The two-country concentration
| Country | Establishments | % of global |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5,072 | 32.0% |
| China | 3,969 | 25.0% |
| South Korea | 745 | 4.7% |
| Germany | 700 | 4.4% |
| Taiwan | 482 | 3.0% |
| Canada | 387 | 2.4% |
| United Kingdom | 384 | 2.4% |
| Italy | 380 | 2.4% |
| Japan | 333 | 2.1% |
| Israel | 303 | 1.9% |
| All others | 3,100 | ~19.6% |
| Total | 15,855 | 100% |
Why this matters in diligence
| Question a diligence team asks | Public source |
|---|---|
| Where are the target's manufacturing sites registered? | FDA Establishment Registration database |
| What product codes does each site cover? | Same — products array on each registration |
| Are any sites under recent FDA inspection adverse findings? | FDA Compliance Actions (warning letters, 483s, recalls) |
| Is the corporate parent owner consistent across sites? | owner_operator_name field |
The geographic concentration in the top table is the structural reason "second-source" sourcing decisions matter so much in medtech BD — single-source dependency on a U.S. or China site is the most common unmitigated supply-chain risk in device diligence.
Verifiable at the FDA Establishment Registration & Device Listing public database.
Editorial commentary on publicly available regulatory and public-database data. Not investment, legal, regulatory, or medical advice.