
What Makes Cheap Earbuds a Real Value? Here's How I Find the Hidden Gems
So I did what I always do. I charged them up, then swapped out the default medium-size tips for the largest set of included ear tips and hoped I'd get a tight seal, which is crucial for getting optimal sound quality. If I can't get a tight seal, I'll swap in a pair of my go-to tips from other earbuds brands I've tested (Sennheiser and Bowers & Wilkins tips are a good match for my ears) and note that in my review. In this case, Final Audio's largest tips worked well. No issue there.
I ran through some of the usual tracks I use for evaluating headphones, an eclectic mix that includes Spoon's Knock Knock Knock, Athletes of God's Don't Wanna Be Normal, Orbital's Dirty Rat, Bjork's Hollow, Drake's Passionfruit, Pixies' Vault of Heaven, Florence and the Machine's Choreomania, various Foo Fighters songs, plus some tracks from Car Seat Headrest's The Scholars, CNET home audio editor Ty Pendlebury's favorite new album (it is well recorded).
The ZE3000 SV lacked a few features, like sensors that pause your music when you take a bud out of your ears and resume playing when you put it back in. The noise-canceling and voice-calling performance weren't top-tier. But the earbuds seemed well-tuned and pleasant-sounding, with a natural quality to the sound, with good depth and bass punch. They were also nicely designed. Overall, they seemed like a step up from many budget earbuds I've tested.
Then things took an unexpected turn. I noticed that an online earbuds sleuth had claimed that the ZE3000 SV weren't unique and cost more than they should. Some Reddit users picked up on his post and were critical of Final Audio. But were the accusations really true? And had the company actually done anything wrong?
As I dug deeper into this little mystery, I got a revealing glimpse behind the curtain of how budget headphones are made and how any given brand can distinguish its low-cost models from those of rivals.
Below, I'm going to fill you in on how companies make their budget earbuds and on the trade-offs involved, from features to cost to who does the actual work. I'll also give you an in-depth comparison of designs from budget earbuds mavens Earfun and Soundpeats and my detailed, hands-on impressions of the Final Audio ZE3000 SV and a lower-cost model that on the surface shares some distinct similarities.
A daunting array of choices
As consumers, we face dizzying choices when it comes to audio products. In-ear or over-ear. Wired or wireless. High-end or entry-level. Headphones or portable speakers. Often we end up with a small collection across some or all of those categories, some that we use every day, others that sit in a drawer for long stretches at a time. My colleague Katie Collins has written that everyone needs three different types of headphones, each one serving a different purpose.
But that can add up to a chunk of spending, so we're also always on the lookout for a bargain. Decent quality without breaking the bank.
In premium territory, there's Apple, the dominant player in the true-wireless earbuds market with its category-defining AirPods and Beats products. According to market researcher Canalys, in the first quarter of this year, it held a 23% share of that market worldwide, and in North America, its share is more than double that at "over 50%." The AirPods Pro 2 and other higher-end noise-canceling earbuds from Bose, Sony and other big-name audio brands start at around $250 (list price) and go all the way up to $400 or more.
A lot of people can't afford those prices, or maybe just don't want to spend that much on a device that's pretty easy to lose. I've lost or damaged only a handful of earbuds in over 10 years of testing them, but my kids sure are skilled at misplacing or destroying them.
While the number of true-wireless earbuds shipped each year continues to grow — 331 million devices in 2024, up 12% from the year before, according to Canalys — Apple's share has been drifting downward, with some of the biggest growth coming from non-established audio brands, many of them based in China, that make "cost-effective" earbuds that come in at half the price of AirPods or less — sometimes much less.
I can check out only so many budget earbuds and headphones, so I tend to keep coming back to a handful of value brands that produce affordable products that punch above their weight, so to speak. These include Earfun, Anker (Soundcore), Soundpeats and Baseus. I've also dabbled in QCY, Acefast, Oladance, Tranya, Tozo and Tribit, which I think makes better Bluetooth speakers than earbuds and headphones.
This is just a small fraction of the no-name audio brands you'll find on Amazon, some of them with nonsensical names like TSYUCXH, KZ ZSN and Rorsou. I've had a few folks suggest I try the $29 Beribes headphones, which have accrued 45,000 user reviews on Amazon and look eerily similar to the Tozo HT2, which I've tried and which aren't bad for around $35.
There is no shortage of budget earbuds confronting consumers. This is just a small sampling.
David Carnoy and Zooey Liao / CNET
Prices for budget headphones and earbuds have remained fairly steady, with only slight increases amid President Donald Trump's shifting tariff threats. A couple of value headphone companies I spoke with said that if tariffs stay at their current levels, they didn't anticipate prices rising significantly on their models, which suggests profit margins on budget buds may be a little better than I thought.
Once you spend a little time in this world — or too much time, in my case — you start to notice that a lot of the products look and sometimes sound pretty similar. There are AirPods clones with stems, and stemless "dot-style" buds like the Final Audio ZE3000 SV. You also encounter plenty of "sports" models with ear hooks that mimic the ear-hook design of the Beats Powerbeats Pro and newer Powerbeats Pro 2. Occasionally, you'll see near-exact copies of popular earbuds like the AirPods, but for the most part, these so-called knockoffs simply — and sometimes rather blatantly — follow the design cues of popular models.
Earbuds design: Off the shelf versus from the ground up
Diving into budget earbuds waters can be a murky experience. While cheap earbuds continue to improve, not all are created equal, and I still run into a lot of low-cost buds that sound pretty poor. By that, I mean they lack clarity and definition, distort at mid to higher volumes, and have middling noise canceling and voice-calling performance.
That said, it's becoming increasingly easy to find budget models that meet the criteria of being good enough and that offer a good fit along with decent sound quality and overall solid performance.
Getty Images / Zooey Liao / CNET
Some value products are developed from the ground up (from scratch) by a company's own team of designers and engineers. But the reality is that the majority of earbuds on the market are based on off-the-shelf designs or "pre-developed product packages" crafted by Chinese factories.
That means many earbuds you'll find on Amazon, while looking slightly different, are based on the same "package." The challenge for me as a reviewer is trying to discern what's different about all these similar models, especially when the changes from generation to generation are incremental at best.
What I find interesting is that now even major audio brands like Bose are doing their own versions of pre-developed product packages, licensing out their designs and technology to other brands to help recoup development costs.
Earlier this year, Skullcandy released its Method 360 ANC buds with Sound by Bose, which were developed in collaboration with Bose and lean on the technology and tuning that Bose developed for its own earbuds. I described them as "$100 Bose earbuds in disguise" because the buds themselves share a very similar design aesthetic to Bose's QuietComfort Ultra Earbuds, though their charging case resembles the one Skullcandy uses for its $60 Dime Evo earbuds.
"Sound by Bose allows us to bring our audio technology to products in markets, categories or price points where we don't currently offer solutions," says Nick Smith, president of audio technology business and chief strategy officer at Bose.
We've also seen a proliferation of cheap earring-like clip-on buds. That happened after Bose popularized this design with its $300 Ultra Open Earbuds and factories in China went into overdrive to create cheap knockoffs. While clip-on earbuds first started appearing in Asia several months (or even longer) before the Ultra Open Earbuds were released, Bose not only vastly improved upon the design and performance of early clip-on models, but it also did a bang-up job marketing them as a "totally new kind of wearable device."
Since the clip-on open earbuds don't feature active noise canceling and their open design compromises sound quality, their performance bar is lower, making it easier for value brands to create compelling alternatives to the Bose buds for much less.
Once new clip-on models upgraded their drivers and added their own versions of Bose's flexible hinge, enhancing their comfort level, the gap narrowed significantly between Bose's premium clip-on model and those from far cheaper value brands. For example, Baseus' new MC1 Pro cost around $65, and while they aren't as good as the Bose, they're not that far behind and cost way less.
"To offset acoustic limitations, emerging vendors are collaborating with audio labs to optimize sound quality, with some products nearing traditional TWS [true-wireless stereo] standards," Cynthia Chen, research manager at Canalys (now part of Omdia), said in a statement.
She noted that open earbuds are the fastest-growing segment of the true-wireless earbuds market and are accelerating the shift from functional audio devices to value-driven, lifestyle-oriented products. Open buds are "where technology meets fashion," she said.
Two popular budget earbuds with similar specs: What separates them?
Over the years, I've become well-versed in Anker's Soundcore buds (of which there are many) and Earfun's offerings, and awarded the EarFun Air Pro 4 an Editors' Choice award in 2024 as a value standout. Most companies don't want to delve too deeply into the details of their product development. When I asked Anker's PR rep about how it developed its products, he came back with: "We respectfully decline to comment."
CNET composite: Zooey Liao/Joe Maldonado; Getty Images, Amazon
Earfun, however, was more forthcoming. Despite its products looking like they might be based on pre-developed product packages, Helen Shaw, the company's marketing manager, tells me they aren't and that EarFun creates "ground-up" products based on its original designs with custom molds, circuit boards and various components.
"All EarFun products are independently developed, with its own R&D team, and the core R&D team has previously served the world's first-line audio brands, such as Sony, JBL and Philips," Shaw says.
"Self-developed mode" adds more time to the development process, and it typically takes a year or more to complete a product. As an example, she said that its next-gen Air Pro 4 Plus would be available in September or October, a little more than a year after the Air Pro 4 was released in August 2024.
"This is relatively rare among the current cost-effective headphone brands," Shaw tells me. "Other brands basically find factories to directly OEM, change the logo and change the ID."
("OEM" is industry jargon for companies that do the actual manufacturing of products on behalf of the brands that put their names on the final products.)
By doing so, they can save manpower and capital investment and can quickly go to market (in six months instead of a year, for instance). But the disadvantage is that they don't tightly control the production process. As a result, there can be quality control issues, with imperfections creeping into the products, which can lead to performance problems; sound quality can vary from earbud to earbud even though they're the same model.
EarFun doesn't release quite as many earbuds as Anker does each year, and its priciest true-wireless earbuds, the Air Pro 4, list for $80 and usually sell for closer to $60. In contrast, Anker's new-for-2025 Liberty 5 buds list for $130 and typically get discounted to $110 or a little less.
The Liberty 5 are a tad sleeker and more premium-looking than the EarFun Air Pro 4 and have improved noise-canceling and voice-calling capabilities. But it's debatable which is the better value and some people will tell you they like the older Liberty 4 Pro, which has dual drivers and sometimes is on sale for less than the Liberty 5.
As a reviewer, it gets even trickier when the specs of two models from competing brands look nearly identical.
Take for example the new-for-2025 Soundpeats Air5 Pro. They're powered by the same Qualcomm chip found in the EarFun Air Pro 4, have the same size drivers and cost essentially the same. I was curious to hear why each company thought its product was better, given their similarities.
EarFun's Shaw was quick to point out that the Soundpeats Air5 Pro lacked a few features that were in its Air Pro 4 buds. These included ear-detection sensors, wireless charging, Google Fast Pair and Auracast, which allows you to tune into audio broadcasts over Bluetooth, say from a TV at your gym. She also said that the EarFun team spent nearly half a year "customizing the ear caps" and included five pairs of ear tips to help ensure a tight seal and comfortable fit for a variety of ear sizes. (I certainly agree that ear tip design is a critical, sometimes overlooked element of earbuds design; I also value ear-detection sensors.)
"For the active noise canceling and sound-quality performance, both have the brand's tuning style and different results," she says. "It depends on the user's preference."
A Soundpeats representative defended the company's Air5 Pro, citing its potential advantages:
"At first glance, the Soundpeats Air5 Pro and the EarFun Air Pro 4 appear very similar. Both are powered by the Qualcomm QCC3091 chip, offer high-resolution audio support, feature similar driver sizes and are available at comparable price points. However, the real-world experience can differ, and this is where Soundpeats demonstrates a clear advantage."
Getty Images / Zooey Liao / CNET
She said that the Air5 Pro offered up to 55 decibels of "AI-powered" adaptive noise cancellation, compared with 50 decibels on the EarFun Air Pro 4. It also featured anti-wind noise technology, which helped maintain audio clarity in outdoor settings. Combined with the buds' six-microphone setup and CVC 8.0 (Qualcomm's Clear Voice Capture technology with background noise reduction), this added layer of noise control gave the Soundpeats "a slight edge in preserving both audio and call quality in noisy environments."
She also noted that from a comfort standpoint, the Air5 Pro were lighter at 4.8 grams per earbud compared to 5.2 grams for the EarFun. Additionally, the Air5 Pro's "ergonomic shape and integrated triangle vent help reduce in-ear pressure, allowing for longer, more comfortable use."
Personally, I'd give the slight edge to the Earfun Air Pro 4 due to those extra features. However, from a performance standpoint, they're both at a similar level, with small differences separating them. That makes them challenging to evaluate, especially when everybody has different ears and audio tastes.
Online drama and an earbuds origin story
CNET composite: Zooey Liao/Joe Maldonado; Getty Images, Amazon
Based in Kawasaki City, Japan, Final Audio is geared toward audiophiles and specializes in earphones and headphones that range from its flagship $4,000 D8000 planar magnetic open-back headphones to those aforementioned entry-level ZE3000 SV buds that are priced near the top of the "budget" range at $100.
I'm always on the lookout for under-the-radar products that might be a good value, and the ZE3000 SV seemed like they might be a good candidate based on my experience with earlier Final Audio products.
Judging from how they looked, I was under the impression that the ZE3000 SV buds were developed from the ground up.
Curious to see exactly what their specs were and whether there was any online buzz about them, I did a quick search and came across an eyebrow-raising post in the message boards at audiosciencereview.com entitled Reviewer Poorting finds that $100 ANC earbuds Final ZE3000 SV is almost the same product as $33 Roseselsa Ceramics X. Poorting had published a video on BiliBili tearing down both earbuds and comparing their components.
Truth be told, I'd never heard of the Roseselsa Ceramics X earbuds before I saw that post comparing them to Final Audio's ZE3000 SV buds, though it appears the Ceramics X have a small cadre of fans. (Note that they currently cost $38 instead of $33.)
"The Ceramics X was released in March 2024 and the ZE3000 SV in December 2024," wrote the message board poster, named Helias. "I guess Final found the same OEM who made the Ceramics X and asked it to produce the ZE3000 SV with minimal modifications. Final saved tons of R&D cost here, and is obviously having a greater profit margin than Roseselsa. However, in terms of performance, I'm afraid I don't see proof that the Final offers much more than the Roseselsa."
Hmmm, I thought. I guess the Final Audio earbuds weren't developed from the ground up after all. But I also wasn't convinced they were exactly the same product. I thought there might be more to the story, so I went to Amazon and bought the Ceramics X, then dashed off an email to the Final Audio PR rep. I told her that I liked the ZE3000 SV but came across a post online claiming they were the doppelganger for the much cheaper Roseselsa buds.
"Can you ask someone at Final about it?" I inquired.
She said the folks there weren't aware of the post until I alerted them to it.
As it turns out, the post was correct. The ZE3000 SV, which have become hard to find online (perhaps because Final Audio has held back distribution after becoming aware of the little online drama surrounding them), were based on a pre-developed product package. However, the PR rep said that while the ZE3000 SV and the Roseselsa Ceramics X share a common base and appear visually similar, there are significant differences.
The Final Audio ZE3000 SV (left) and the Roseselsa Ceramics X.
Numi Prasarn and Zooey Liao / CNET
"Roseselsa made only minimal changes, limited to tuning and finish," she says, "whereas Final implemented more substantial modifications in areas critical to sound and performance."
She explained that with the rapid growth of true-wireless earbuds and the huge surge in demand, many factories in China were offering earbuds packages that included the molds, circuit boards and various components. This setup benefited factories, as they could sell the same package to multiple brands and recoup development costs more easily.
Factories gave brands like Final Audio two options. They could use the package as is, slap their logo on it and essentially white-label it, or the brand could invest in customizing it by changing the mold, structure or internal components.
The ZE3000 SV, which wasn't designed to be "as complex as Final's ground-up flagship models," fell into the custom option category. The company opted for "a reliable base package" it had already tested and then made several customizations in line with its sound and design philosophies.
For starters, Final altered the look of the buds with an angled top and added its own matte, pebbled finish. On the inside, it swapped in new drivers, redesigned the rear acoustic chamber and programmed the buds with its own proprietary noise-canceling algorithm.
It also included its own ear tips, which, as I've noted, are important for a secure, comfortable fit and tight seal. Finally, it developed a dedicated companion app for the buds.
What it didn't change was the main circuit board, front acoustic chamber, system software and the exterior shell of the case.
Now that I had the Ceramics X, I was able to compare the two models myself. With that matte, pebbled finish and with Final slicing off the top of each bud to give them a little more interesting, angled look, the ZE3000 SV definitely looked a little more premium, though the Ceramics X design seemed just fine to me, particularly considering their low price.
I noticed some differences in sound quality and noise-canceling performance. The Final's noise canceling was a tad superior — it did a slightly better job muffling the sound of an HVAC in my kitchen. And although the Ceramics X sounded impressive for its low price, the ZE3000 SV was slightly smoother sounding with slightly better treble performance, slightly more natural sounding mids and a tad more depth and openness. I found the ZE3000 SV's tonal balance more pleasing overall, but the Ceramics X's sound certainly impressed me for the price.
As far as their companion apps go, both are adequate, though not great. The Final Connect app offered a seven-band equalizer to tweak the sound, while the Roseselsa RoseLink app had three preset EQs to choose from: Pop, HiFi and Rock.
Both buds support the AAC, SBC and LDAC audio codecs for Bluetooth streaming (Android devices support LDAC). They also offer Bluetooth multipoint pairing, allowing you to pair the buds with two devices simultaneously. Both also have a low-latency mode for gaming and video watching.
In the end, to my eyes and ears anyway, the Final ZE3000 SV earbuds are a small step ahead of the Ceramics X. You can argue over whether Final Audio's customizations are worth the extra $60 or so — many people would say probably not — but Final had improved upon the base package. It didn't have to spend as much to develop the product from the ground up, but there were still extra costs involved.
Maybe prefab isn't so bad
Five years ago, the gap between premium and budget true-wireless earbuds was fairly wide. Higher-end components, particularly when it comes to drivers, built-in amplifiers, DACs (digital-to-analog converters) and chipsets impact sound quality, overall performance and feature sets.
Getty Images / Zooey Liao / CNET
While Apple, Bose, Sony and other big audio brands continue to offer top earbuds that are well-designed and feature not only excellent sound quality but also superior noise canceling and voice-calling performance, you can find plenty of earbuds options between $40 and $100 that are surprisingly decent. The hard part is finding cheaper models that manage to rise above the rest of the budget pack and stand out as under-the-radar gems — whether it's because they offer an overall strong combination of fit and performance, or whether they simply stand out for their sound quality.
Budget earbuds are often made in the same Chinese factories that manufacture earbuds from first-line audio brands, and some lower-end models from those known brands likely share some of the same off-the-shelf components found in no-name, value earbuds.
Since I test the majority of earbuds for only a few weeks at a time (though some of my favorite models I continue to wear more regularly), it's always hard to tell how reliable and durable some of these cheaper earbuds are and whether they'll truly hold up over time. Alas, with just about whatever earbuds you use, their battery life degrades over time, and eventually the buds have to be replaced (since you can't swap in new batteries), sometimes sooner rather than later, especially if you wear them for several hours a day, as a lot of AirPods users do.
There's a tendency to look down on products that haven't been designed from the ground up, even in the land of earbuds where lookalikes are common, whether they're self-developed or not. But my travels through this world have taught me that there's more nuance and variation to product development than I thought.
In some ways, what Final Audio did with the ZE3000 is similar to what I did when I added a two-car garage to our house a few years ago. To save some money, I looked at some prefab designs at a place that sold prefab sheds and garages. I could take one of the standard models — there were four or five styles to choose from — or I could pay more to customize the design, adding dormers for the second floor and upgrading the windows and some of the construction materials.
I opted to customize it — it cost about 25% more — but it ended up looking significantly better while still costing much less than building a structure from scratch. It also went up remarkably quickly, as a small crew of Amish men from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, erected it in two days.
If you saw it, you might not even think it was based on a pre-developed product package.
CNET composite: Zooey Liao/Joe Maldonado; Getty Images, Amazon
Visual Designer | Zooey Liao
Art Director | Jeff Hazelwood
Creative Director | Viva Tung
Video | Numi Prasarn
Video Editor | JD Christison
Project Manager | Danielle Ramirez
Editor | Corinne Reichert
Director of Content | Jonathan Skillings
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
TransPerfect Opens New Contact Center in the Philippines
NEW YORK and MANILA, Philippines, July 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- TransPerfect, the world's largest provider of language and AI solutions for global business, today announced the opening of a contact center in Manila, marking the company's first entry into the Philippines and further strengthening its global service network. This new center of excellence will serve a wide range of industries, including finance, healthcare, legal, insurance, telecommunications, and technology. Equipped with modern, secure infrastructure, the facility is designed to support high-volume operations while fostering team member productivity and performance. With the addition of Manila, TransPerfect expands its global presence into Asia—joining locations in the US, Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, and France—to deliver around-the-clock support across time zones. 'Manila offers a dynamic and talented workforce with deep expertise in customer service,' said Steve Cheeseman, Vice President, TransPerfect Connect. 'This launch reflects our commitment to growing where our clients need us most and providing high-quality, human-centered support at scale.' TransPerfect President and Co-CEO Phil Shawe remarked, 'We are pleased to open in the Philippines and expand our contact center operations in Asia.' TransPerfect expects to hire more than 500 professionals in Manila over the next 12 months, with opportunities in customer service, technical support, live interpretation, and many back-office positions. The company offers competitive pay, comprehensive benefits, and a career development program tailored for long-term growth. For more information or to explore open roles, visit The Manila contact center is located at:17th Floor, Jollibee TowerEmerald Avenue, Ortigas CenterPasig City 1605PhilippinesEmail: info@ About TransPerfect ConnectTransPerfect Connect is a leading provider of global call center services, business process outsourcing (BPO), and remote interpreting solutions, including over-the-phone interpretation (OPI), video remote interpretation, and multilingual email and chat support. With services in over 200 languages and industry-specialized interpreters screened for subject expertise, TransPerfect Connect enables businesses to bridge communication gaps in seconds. TransPerfect Connect is a division of TransPerfect, the world's leading provider of language and AI solutions for global business. For more information, please visit About TransPerfectTransPerfect is the world's largest provider of language and AI solutions for global business. From offices in over 140 cities on six continents, TransPerfect offers a full range of services in 200+ languages to clients worldwide. More than 6,000 global organizations employ TransPerfect's GlobalLink® technology to simplify the management of multilingual content. With an unparalleled commitment to quality and client service, TransPerfect is fully ISO 9001 and ISO 17100 certified. TransPerfect has global headquarters in New York, with regional headquarters in London and Hong Kong. For more information, please visit our website at Contact: Ryan Simper +1 212.689.5555mediainquiry@


Digital Trends
27 minutes ago
- Digital Trends
Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold 7 claim still puts it behind the competition
What's happened? Following the launch of the new Galaxy Z Fold 7, Samsung has now confirmed that its phone is capable of being open and shut 500,000 times over its lifetime. The new data, from Samsung Display, has been confirmed by Inspection and Bureau Veritas, which ensured it remained functional after the high number of folding cycles. Recommended Videos This number is a 150% improvement on the 200,000 folds that the Z Fold 6 was certified for, Why this matters: Foldable phones need to be made of a flexible OLED material, and opening and closing the phone will eventually cause the panel to degrade and break. This uprated ability means Samsung is claiming the phone will last 10 years for some users. Given the phone will only be supported for security upgrades for seven years, this means it should physically last its entire working life. Why should I care? The high cost of a foldable phone – especially the Galaxy Z Fold 7, which can cost well over $2,000 – means users will want it to last a very long time. 200,000 folds, the previous benchmark achieved by the Z Fold 6, has been an industry average for some time, and this focus on performance and durability is a good sign that the competition is ramping up in the foldable space. Companies are investing to show greater performance and outstrip rivals, which usually leads to better products for consumers. OK, what's next? We can expect 500,000 folds to become the benchmark for competitors seeking to dethrone Apple. However, the OnePlus Open was certified for 1,000,000 opens, so there's still a way to go for Samsung. Given this level of durability is likely to be enough for most people, the next focus will be on the glass used and the underlying framework. Improving these designs could allow for a crease-free design, and is rumored to be a key selling point for the much-vaunted iPhone Fold, tipped to launch next year.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Infosys Collaborates with AGCO to Deliver IT and HR Operations Transformation
Building on a longstanding relationship to enhance AGCO's operational framework for growth by leveraging Infosys Cobalt and Infosys Topaz BENGALURU, India, July 22, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Infosys (NSE: INFY) (BSE: INFY) (NYSE: INFY), a global leader in next-generation digital services and consulting, today announced the extension of its strategic collaboration with AGCO Corporation (NYSE: AGCO), a global leader in the design, manufacture and distribution of agricultural machinery and precision agriculture technology. This new engagement spans IT infrastructure and HR operations, empowering AGCO with an efficient and future-ready operational framework. The transformation aims to enhance user experience through responsive IT solutions, simplicity, consistency and cost reductions via standardized processes as well as accelerated efficiency with scalable tools and automation technologies. Building on the trust fostered through a strategic digital transformation collaboration, the two companies are working together on the following critical areas: HR operations aimed at elevating employee experience, streamlining processes and driving efficiency within AGCO's human resource functions, in collaboration with the Infosys BPM practice. IT infrastructure operations leveraging best-in-class offerings like Infosys Polycloud, a part of Infosys Cobalt, along with automation technologies aimed at simplifying, standardizing, and optimizing AGCO's IT ecosystem. In an effort to simplify AGCO's operations and realize cost efficiencies, Infosys is using generative AI for knowledge management, problem analysis, categorization and incident resolution. Powered by Infosys Topaz, an AI-first set of services, solutions and platforms using generative AI technologies, Infosys will work towards ensuring access to next-gen tools and technology vital for AGCO's growth trajectory. "At AGCO, we're committed to delivering excellence in everything we do, always putting Farmers First. Collaborating with Infosys is intended to enable us to create a responsive, streamlined and innovative operational ecosystem within IT and other functions that allows our teams to focus on critical and strategic initiatives that center on the farmer," said Viren Shah, Chief Digital & Information Officer, AGCO Corporation. "By leveraging our strengths in AI, automation and digital expertise, our collaboration with AGCO reflects Infosys' commitment to delivering tangible outcomes that drive enhanced user experience, efficiencies and lower operational costs," said Jasmeet Singh, Executive Vice President and Global Head of Manufacturing, Infosys. "This collaboration underscores the power of innovation and trust that has been the hallmark of our relationship with AGCO over the years." About Infosys Ltd. Infosys is a global leader in next-generation digital services and consulting. Over 320,000 of our people work to amplify human potential and create the next opportunity for people, businesses, and communities. We enable clients in more than 59 countries to navigate their digital transformation. With over four decades of experience in managing the systems and workings of global enterprises, we expertly steer clients, as they navigate their digital transformation powered by cloud and AI. We enable them with an AI-first core, empower the business with agile digital at scale and drive continuous improvement with always-on learning through the transfer of digital skills, expertise, and ideas from our innovation ecosystem. We are deeply committed to being a well-governed, environmentally sustainable organization where diverse talent thrives in an inclusive workplace. Visit to see how Infosys (NSE, BSE, NYSE: INFY) can help your enterprise navigate your next. About AGCO AGCO (NYSE: AGCO) is a global leader in the design, manufacture and distribution of agricultural machinery and precision ag technology. AGCO delivers value to farmers and OEM customers through its differentiated brand portfolio including leading brands Fendt®, Massey Ferguson®, PTx and Valtra®. AGCO's full line of equipment, smart farming solutions and services helps farmers sustainably feed our world. Founded in 1990 and headquartered in Duluth, Georgia, USA, AGCO had net sales of approximately $11.7 billion in 2024. For more information, visit Safe Harbor Certain statements in this release concerning our future growth prospects, or our future financial or operating performance, are forward-looking statements intended to qualify for the 'safe harbor' under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those in such forward-looking statements. The risks and uncertainties relating to these statements include, but are not limited to, risks and uncertainties regarding the execution of our business strategy, increased competition for talent, our ability to attract and retain personnel, increase in wages, investments to reskill our employees, our ability to effectively implement a hybrid work model, economic uncertainties and geo-political situations, technological disruptions and innovations such as artificial intelligence ("AI"), generative AI, the complex and evolving regulatory landscape including immigration regulation changes, our ESG vision, our capital allocation policy and expectations concerning our market position, future operations, margins, profitability, liquidity, capital resources, our corporate actions including acquisitions, and cybersecurity matters. Important factors that may cause actual results or outcomes to differ from those implied by the forward-looking statements are discussed in more detail in our US Securities and Exchange Commission filings including our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025. These filings are available at Infosys may, from time to time, make additional written and oral forward-looking statements, including statements contained in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and our reports to shareholders. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statements that may be made from time to time by or on behalf of the Company unless it is required by law. SOURCE Infosys Sign in to access your portfolio