Optoma
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 30 October 2026 · 5 sources
Taiwanese projector brand owned by Coretronic, selling home and office models.
There's no proof Optoma pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage, and it has no full independent audit.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Optoma? Send a right of reply.
Compare Optoma with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 1 of 6 Good requirements.
- Holds the grade back: It has 3 red flags: no evidence of a living wage, unaudited production in high-risk countries and untraced high-risk mined materials. Two or more red flags means a poor grade.
- It isn't Harm on record, because there's no serious confirmed problem on its record.
- Lacks transparency is still a poor grade: in supply chains like this, workers who can't be seen to be treated fairly are usually underpaid or unprotected.
Good requirements 1 of 6
- Not met: Pays a living wage, or holds a strong fair-pay certificationLiving wage: no evidence
- Not met: Respects worker rightsMost of its products are made in countries such as China and Malaysia, where unions are heavily restricted, and it has no full supply chain audit.
- Not met: Supply chain independently audited or certified, or at least 80% made in countries with strong labour standards
- Met: No child or forced labour findings or links
- Not met: Names the factories or farms that make its products, or is fully certified by a scheme that holds and audits that list
- Not met: Traces its cobalt, gold and other conflict minerals to the mine
Red flags 3
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wage
- Red flag: Made mostly in countries with poor worker rights, without a full independent audit of its supply chain
- Red flag: Relies on high-risk mined materials it can't traceShown to explain the grade. It isn't one of the 2 red flags that set it.
- Red flag: Fails its category's raw-material check (means Lacks transparency)
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Where it's made
These are its parent group's countries across all its brands; Optoma doesn't say where its own products are made. The rest is shown as where electronics are usually made.
| Country | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| China | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Vietnam | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| Taiwan | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| MalaysiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| South KoreaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Close to a living wage | Low |
| IndiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
Evidence
What we found
- Risk across the industry, not a finding about this company: cobalt, tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold mining carry child and forced labour risk (DR Congo, Indonesia), and assembly overtime is widespread.
- Modern slavery statement
- Relies on metals such as cobalt, gold and tin from artisanal mines where miners, including children, face toxic dust, mercury exposure and deadly tunnel collapses. It hasn't shown any steps to trace these materials to the mine, so it's graded Lacks transparency until it does.
Research notes Optoma sources its projectors through a Taiwan-based affiliate, and its parent Coretronic is one of its main suppliers; Coretronic has plants in Taiwan (Hsinchu, Zhunan, Tainan), China and Vietnam, but Optoma does not say which factories make its projectors or name other suppliers. Coretronic has committed to the RBA Code of Conduct and SA8000, while Optoma itself only sends tier 1 suppliers a questionnaire. It publishes no supplier audit results, smelter list or conflict minerals report, and its sustainability report covers only environmental supplier checks.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| UK Modern Slavery Statement Registry | Listed | Optoma Holding Limited filed a UK modern slavery statement for 2025; it reported no forced labour indicators or priority risks and left the audit and monitoring questions unanswered. View |
Sources and actions
Sources 5
Show all 5 sources
- Coretronic 2023 Annual Report (MarketScreener) · search the archive · Coretronic sites in Hsinchu, Zhunan, Tainan and Hukou (Taiwan), investments in China and factories in Vietnam
- Optoma - Sydney HiFi Castle Hill · search the archive · Australian hi-fi store selling Optoma projectors
Published by Optoma or its owner
- Optoma Modern Slavery & Human Trafficking Statement 2025 · search the archive · Products sourced primarily through a Taiwan affiliate; Coretronic is parent and key supplier, committed to the RBA Code and SA8000; tier 1 supplier questionnaire planned; no incidents found
- 2024 Optoma Sustainability Report · search the archive · Optoma is owned by Coretronic, one of its main suppliers; supplier checks cover ISO 14001 environmental certification only
- OPTOMA HOLDING LIMITED modern slavery statement summary (2026) · search the archive · 2025 statement: no priority risks or forced labour indicators reported; audit, grievance and KPI questions not answered
Company details
- Headquarters
- Taiwan
- Last researched
- 30 October 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Optoma ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/optoma, last researched 30 October 2026, accessed [date].
- Method
- Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means
Other TV and audio brands
Nothing we've rated in TV and audio is better than Lacks transparency yet.
Something missing or wrong?
Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent Optoma.