Choosing the most sustainable route for end-of-life (EoL) treatment of disposal products and materials contributes to enabling the transition from a linear economy to a circular economy. In an industrial production context, weighing up between EoL options has been done mainly with financial indicators such as investment cost and benefit margins, while other aspects of sustainability dimensions, such as environmental and social, are not commonly assessed with measurable parameters yet. Hitherto, efforts have been made in developing assessment systems and indicators for non-monetary values like environmental impacts or circularity, yet there are many limitations in each method, and there is no standardization for emerging topic of circular economy yet. Combining application of two or more environmental assessment methods can minimize weaknesses of each. This study assesses three different EoL treatment routes for steel wire rope disposed after hoisting application with life cycle assessment (LCA) and circularity indicator (CI) methodologies by quantifying climate impact and product circularity with carbon footprint of product (CFP) and in-use occupation ratio and final retention in society (UOR and FRS), respectively. Steel wire rope after 10 years of hoisting can be treated in three different routes (1) material recycling with traditional route of directly recycling in electric arc furnace (EAF) for steel with EAF dust recycling, (2) novelty route of pre-removal of Zinc coating for zinc recovery before recycling in EAF, or (3) repurposing as concrete reinforcement material. UOR and FRS are circularity indicators (CI) used to evaluate the circularity of a material or product by measuring how efficiently a material is being used over time and how much of the used material is recoverable at the end of a certain time period. Specifically, UOR compares duration of time that material is being used in an application to its theoretical maximum use duration, which is a set period of time during which the material can be used without requiring significant repairs or replacements. However, FRS represents the share of recoverable material. A material with a higher UOR would be considered more circular, as it is being used for larger proportion of its maximum use duration. UOR and FRS when combined with LCA provide better insight on the environmental and circularity impact of repurposing, to support sustainable resource management decisions in two scenarios: recycling and repurposing. Result from LCA and CI calculations was analyzed and interpreted separately and then combined for an overview of repurposing and material recycling of EoL steel wire rope from hoisting application. Findings from this study advance the understanding of sustainability assessment for EcoDesign in EoL technologies and management.