If a supplier quotes you "ANSI A4" or "EN388 4544C" - this article tells you what to verify. Includes the three lab labs we actually use, real test cost ranges, and the two corners every importer should refuse to cut on cut-resistant gloves.
ANSI 105 and EN 388 - The Two Tests You'll See Quoted
ANSI/ISEA 105 (North America) and EN 388 (Europe) measure roughly the same thing - the force required to cut through a glove material - but use different blade types, different sample geometries, and different rating scales. If you ship the same SKU into both Cologne and Chicago, you need both certs on file. Buyers who get burned almost always get burned by accepting a single-standard cert because "the conversion is close enough."
ANSI A1 to A9 Cut Levels
Tested with the TDM-100 machine measuring grams of force to cut. A1: 200-499g (light kitchen). A2: 500-999g (light assembly). A3: 1000-1499g (general industrial). A4: 1500-2199g (sheet metal, light glass). A5: 2200-2999g (medium-duty glass). A6: 3000-3999g (heavy glass, oil & gas). A7: 4000-4999g. A8: 5000-5999g. A9: 6000g+.
EN 388:2016 Decoded
Four numbers and a letter: e.g., 4X43F. Position 1 = abrasion (0-4). Position 2 = cut, old Coupe test (X means not applicable, replaced by letter at end). Position 3 = tear (0-4). Position 4 = puncture (0-4). The letter A through F = cut resistance via new TDM test (A is lowest, F is highest).
ANSI vs EN Cross-Reference
Rough conversion: ANSI A2 to A3 ~ EN B. ANSI A4 ~ EN C. ANSI A5 ~ EN D. ANSI A6 ~ EN E. ANSI A7+ ~ EN F. Not exact - test conditions differ. Best practice: test against both standards and print both ratings on the cuff.
Why HPPE Replaced Kevlar in Many Apps
HPPE (Dyneema, Spectra) achieves ANSI A4 at 13-gauge weight - thinner than Kevlar's A4 at 10-gauge - while being more comfortable, washable, and 30 percent cheaper. Kevlar still wins for heat-resistant applications (HPPE melts at 144C; Kevlar withstands 425C).
Reading Real Lab Reports
A real test report includes: lab name (SGS, BV, Intertek, TUV preferred), test date (less than 1 year old), the exact glove model number tested, full TDM data per sample, statistical confidence interval. Beware of 'self-test' reports or reports older than 12 months.
Common Importer Mistakes
1) Buying 'A4 gloves' without seeing the report - some Chinese factories grade themselves. 2) Skipping abrasion - a cut-resistant glove that wears through in 200 cycles isn't useful. 3) Ignoring TIA (touchscreen, impact, arc-flash) sub-tests required by some end customers. 4) Trusting verbal certs - always demand PDFs with signatures.
The Two Corners You Should Never Cut
On cut-resistant gloves specifically, two corners cause almost all the field failures, and we refuse to cut either. First: the test report. A self-graded A4 with no accredited lab report is a marketing number - insist on an ISO 17025-accredited report (SGS, Intertek, BV, TUV) for the exact model, dated within 12 months. Second: the coating and abrasion. A glove can hit A4 cut resistance and still wear through in 200 abrasion cycles, leaving a worker holding a useless glove within days. A cut-resistant glove that does not also survive real abrasion is a false economy that ends in injuries and returns. These two - a real report and genuine durability - are non-negotiable, however much pressure there is on price.
Impact, Arc-Flash and the Other Sub-Ratings
Cut level is rarely the only requirement, and end customers increasingly demand sub-ratings that sit alongside it. ANSI/ISEA 138 covers back-of-hand impact protection (a 1-2-3 scale) - critical for oil and gas, construction, and automotive, and delivered via TPR (thermoplastic rubber) on the knuckles. EN 388's optional impact letter (P) covers the same. Arc-flash (NFPA 70E) matters for electrical work; touchscreen compatibility is now an expected default. If your end customer's spec calls for impact or arc protection, that is a different and more complex build than a plain cut glove, and it must be specified up front - bolting it on later means a new sample cycle. Our guide on anti-impact gloves covers the ANSI 138 side in depth.
Matching Cut Level to the Actual Task
Over-speccing cut resistance is a real and costly mistake in the other direction: an A6 or A7 glove on a task that needs A3 is bulkier, less dexterous, more expensive, and more likely to be removed by workers who find it clumsy - which is worse for safety than a comfortable A3 they actually wear. Match the level to the genuine hazard: A2-A3 for general handling and light assembly, A4-A5 for sheet metal and glass handling, A6+ for severe hazards like heavy glass and blade work. The right answer is the lowest level that safely covers the task at the highest dexterity, not the highest number you can buy. We will ask what the work actually involves rather than just quoting whatever cut level you name.
Want a Second Opinion on Your Tech Pack?
We review around 8-12 tech packs a week from buyers comparing factories. Free, no obligation - we will flag construction issues, suggest fabric alternatives, and tell you if a quote you got elsewhere is realistic.
This guide is updated when industry conditions change - the last revision was based on Q1 2026 fabric pricing and CN-EU freight rates.