A brand may need to authenticate a product at a customer touchpoint or coordinate lifecycle events across manufacturers, distributors and service partners. These requirements can coexist, but they create different integration work. Decide which is the main bottleneck before shortlisting platforms.
Reviewed on 5 September 2026. Written by Hashentic, one of the providers compared. The table distinguishes our implemented capabilities from the provider descriptions linked below. “Confirm” means the reviewed sources do not establish the exact feature; it is not a claim that the feature is absent. Recommendations are our assessment of fit, without comparative security testing or equivalent commercial quotes.
The decision behind the comparison
Kezzler documents DataExchange, ProductLifecycle and ProductVerify; its passport tooling supports multiple template profiles. Hashentic connects secure NFC, configurable records, public passport data and event-driven actions. A record containing lifecycle fields is not automatically a complete partner event network.
Prepare one model, two batches and a small set of serialized items. Add a shipment, a receipt, a repair and a correction. For each event, identify its source, timestamp, access rules and responsible owner. Then ask which connections already exist and which are project-specific work.
Capabilities at a glance
| Capability | Hashentic | Kezzler |
|---|---|---|
| Authentication evidence | NTAG 424 DNA and EM4425 cryptographic checks; static QR/NTAG215 are information links. | ProductVerify uses serialized identities; confirm physical verification method. |
| Customer experience | Branded pages with templates selected by country, identifier type and labels. | Product and lifecycle information; confirm the customer journey. |
| Product passports | Configurable records and public JSON-LD data; required content must be verified. | Passport templates with market/use-case profiles. |
| Forms and automation | Forms, six triggers, ten action types and conditions; optional AI-assisted drafts. | Lifecycle event processes; confirm equivalent form workflows. |
| Integration and setup | REST API, incoming webhooks, outgoing HTTP actions; supported desktop NFC writing. | GS1-oriented event exchange and secure APIs. |
Sources: Traceability; Passport template updates.
Hashentic: technology, forms, workflows and platform.
Pros and cons
Hashentic
Strengths
- Secure NFC, product records and customer forms can feed the same configured process.
- Your team can define follow-up actions and connect existing systems.
Limitations and trade-offs
- No ready-made EPCIS connector was established in the audited implementation.
- Multi-party event coverage requires integration design and agreement with data owners.
Kezzler
Strengths
- Named capabilities for event exchange and lifecycle data.
- Passport profiles for differing market requirements.
Limitations and trade-offs
- Coverage depends on the participating systems and supplied events.
- A serialized identity alone does not specify physical anti-copy evidence.
A pilot that answers the important questions
- Import a model, batches and individual identities using agreed identifiers.
- Exchange shipment and receipt events between two sample systems.
- Correct an event without losing the required historical context.
- Verify one physical item and retrieve the appropriate product-passport data.
Is Hashentic a Kezzler alternative?
Choose Hashentic when secure scans and configurable customer actions are the immediate need, with a defined set of data integrations.
Include Kezzler when coordinating traceability events across several partners is the main requirement and the proposed connectors match your systems.
Compare the complete rollout
Compare the same partner count, event volume, history-retention requirement and export scope. Separate connector setup, data cleanup and ongoing operation from the platform subscription. Success depends on usable events from participants, not merely on the presence of a traceability dashboard.
Discuss your pilot with sample products and an agreed test plan.
