Razer

Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.

Last researched 3 November 2026 · 4 sources

Gaming hardware company selling mice, keyboards and headsets.

There's no proof Razer pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage, and it has no full independent audit.

Better-graded laptops and computers

Graded higher than Razer, selling the same kinds of things. Second-hand first.

2 refurbished sellers, Good by ruleBuying second-hand or refurbished: Back Market and Reebelo · See them allGood Raspberry PiMissing: a full independent supply chain audit, where its earlier stages happen and 2 more · ElectronicsLow-cost single-board computersPays or is working towards a living wage, with gaps still to close.On TrackPartly verified

No laptops and computers brand selling new goods is Good yet. This is the strongest so far. Second-hand and refurbished goods create no new factory work, so they're Good by rule and come first.

See every laptops and computers brand

See better laptops and computers options

Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Razer? Send a right of reply.

Compare Razer with another brand

Brand to compare with

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, a hidden, unaudited supply chain 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.

How grades are decided

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: Hidden supply chain, mostly in countries with poor worker rights
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

From press and retailer reports; Razer doesn't say where its products are made. The rest is shown as where electronics are usually made.

Where it's made, and conditions there
Country	Worker rights	Legal minimum wage	Forced labour risk
China	No guarantee of rights	Below a living wage	Moderate
VietnamUsual for the industry	Systematic violations	Well below a living wage	Moderate
TaiwanUsual for the industry	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.
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 Razer outsources production to contract manufacturers, primarily in China, with its top five covering about 80% of procurement spend, but it does not name them or give country shares. It says it expects partners to pass RBA or SMETA social audits and ISO 45001 safety certification, but it is not an RBA member and publishes no supplier list, audit numbers, findings or living wage commitment; its FY2025 sustainability report adds none. No confirmed labour abuses at its suppliers were found.

Sources and actions

Sources 4

Show all 4 sources

Who Owns Razer? (BGR) · search the archive · Owned by Min-Liang Tan (39%), CVC (32%) and Lim Kaling (29%); products primarily made in China
Razer Inc. ESG Report 2021 (HKEX filing) · search the archive · Top 5 contract manufacturers cover over 80% of orders; audits 'from time to time'; 1,649 employees in FY2021

Published by Razer or its owner

Razer: Responsible Manufacturing · search the archive · Contract manufacturers expected to hold ISO 9001/14001/45001 and pass RBA or SMETA audits; no numbers or findings given
Razer FY2025 Sustainability Report · search the archive · FY2025 report covers top five contract manufacturers (~80% of spend); no audit numbers or supplier labour findings given

Company details

Headquarters: United States
Last researched: 3 November 2026
Cite this page: Labour Lens, "Is Razer ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/razer, last researched 3 November 2026, accessed [date].
Method: Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means

Something missing or wrong?

Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent Razer.

Send evidence Send a right of reply