Bluetooth SIG qualification, process and product listing
Guide · Bluetooth SIG qualification
Bluetooth SIG qualification is a distinctive regime in the product certification landscape. It is not a regulatory framework imposed by a public authority, but a contractual obligation enforced by a private industry consortium, the Bluetooth Special Interest Group, on any company wishing to use the Bluetooth brand or its logos. It coexists with, and never replaces, national radio certification: RED article 3.2 in the European Union, FCC Part 15.247 in the United States. This page sets out the programme's principles, the distinction between listing and qualification, the available routes (EPL or Full Qualification), the technical identifiers (QDID, DID, ICS, IXIT) and the pitfalls associated with incomplete commercialisation.
Why qualification is separate from radio
Section titled “Why qualification is separate from radio”The Bluetooth SIG, founded in 1998, owns the Bluetooth trademarks and licenses their use to its members. The word, the logos and the brand book are protected through international trademark filings. Any commercial mention of Bluetooth on a product, its packaging, its documentation or its website requires an active licence, and the SIG conditions that licence on two formal acts: joining the programme, and declaring the product in the qualification database.
Two objectives coexist within the programme:
- Trademark protection. Ensuring that any product displaying the logo respects the Bluetooth specification and does not degrade the reputation of the ecosystem.
- Interoperability assurance. Verifying that a headset, a sensor or a connected device actually communicates with other equipment on the market, regardless of manufacturer.
The SIG is neither a state authority nor a Notified Body in the European sense. Its decisions have contractual, not regulatory, force. But in practice, without qualification, a product can neither call itself Bluetooth, nor use the official logos, nor be integrated into the Apple Find My, Google Fast Pair, Matter or Auracast ecosystems. The commercial stake is therefore major, even though the legal stake is private in nature.
Radio regulation versus consortium qualification
Section titled “Radio regulation versus consortium qualification”A common confusion equates SIG qualification with radio certification. The two regimes have distinct foundations and effects.
| Aspect | Bluetooth SIG qualification | Radio certification (RED / FCC) |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | Private consortium programme | Public regulatory framework |
| Issuing body | Bluetooth SIG (Kirkland, WA, USA) | European Commission (RED), FCC (USA) |
| Subject matter | Trademark, interoperability, profiles | Spectrum, power, harmonics, safety |
| Sanction | Licence revocation, infringement action | Market withdrawal, fines |
| Scope | Any product using the Bluetooth brand | Any radio emitter placed on the market |
| Reference | Bluetooth Core Specification + profiles | EN 300 328, FCC Part 15.247 |
| Documents | QDID, DID, ICS, IXIT | RED DoC, FCC ID, test reports |
A Bluetooth product must obtain both, without exception: SIG qualification for the right to use the brand, radio certification for market access. The two dossiers are built in parallel but never substitute for each other. See RED pillar and FCC pillar for the radio regimes themselves.
Membership tiers
Section titled “Membership tiers”Programme access starts with membership. The SIG offers three levels, arranged as a pyramid of engagement.
Adopter
Section titled “Adopter”The entry level, with no annual fee. An Adopter can qualify products, access the Bluetooth Core Specification and the published profiles, and use the Bluetooth brand on qualified products. Adopters do not participate in the standards process and have no working group access. This is the status used by the vast majority of IoT and consumer product makers.
Associate
Section titled “Associate”Intermediate level, with an annual subscription scaled to the company's revenue. An Associate accesses the Working Groups, contributes to future specifications, holds voting rights on certain committees and benefits from reduced qualification fees. Typically adopted by chipset vendors, major OEMs and Bluetooth stack vendors.
Promoter
Section titled “Promoter”A status reserved to a limited number of founding members (historically Apple, Ericsson, Intel, Lenovo, Microsoft, Nokia, Toshiba, with some rotation). Promoters sit on the Bluetooth Board of Directors and steer the organisation's strategy. Entry at this level is not open by ordinary application.
| Tier | Annual fee | Vote | Product qualification | Working group access |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adopter | No annual fee | No | Yes | No |
| Associate | Annual subscription | On certain committees | Yes, reduced fees | Yes |
| Promoter | Promoter commitment | Board | Yes, reduced fees | Yes, governance |
For a finished-product manufacturer integrating an already qualified Bluetooth module, Adopter status is generally sufficient. Moving to Associate is justified for stack designers, chipset vendors, or companies producing significant volumes and wishing to influence the evolution of the standard.
Qualification, listing and identifiers
Section titled “Qualification, listing and identifiers”The programme's vocabulary distinguishes several notions that must be kept separate to understand the process.
Qualified Design ID (QDID)
Section titled “Qualified Design ID (QDID)”The QDID identifies a qualified design. A "design" in the SIG sense is a coherent set: Bluetooth software stack (LL, HCI, L2CAP, GAP, GATT...), implemented profiles, sometimes the associated radio hardware. A QDID is not a finished product; it is a subsystem or a Reference Qualified Design that can be reused by several products.
Typical examples of QDIDs:
- An all-in-one Bluetooth chipset (Nordic nRF52, Espressif ESP32-C3, Silicon Labs EFR32...) qualified by the silicon vendor.
- An independent Bluetooth software stack (Zephyr Bluetooth, BlueZ, mbed-os BT) qualified by its publisher.
- A certified RF module (Murata 1LD, u-blox NINA-B3, Laird BL654...) qualified by the module maker.
Declaration ID (DID)
Section titled “Declaration ID (DID)”The DID identifies a product listing declaration. When a manufacturer places a finished product on the market, it creates a DID in the SIG portal by referencing the QDIDs the design inherits (typically a chipset or module QDID). The DID carries the commercial name of the product, the model, the manufacturer, and the list of declared features.
A single QDID can serve as the basis for dozens, even thousands, of distinct DIDs. That is the economics of the programme: qualify a chipset once, then every product integrating that chipset simply pays for a listing.
ICS and IXIT
Section titled “ICS and IXIT”Two technical documents drive the qualification tests.
- ICS (Implementation Conformance Statement). Exhaustive list of the standard features the design implements, with a status (mandatory, optional, conditional). The ICS determines which test cases are applicable and which are out of scope. A feature absent from the ICS will not be tested, but it cannot be declared as supported by the product either.
- IXIT (Implementation eXtra Information for Testing). Provides the practical parameters required to execute the tests: Bluetooth addresses, test encryption keys, service identifiers, configurable timings, hardware capabilities. The IXIT is read by the test tool to configure the bench.
The ICS and IXIT are documents standardised within the SIG, specific to each profile and each Core Specification version. Preparing them represents a significant share of the qualification effort: an incomplete or incorrect ICS leads to gaps during testing.
Reference Qualified Design versus End Product
Section titled “Reference Qualified Design versus End Product”The SIG distinguishes two qualification statuses:
- Reference Qualified Design (subsystem). A generic design intended to be reused by other manufacturers. Typically a chipset, a module or a stack. The QDID holder is responsible for its maintenance (errata, version updates).
- End Product. A finished product intended for the market. It necessarily inherits one or more QDIDs and obtains a DID. It is not reusable by other manufacturers.
This distinction structures the economic model: silicon vendors and module makers pay to produce reusable QDIDs; finished-product manufacturers pay one listing per DID.
Qualification routes
Section titled “Qualification routes”Three main routes exist depending on the nature of the product and the level of reuse available.
Comparative list of routes
Section titled “Comparative list of routes”- End Product Listing (EPL) on an existing QDID. The product integrates an already qualified module or chipset, with no modification of the RF design or the Bluetooth stack. The manufacturer declares the product, pays reduced listing fees, and obtains a DID quickly. No testing is required. This is the route chosen by most consumer IoT makers.
- Qualification with partial reuse. The product inherits a chipset or stack QDID but adds features or modifies parameters. The manufacturer must create a new QDID covering only the differences, while reusing the inherited elements. Costlier than EPL but avoids re-qualifying the entire stack.
- Full Qualification (new design). The product uses a proprietary RF or software design, for example an in-house chipset or a home-grown stack. The manufacturer must run the full set of applicable tests, create a new QDID and an associated DID. This is the longest and costliest route.
| Criterion | EPL on existing QDID | Partial qualification | Full Qualification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Assumption | Inherited module or chipset, no modification | Inherited with extensions | Fully proprietary design |
| Tests to rerun | None | Only the differences | All declared profiles |
| Documents | DID, conformance declaration to parent QDID | Partial QDID + DID | Full QDID + DID |
| Typical lead time | A few days to a few weeks | Several weeks | Several months |
| SIG fees | Simple listing | Listing + partial qualification fees | Full qualification fees |
| Candidate profile | OEM integrating a COTS module | Manufacturer adding a proprietary profile | Silicon vendor, stack vendor |
Self-test versus BQTF
Section titled “Self-test versus BQTF”A second dimension shapes the test programme: who executes the tests.
- Self-test. The candidate runs the tests itself on its own bench, using a certified test tool (such as the Anritsu MT8852 Bluetooth tester, Rohde CMW270, Teledyne LeCroy X240, or software tools such as Bluetooth Protocol Viewer). This route is open to members with the necessary skills and instrumentation, and reduces external costs. The SIG audits self-tests occasionally.
- Bluetooth Qualification Test Facility (BQTF). The candidate entrusts the tests to a laboratory accredited by the SIG. The public list is published on the Bluetooth SIG website. This route is mandatory for certain sensitive features, notably those involving security, the radio physical layer, or LE Audio and Auracast profiles during their initial introduction.
The choice between self-test and BQTF depends on the manufacturer's internal profile, the volume of qualifications expected and the nature of the features. A manufacturer qualifying a single product with a COTS module often picks a BQTF for simplicity; a silicon vendor qualifying several versions per year invests in a self-test bench.
The process, step by step
Section titled “The process, step by step”The sequence of a Bluetooth SIG qualification, from route selection to publication on the public listing database.
- Join the SIG. If the company is not already a member, create an account on the SIG portal and join at least as an Adopter. This step has no fee but is administrative (SIG validation), allow a few days.
- Route selection and parent QDID. Identify whether the product calls for an EPL on an existing QDID (qualified COTS module), a partial qualification (proprietary extensions) or a Full Qualification (own design). For an EPL, check in the public database that the parent QDID is in "Listed" status and indeed covers the Bluetooth Core version used.
- Prepare technical documents. Draft the ICS (supported features) and the IXIT (test parameters) for each declared profile. Document the radio design, the stack used, the implemented Bluetooth profiles (GATT, A2DP, HFP, BAP, BASS, CSIP, MICP and so on depending on the product).
- Internal pre-tests (Full Qualification). Verify Bluetooth behaviour on an in-house bench, ideally with a certified test tool (Anritsu MT8852B, R&S CMW270...). Identify deviations from the ICS before paying for external testing.
- Formal testing. Depending on the route, execute the tests in self-test mode or entrust them to a BQTF. Reports must follow the format imposed by the SIG, with traceability to ICS, IXIT, Core version and test plan version.
- Submission to the Bluetooth Qualification Process (BQP). Upload the full dossier on the SIG portal: ICS, IXIT, test reports, conformance declaration, qualification or listing fees.
- Review and publication. The SIG reviews the dossier, may request clarifications, then assigns a QDID (for a Full or partial Qualification) or directly a DID (for an EPL). The product appears in the public Qualification Listing database.
- Brand and logo use. Once the DID is assigned, the manufacturer may use the Bluetooth word, the standard logo and, subject to conditions, the "Bluetooth Smart" or "LE Audio" logos depending on declared features. The brand book rules apply: size, contrast, clear space.
- Listing maintenance. Keep the declaration current when hardware or firmware changes impact Bluetooth. An undocumented modification can invalidate the listing.
This sequence runs in parallel with radio certification (RED or FCC). Bluetooth radio tests under EN 300 328 or Part 15.247 do not cover SIG tests: the former check spectrum occupancy and coexistence, the latter check Bluetooth protocol compliance.
Interaction with RED article 3.2
Section titled “Interaction with RED article 3.2”In the European Union, Bluetooth radio falls under article 3.2 of the RED directive ( 2014/53/EU ), which requires efficient spectrum use. The applicable harmonised standard is EN 300 328, which covers all 2.4 GHz transmitters, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth alike. The standard specifies maximum power, occupied bandwidth, frequency hopping (FHSS for Classic Bluetooth) or wideband modulation techniques, and adaptive frequency hopping.
The EN 300 328 report covers none of the SIG qualification scope. Conversely, SIG qualification does not relieve the manufacturer of RED obligations. Both dossiers must exist, and their contents are largely disjoint:
- An EN 300 328 report documents RF levels, AFH, occupied bandwidth.
- A SIG dossier documents the stack, the profiles, the respect of the Core Specification.
For the other applicable RED articles: 3.1(a) health (often covered by EN 62479 or EN 62311 for low-power devices), 3.1(b) radio EMC ( EN 301 489-17 for Bluetooth), and 3.3 cybersecurity ( EN 18031 ) since August 2025. See RED tests for the detail.
Interaction with FCC Part 15.247
Section titled “Interaction with FCC Part 15.247”In the United States, Bluetooth radio falls under 47 CFR Part 15.247, which covers unlicensed operations in the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands. The requirements are structured around:
- Maximum conducted power (1 W in 2.4 GHz, for DSSS, digital modulation or compliant FHSS techniques).
- Out-of-band emissions and harmonics limits.
- Measurement methods specific to wideband and frequency-hopping modulations (Part 15.247 and associated KDB).
The Part 15.247 report, submitted to the TCB ( see FCC pillar ), produces an FCC ID. Here too, the FCC ID never substitutes for SIG qualification, and vice versa. For a product commercialised on both sides of the Atlantic, see EU + US dual certification: the SIG programme stacks on top of the four radio regimes (CE, RED, FCC, PTCRB).
Specifications and profiles covered
Section titled “Specifications and profiles covered”The Bluetooth Core Specification, published by the SIG, is the main reference. It evolves by major versions.
| Core version | Main additions | Typical status late 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| 4.2 | LE Privacy, LE Secure Connections | Still widely deployed |
| 5.0 | LE 2M PHY, LE Long Range, Advertising Extensions | Majority deployment |
| 5.1 | Direction Finding (AoA / AoD) | Broad deployment |
| 5.2 | LE Audio (LC3, Isochronous Channels) | Adoption underway |
| 5.3 | Encryption Key Size Control, Connection Subrating | Current adoption |
| 5.4 | Periodic Advertising with Responses (PAwR), Encrypted Advertising | Recent adoption |
| 6.0 | Channel Sounding, LE Audio refinements | Early adoption |
On top of the Core Specification, profiles define application use cases: GATT, HFP, A2DP, HID, HOGP, Mesh Profile (for Bluetooth Mesh), BAP / BASS / CAP / TMAP (for LE Audio and Auracast). Each profile has its own ICS, IXIT and test plans. A product that declares Auracast support, for instance, can only do so once it has passed the tests for the associated CAP and BASS profiles.
Major new features (LE Audio, Auracast, Channel Sounding) are regularly accompanied by mandatory BQTF requirements in the months following their publication, the SIG aiming to avoid ecosystem degradation during initial rollout.
Common pitfalls
Section titled “Common pitfalls”Using the Bluetooth trademark without listing
Section titled “Using the Bluetooth trademark without listing”The simplest mistake to avoid and the most frequent. A product with a working Bluetooth radio cannot call itself Bluetooth, use the logo, or mention "Bluetooth 5.x" in its documentation, until a DID has been obtained. Some manufacturers work around this by referring to "2.4 GHz wireless connectivity", but that strategy gives up the main commercial benefit of the technology.
Modifying a qualified subsystem without re-qualification
Section titled “Modifying a qualified subsystem without re-qualification”A product inherits a module QDID under a strong assumption: the module is used as is, without hardware modification (antenna, RF supply, layout) or firmware modification (stack configuration, profile parameters). Any deviation, for instance an antenna swap with a different gain or a modification of the Bluetooth stack supplied by the module maker, invalidates the listing. The manufacturer then needs to create a fresh QDID or move to Full Qualification.
Confusing qualification with radio certification
Section titled “Confusing qualification with radio certification”Many manufacturers discover late that RED or FCC certification does not cover SIG qualification. The product schedule is then pushed back by several weeks to several months depending on the route. Budget for it from the design phase, with the same care as the radio itself.
Underestimating ICS and IXIT
Section titled “Underestimating ICS and IXIT”A sloppy ICS leads to a rejected dossier or to wasted testing. Conversely, an ICS that declares features not implemented triggers gaps during testing. Writing the ICS and IXIT is an engineering task in its own right, not an administrative form.
Jumping from one Core version to another without re-qualification
Section titled “Jumping from one Core version to another without re-qualification”Qualification is tied to a Core version and a set of errata. Moving from 5.3 to 5.4, for instance to adopt PAwR or Encrypted Advertising, is not covered by an existing listing. A formal DID update, or a new QDID, is required depending on the extent of the changes.
Forgetting the "LE Audio" or "Auracast" logos
Section titled “Forgetting the "LE Audio" or "Auracast" logos”The sub-brands (Bluetooth Smart, LE Audio, Auracast) have their own usage rules. A product can only display the Auracast logo when it has declared and qualified the appropriate CAP, BAP, BASS profiles. Misuse of a sub-brand without the matching qualification is treated as misuse of the main brand.
Underestimating per-product listing fees
Section titled “Underestimating per-product listing fees”A company producing several variants (with or without LE Audio, with or without Mesh, and so on) must create one DID per distinct commercial reference. The aggregate cost can surprise. A consolidated SKU strategy, with features enabled by firmware on a common hardware base, is often more economical.
Engineering support for qualification
Section titled “Engineering support for qualification”See also the glossary for QDID, DID, ICS, IXIT definitions, and the guides RED standards, FCC scope and EU + US dual certification for a dual programme.
Sources & references
- Bluetooth SIG qualification and listing process , Bluetooth SIG www.bluetooth.com/develop-with-bluetooth/qualification-listing/
- Bluetooth SIG qualification process steps , Bluetooth SIG www.bluetooth.com/develop-with-bluetooth/qualification-listing/qualification-process/
- Bluetooth Core Specification , Bluetooth SIG www.bluetooth.com/specifications/specs/
- Bluetooth SIG membership tiers , Bluetooth SIG www.bluetooth.com/develop-with-bluetooth/join/
- ETSI EN 300 328, transmission systems in the 2.4 GHz band , ETSI www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/300300_300399/300328/
- 47 CFR Part 15.247, operation in 902-928 MHz, 2400-2483.5 MHz and 5725-5850 MHz bands , FCC www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-15/subpart-C/section-15.247