EJOT fasteners and facades, EPDs at a glance
EJOT sits in a sweet spot of building hardware: fasteners and facade systems that quietly hold projects together, from ETICS to rainscreen and flat roofs. Buyers increasingly expect environmental paperwork with the box of screws. Here is how EJOT’s portfolio stacks up on Environmental Product Declarations, where coverage looks strong, and where a tighter set of product‑specific EPDs could unlock more specs without a price fight.
Who EJOT is, and what they sell
EJOT is a Germany‑headquartered manufacturer focused on fastening and facade substructures for construction, with a parallel industrial business. On the construction side, the catalog spans self‑drilling and self‑tapping screws, concrete screws, window and wood screws, plastic and metal anchors, ETICS fixings and profiles, scaffolding fasteners, the CROSSFIX substructure system, flat‑roof stress plates and solar attachments. It is not a pure play. Think multiple product families serving the envelope end to end, with hundreds of SKUs across sizes and materials.
For a quick taste of their sustainability hub, see EJOT’s EPD landing page (https://www.ejot.com/construction/sustainability-epds).
EPD coverage, in plain English
The essentials are there. EJOT publishes third‑party verified Type III EPDs through IBU that cover major use cases. Recent examples include a 2025 EPD for the CROSSFIX rear‑ventilated facade substructure, valid into 2030, which signals continued investment in the category (IBU, 2025).
Anchoring adhesives are covered with product‑specific EPDs too, such as Multifix PSF+ polyester and Multifix SE1000 SEISMIC epoxy from 2024, both verified by IBU and set to remain valid well into the second half of this decade (IBU, 2024).
Legacy but still‑current declarations round out the picture. EJOT holds IBU EPDs for ETICS fastening solutions, rear‑ventilated facade fastening systems, flat‑roof fastening systems, and self‑tapping screws, which remain valid through mid‑2026 to early 2027 in most cases (IBU, 2021) (IBU, 2022).
Where the gaps likely are
System‑level EPDs are practical for specs, yet project teams often prefer a direct match to the exact fastener that appears on the bill of materials. Some families, like standalone concrete screw lines and certain through‑bolts or heavy anchors, appear not to have individually labeled product‑specific EPDs publicly listed today, even if they are referenced within broader system declarations. If a submittal asks for a one‑to‑one fastener EPD, that can slow the approval loop.
Competitive pressure you will feel on bids
Fastener buyers have options, and several peers now publish SKU‑level declarations across anchors and screws. Hilti lists product EPDs for screw anchors, undercut anchors, and self‑drilling and drywall screws with current validity windows that reach into 2029 and 2030 (EPD Hub, 2029) (EPD Hub, 2030). Würth has IBU EPDs for stainless and carbon steel screws that are valid toward 2029 (IBU, 2029). Fischer covers multiple injectable mortars under IBU with 2029 validity as well (IBU, 2029). In facade substructures and envelope screws, SFS is a frequent comparator in North America and Europe, and Simpson Strong‑Tie competes on anchoring in U.S. commercial work. When a project team filters by product‑specific EPDs, the shortlist narrows quickly.
A likely missed opportunity, illustrated
Consider high‑volume concrete screws for mechanical attachments on slabs or walls. If the exact EJOT concrete screw series a distributor stocks lacks a product‑specific Type III EPD, teams chasing LEED materials credits often default to a peer with a matching declaration to avoid conservative assumptions and penalties in their accounting. Under current guidance, LEED v5 has been ratified by USGBC members and continues to give preference to product‑specific, externally verified EPDs in materials tracking, so having the right label on the right SKU still matters commercially (USGBC, 2025).
What this means for the go‑to‑market plan
Map the top sellers by volume and by margin, then cross‑check which of those SKUs already have a product‑specific EPD versus being covered inside a system EPD. Prioritize new declarations for the fasteners that show up most in standard details for ETICS, rainscreen rails, and roof membrane attachment. Pick PCRs that align with competitor disclosures so specifiers can compare apples to apples, and do not overthink it if a generic construction PCR accomplishes the same submission outcome.
The right LCA partner will reduce the drag on engineering and product teams by handling the data pull from plants, utilities, and suppliers, then steering the project to the program operator that fits your markets. That is how timelines compress and how the EPD set stays high quality and dependable without eating your roadmap. Small note, dont let old declarations sit within months of expiry.
Where EJOT already shines, and the next quick win
Strengths today are clear. Envelope systems have current EPDs, adhesives are covered, and there is history on fasteners that many roof and facade packages rely on. The quickest incremental win is adding product‑specific EPDs for the concrete screw families and any heavy‑duty anchors that drive recurring revenue in healthcare, office TI, logistics, and education projects. It shortens submittal back‑and‑forth, keeps you on the preferred list when EPDs are mandatory, and reduces the odds of being swapped late for an EPD‑labeled equivalent.
Final take
EJOT is broadly spec‑ready on EPDs for the envelope. Expanding product‑specific coverage for high‑turn SKUs would tighten alignment with how design teams now filter catalogs, especially with LEED v5 moving from discussion to market use in 2025 (USGBC, 2025). When the paperwork matches the part number, sales cycles get smoother and price is not the only lever.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which EJOT product areas already have current EPDs?
Do system‑level EPDs work for specifications?
Yes, they often do, but many teams still prefer a product‑specific, externally verified Type III EPD that matches the exact fastener on the BOM to avoid conservative accounting in credits or owner policies (USGBC, 2025).
Who are EJOT’s common competitors on projects with EPD asks?
Hilti, Fischer, Würth, SFS, and Simpson Strong‑Tie frequently appear. Several publish product‑level EPDs for screws and anchors with validity windows into 2029–2030, which can sway submittals when EPDs are mandatory (EPD Hub, 2030) (IBU, 2029).
About the Author
Walker Ryan is a climate-tech entrepreneur focused on driving industrial decarbonization through better data. As the founder and CEO of Parq, he helps manufacturers generate high-quality, third-party–verified carbon disclosures at scale—accelerating a traditionally slow and expensive process. Before starting Parq, Walker led over $200 million in sustainability-focused investments as VP of Strategy & Growth at ReStream Solutions, following earlier experience in investment banking at Deutsche Bank. He brings a rare mix of capital markets expertise and hands-on sustainability knowledge to tackling the infrastructure of industrial emissions.
