Comparison
Ready-mix coating vs blending in house
Buy the formulation finished, or buy the raw materials and blend them yourself.
Written by Rglax Pharma, who manufacture coating material · Reviewed 25 August 2026
We sell ready-mix, so read this knowing that. The honest position is that in-house blending is cheaper per kilogram and worse per batch, and whether that trade is worth it depends entirely on how many different products you coat and how much variability you can absorb.
| Criterion | Ready-mix | In-house blending |
|---|---|---|
| Cost per kg | Higher | Loweredge |
| Batch to batch variation | Fixed at our endedge | Enters at every weighing |
| Raw materials to qualify | Oneedge | Five to eight per formulation |
| Vendor audits to run | Oneedge | One per raw material |
| In-house development time | Noneedge | Weeks per formulation |
| Formulation control | Ours | Yoursedge |
| Reformulating on short notice | Depends on us | Depends on youedge |
| Shade matching | Done against your sampleedge | Your pigment work |
| Dust and weighing exposure | One materialedge | Every component |
| Where a failure is investigated | With the supplieredge | In your own QA |
| Suits | Many products, lean QA | Few products, strong formulation team |
Our verdict
If you coat one or two products at very high volume and have a formulation team with spare capacity, blending in house will be cheaper and you should do it. If you coat many products, or your QA is already stretched, the per kilogram premium buys back more than it costs in qualification, investigation and variability.
Choose Ready-mix when
A wide product range, frequent shade changes, a lean QA function, or a history of batch to batch coating variation you have not been able to trace.
Choose In-house blending when
One or two very high volume products, an in-house formulation team, and the appetite to qualify and audit every component yourself.
How to decide
Work it out from your own product.
Count the products you coat, then count your QA capacity. A unit coating two products at very high volume with a formulation team that has time is genuinely better off blending, and we will say so rather than pretend otherwise. A unit coating thirty products, changing shades regularly, with a QA function already stretched across audits and documentation, is paying the apparent saving straight back in vendor qualification, incoming testing and failure investigation. The number that decides it is not the price per kilogram, it is how many hours a year your team spends on coating raw materials.
Where this goes wrong
- 01Comparing only the material costThe comparison has to include vendor qualification, incoming testing, weighing labour, blending time, and the investigations that follow a batch that came out wrong.
- 02Blending without controlling pigment particle sizeShade drift between batches is usually a pigment dispersion problem rather than a weighing problem, and it is the hardest one to find after the fact.
- 03Treating a ready-mix supplier as interchangeableTwo suppliers can meet the same specification and behave differently on your pan. Qualify on your own cores, not on the certificate.
- 04Moving to ready-mix and keeping the old process parametersA ready-mix grade is developed on a particular process window. Ask for it, and start there rather than at whatever the in-house blend used to need.
Questions about Ready-mix and In-house blending
Grades either way
- AQ-ZWt10Aqueous film coat, extra whiteWater base extra white film coat for cores that show through a standard white.Film coating
- ECM-RP347Enteric coat, methacrylic base, non-aqueousSolvent base methacrylic enteric film for the Pantoprazole group.Enteric coating
- CVS-101Moisture barrier for Amoxycillin and ClavulanateSolvent base extra white barrier film for the most moisture sensitive combination.Moisture barrier
