Data product · reviewed quarterly

Hong Kong PPF Installation Observatory

This report aggregates anonymised installation records published by LETS GET WRAP where the vehicle, service scope and material fields are complete. It reflects our own installation sample — not the Hong Kong market as a whole, not every PPF brand, and not laboratory material testing. Every figure can be checked case by case in the archive linked below.

Facts last verified 2026-08-21 against the Published case archive (observatory dataset). Next review due 2026-11-21. Method and citation

Sample, method and limitations

Data period: Public case archive as published up to 2026-08-21
Sample: 516 of 526 published LETS GET WRAP case records
Inclusion criteria: Case is publicly published on letsgetwrap.com and states brand, model and material.
Exclusion criteria: 10 records excluded for missing brand, model or material fields.
Method: Counts are derived programmatically from the published case fields (material line, finish text, product list). A case can belong to more than one service or texture group, so those percentages can exceed 100%.
Author: LETS GET WRAP content team
Technical review: LETS GET WRAP lead installer (technical review)
Last updated: 2026-08-21
Next review: 2026-11-21
Version: v1.0

Limitations (please cite these together with the figures)

This is an in-house installation sample, not a Hong Kong market study, market-share estimate or average market price.
It is not a laboratory performance test of any film; durability claims are not inferred from this data.
Individual completion months are not published per case, so no time-series or trend conclusions are drawn.
The sample skews towards vehicles whose owners agreed to photography and publication.

Vehicle makes in sample (top 12)

Category	Cases	Share of sample
Tesla	139	26.9%
BMW	59	11.4%
Smart	46	8.9%
BYD	31	6%
Porsche	27	5.2%
MERCEDES-BENZ	25	4.8%
Zeekr	20	3.9%
Toyota	18	3.5%
Honda	11	2.1%
Audi	10	1.9%
Mini	10	1.9%
Subaru	10	1.9%

Service scope (multi-count)

Category	Cases	Share of sample
Window & light film	515	99.8%
Coating & detailing	512	99.2%
Colour PPF colour change	271	52.5%
Clear paint protection film	255	49.4%

Surface finish (multi-count)

Category	Cases	Share of sample
Satin / matte	145	28.1%
Gloss	119	23.1%
Chrome	92	17.8%
Liquid metallic	42	8.1%
Forged carbon	6	1.2%

Colour PPF colour families

Category	Cases	Share of sample
Black	80	15.5%
Grey	40	7.8%
Blue	36	7%
Purple	23	4.5%
Green	16	3.1%
Silver	14	2.7%
White	13	2.5%
Red	12	2.3%
Pink	7	1.4%
Iridescent / Colour Shift	6	1.2%

Material lines observed

Category	Cases	Share of sample
GSWF	516	100%
KOCH-CHEMIE	512	99.2%
CYBRIX	215	41.7%
STEK	85	16.5%
iCaur	5	1%

Field disclosure rate

Category	Cases	Share of sample
Install window disclosed	1	0.2%
Budget tier disclosed	0	0%
Manufacturer-backed material noted	50	9.7%

Evidence card

Our conclusion: For owners comparing clear PPF against Colour PPF, we weigh material traceability, the vehicle's paint condition, how long the car will be kept and the written warranty terms — not colour or entry price alone.
Author & technical review: Author: LETS GET WRAP content team; technical review: LETS GET WRAP lead installer (technical review); updated 2026-08-21.
Studio observation: Based on 516 published, field-complete installation records out of 526 cases; definitions and limits are listed in the method block above.
Manufacturer-verifiable data: Material lines, specifications and warranty documents are held by the film manufacturers; we link to the official product pages and record the check date on each service page.
When this does not apply: Repainted or ageing paint must be assessed before installation; deep collision damage or cuts are outside self-healing behaviour, and this report is not a durability test.
Supporting evidence: Browse the full case archive See pricing and service scope