27of120
Belonged to repeated seller groups across search positions.
17 of 120 first-page positions were additional listings from merchant groups already represented on the same query page
8 of 12 selected query pages contained at least one repeated sellerOpenId equality group. Across all pages, 17 positions were appearances beyond a group's first position. This measures same-page merchant-account recurrence, not legal ownership, factories or coordinated behavior.
Liam Cai · Founder, SupplymoYiwu, ChinaWhat we measured
Positions inside and outside repeated seller groups across 120 search positions
The platform grouping field does not establish legal ownership. This study does not accuse companies of flooding results or infer ranking behavior.
sellerOpenId equality does not establish legal ownership, factory identity, corporate groups, beneficial control or upstream-manufacturer identity.
Study reading
Repeated merchant-account exposure appeared on eight pages
All 120 positions returned sellerOpenId and 120 could be assigned to a within-keyword anonymous equality group. 8 of 12 pages contained a group shown more than once; 4 pages returned a different group at every position.
27 positions belonged to repeated groups. Of those, 17 were appearances beyond the first. These counts answer different questions and must not be interchanged.
The median ten-position page contained 9 merchant groups and the minimum contained 5. The largest group occupied 4 positions, or 40% of one page.
Study reading
sellerOpenId equality is account-level only
The official schema describes sellerOpenId as the encrypted 1688 merchant ID. Equality can group results attached to the same merchant account without publishing identity.
It does not prove that two rows share a factory, legal entity, beneficial owner, staff or upstream manufacturer. Related accounts may also appear independent under this method.
Repeated exposure does not explain why the API returned the order. The study did not observe promotion, relevance, personalization, advertising or ranking rules and cannot characterize the pattern as flooding or manipulation.
Study reading
How a buyer can use the result
Group candidates by merchant account before treating one first page as a broad supplier comparison. Several offer links can lead back to the same account and reduce the number of independent commercial conversations.
After grouping, compare exact offers on specification, MOQ, quote, packaging and evidence. Offers from the same account may still have different products or terms.
If legal-entity or factory diversity matters, verify it separately through registration evidence, payment details, supplier communication and on-the-ground checks. sellerOpenId is a screening clue, not due diligence.
Use this data
Everything here is free to reuse with attribution under CC BY 4.0. If you need a cut of the data we have not published, ask and we will run it.
Quote it, or take the whole file
One line, free to quote with attribution
In a Supplymo non-random sample of 120 first-page API result positions across 12 selected English searches on 1688, 17 positions were additional offers attached to a sellerOpenId group already represented on the same query page, and 8 of the 12 pages contained at least one repeated group.
How to cite this study
Liam Cai. "Repeated sellerOpenId groups in first-page 1688 API results." Supplymo, 6 October 2026, https://supplymo.com/research/1688-search-seller-concentration.
The 120 positions map to 120 distinct internal offer IDs. sellerOpenId equality is grouped only within each query and does not identify factories, legal entities or ownership groups. 11 stated limits travel inside the file. Free to reuse with attribution under CC BY 4.0.
Method
How the sample was collected
Everything here is reproducible from the evidence file and the sampling script.
Source
com.alibaba.fenxiao.crossborder:product.search.keywordQuery + product.search.queryProductDetail (read-only)
Sampling frame
12 English keyword searches, default first results page only, 10 platform-ranked result positions per keyword. Each keyword-position is one observation. The same 12 keywords are used by the seller-score and sales-concentration studies for comparability.
Collection window
Single day, 2026-08-12 in China
Write operations
None. No order, payment, enquiry, messaging, refund or logistics endpoint was called.
Check the figures yourself
The 120 positions map to 120 distinct internal offer IDs. sellerOpenId equality is grouped only within each query and does not identify factories, legal entities or ownership groups.
- Rows
- 120
- Collected
- 2026-08-12
- Stated limits
- 11
Readings tested before publication+
Could a missing seller ID be mistaken for a unique seller?
Method. Record field-not-returned, returned-empty and valid seller ID as separate states before grouping.
Result. 120 of 120 rows returned the field, 0 were empty and 120 were valid.
Conclusion. No missing or empty value was counted as an independent seller in this draw.
Does one seller account mean one factory or legal entity?
Method. Treat sellerOpenId only as an account-level equality key and avoid company, factory or ownership inference.
Result. The public evidence labels accounts S1/S2 inside each keyword and contains no seller identity.
Conclusion. The study measures seller-account diversity, not factory diversity or corporate concentration.
Are 120 result positions the same as 120 independent seller choices?
Method. Count unique seller groups separately inside each query and publish both result positions and seller groups.
Result. The median ten-result page contained 9 seller groups; the minimum was 5.
Conclusion. A result slot is a listing exposure, not automatically an independent seller choice.
Can seller groups be followed across different keywords?
Method. Reset S1/S2 numbering inside every keyword in the public evidence.
Result. Cross-query seller equality is deliberately not exposed or used in the public headline metrics.
Conclusion. All published concentration metrics are within-query, avoiding unnecessary seller tracking.
Limits
The 11 limits of this sample
All 11 stated limitations, in the order the evidence file lists them. A number travels further than the caveat attached to it.
- 1This is not a random sample. It covers the default first page returned for 12 selected English keywords, so it describes those result pages rather than all 1688 listings or searches.
- 2A seller account is not the same thing as a factory, legal entity, ownership group or upstream manufacturer. One account can represent a trader or store, and related accounts can still appear independent here.
- 3The 120 rows are query-result positions, not 120 distinct suppliers. The same seller can occupy several rows by design; measuring that repetition is the study's subject.
- 4The snapshot used one API client, default ranking and no buyer-specific filters. Personalisation, advertising, geography, login state and filters may produce a different page.
Show the other 7 limits+
- 5The 12 English keywords are ordinary consumer-goods terms selected for cross-study comparability. Technical, industrial, regulated and Chinese-language searches may have different seller diversity.
- 6The study is a single-day snapshot. Rankings and listings can change, so it does not measure persistence or causality.
- 7Offer IDs and seller equality hashes are not published. Readers can recompute every public summary metric from the anonymous rows, but cannot identify sellers or test cross-keyword account overlap from this file.
- 8Multiple listings from one seller are not evidence of manipulation or a platform defect. A seller may legitimately list variants separately, and a marketplace may rank relevant offers rather than enforce seller diversity.
- 9The study does not test whether repeated-seller listings are truly different products, variants of one product, duplicated listings or advertisements; it only counts the seller account attached to each returned result.
- 10The result should guide a buyer to de-duplicate candidates by seller account before requesting samples or quotes. It does not by itself determine which seller is best or safe to pay.
- 11Nothing here says a platform or seller has done anything wrong. The finding concerns account-equality groups returned by one API sample, not what a rendered page showed or which seller a buyer should trust.
Research boundary
What this study cannot tell you
- sellerOpenId equality does not establish legal ownership, factory identity, corporate groups, beneficial control or upstream-manufacturer identity.
- Repeated merchant groups do not prove result flooding, duplication, manipulation or a platform defect. Ranking behavior was not tested.
- The study records one API result snapshot and does not establish what a rendered website, logged-in buyer or later request displayed.
What this means for a buyer
A sample of this kind is a starting point for questions, not a verdict on any one supplier. Check the exact product and supplier you are about to pay.
Supplier verification
A free check before you commit. We run supplier checks from Yiwu, and we do not promise a lowest price.
Check a supplier →Questions a reader should ask about this
What is the one-line finding?
In a Supplymo non-random sample of 120 first-page API result positions across 12 selected English searches on 1688, 17 positions were additional offers attached to a sellerOpenId group already represented on the same query page, and 8 of the 12 pages contained at least one repeated group. sellerOpenId is an encrypted merchant-account identifier, not a factory, company or ownership-group finding.
How many query pages contained a repeated merchant-account group?
8 of 12 selected query pages contained at least one sellerOpenId equality group shown more than once.
Does the same sellerOpenId prove the same factory or legal entity?
No. The official schema defines sellerOpenId as an encrypted 1688 merchant ID. It does not resolve factories, legal entities, ownership groups or upstream manufacturers.
Does repeated merchant exposure prove result flooding or manipulation?
No. The study did not inspect relevance, promotion, personalization, advertisements or ranking inputs, and a merchant may legitimately list several different offers.
Were the 120 result positions different offers?
Yes within the internal source: the 120 positions mapped to 120 distinct offer IDs. They did not map to 120 merchant accounts, factories or suppliers.