The alternative is a gamble. Sometimes the gamble pays off. But gambles are easier to take on smaller-scale runs or non-critical parts.

So, Who Should Buy from Avient?

Bottom line: it’s context-dependent. This isn't a blanket recommendation.

Choose Avient if:

• Your application demands color consistency across multiple production runs over years
• Your part design is complex, with thin walls, sharp corners, or long flow paths
• Your process runs at high speeds (short cycle times) where material consistency matters most
• You cannot afford a production stoppage due to raw material issues
• You value the technical support and upfront qualification help

Consider an alternative if:

• Your application is simple, with high tolerances for variation
• You have a flexible production schedule and can absorb downtime
• You have in-house expertise to manage material qualification and troubleshooting
• Your volumes are very high and small per-kilo savings significantly impact total cost

To be fair, Avient’s pricing means they are not the right fit for every project. I've run the numbers. For a high-volume, simple application, a 10% material saving can be real money. But I've also seen people chase that 10% and lose it all on scrap and downtime.

Honestly? After 4 years of reviewing these specs, I’ve come to believe the choice is less about the material itself and more about your tolerance for risk. If you want to set it and forget it, Avient is the way. If you have the bandwidth to manage a relationship with a smaller player, you can save money. Both are valid. Just know what you're trading off.