If I Have Two Approved Wax Suppliers, Do I Need Separate Formulas and Wick-Testing Records for Each Wax?

Yes: separate records, shared only where your tests prove it

If you have approved two wax suppliers, each wax needs its own formula records and its own wick-testing results. The formulas may end up the same on paper — same jar, same oil, same load, same wick — but each wax earns that through its own tests, and its record says so. What you should never have is one formula card that silently covers both, because the day one wax changes, you will not be able to tell which candles are affected or which evidence still stands.

That does not mean doubling all your testing. A sensible system starts from your approved formulas on the first wax, runs short confirmation tests on the second, and only does full wick ladders where the confirmation fails. The records stay separate; the work can be shared.

Why two waxes cannot share a card by default

Two waxes sold for the same purpose can have quite different stated properties, even from one supplier. Look at CSI's own container waxes:

A formula run at 11% sits inside CSI 468's stated range and outside CSI 464's. A pour temperature taken from CSI 468's page means nothing for a wax whose page states none. If one supplier's waxes differ like this, two different suppliers' waxes should be treated as different until your tests show otherwise. Hardness, crystal structure, how the wax takes fragrance and how its melt pool spreads can all differ, and each can change the wick you need.

How to structure the records

Think of each sellable candle as a product with one or more approved formulas beneath it. A simple naming convention keeps them apart: LAV-200-W1 for your lavender 200 g candle on wax 1, LAV-200-W2 for the same product on wax 2. Each formula card has its own approval date, its own test evidence and its own retained-sample reference.

The two cards for one product can be linked — a line on each saying "alternative formula: LAV-200-W2" — so anyone in the workshop can see there is an approved fallback. But they remain two records, each with its own evidence.

Qualifying the second wax without doubling the work

Suppose you sell three jar sizes in four fragrances: 12 formulas. Running a full wick ladder on the second wax — three wick sizes, two candles each — for every formula means 12 × 3 × 2 = 72 test candles. At this series' 200 g, 8% convention, that is 72 × 184 g = 13.248 kg of wax. If the second wax is CSI 468 at ₹6,370.00 per 10 kg (₹637.00 per kg), the wax alone costs 13.248 × ₹637.00 = ₹8,438.98. On CSI 464 at ₹507.40 per kg, it is ₹6,722.04.

A staged approach is cheaper and just as rigorous:

In that example, the staged route costs ₹2,812.99 + ₹2,109.74 = ₹4,922.73 in wax on CSI 468 instead of ₹8,438.98 — and it produces the same quality of evidence, because every formula on the second wax has been burned and recorded. The two-candle confirmation is a suggested starting point; if your products vary a lot between candles, use more.

On the production floor and at goods-in

Separate formula records only help if production follows them. Every batch sheet should name the wax by supplier, product and your own lot code, and point to the formula card used — W1 or W2. Store the two waxes in clearly labelled, separate places so that nobody tops up a W1 melt with W2 flakes. Do not blend the two waxes in one melt unless you have qualified that blend as its own formula; a mix of two approved waxes is a third, untested wax.

Separate records also pay off when a customer complains. If a candle from a W2 batch tunnels, the batch sheet leads you to the W2 formula card, the W2 wick evidence and the W2 lot's retained sample, and you can re-burn a candle from that exact combination. With one shared card, you would first have to work out which wax the candle was even made from — and if the sheet does not say, you may never know. The few extra lines of record-keeping are what make a complaint investigation take an afternoon instead of a month.

Goods-in stays separate too. Each new lot of wax 1 is compared with wax 1's retained reference; each lot of wax 2 with wax 2's. Comparing a new W2 lot with a W1 sample tells you nothing useful, because you already know they differ.

Keep both approvals current. If wax 2 is your backup and sits unused for months, run a small confirmation batch periodically so its record reflects a recent lot rather than one from long ago. That applies whether the backup wax is ours or someone else's; CSI's pages do not publish lot numbers or tolerances, so your own confirmation candles and retained samples are what keep the approval honest.

Two approved waxes are a strength: they protect you from stock-outs and failed lots. Two approved waxes sharing one record are a liability, because the first time they behave differently, you will have no clean evidence of which is right. Keep the records apart, link them, and let your tests decide where they match.

Where this page fits

CSI already has guides that cover parts of this question. This page covers the goods-in check for the question above; these go deeper on the rest:

Three things to buy for this job

Frequently asked questions