Methodology

How we test. How we score. What it all means.

VialReport grades research peptides on one thing the market rarely lets buyers see: independent, measured proof of what is actually in the vial. This page explains exactly how we test, how the score is calculated, and what every flag and seal means. Nothing here is a judgment call you have to take on faith. Where we can show the math, we show it.

How we test

The purchase, the blind code, the lab

Every product is purchased anonymously on the open market, with no vendor involvement and no advance notice. Samples are relabeled with blind codes and submitted to an independent ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory that never sees the vendor name. We publish the result in full regardless of outcome. Vendors cannot select which products we test, cannot influence the lab or the grade, and cannot see results before publication.

The VialReport score

0–100. Two components. One number.

Purity 60 pts

Percentage of contents that is the actual target peptide, by HPLC.

99%+ 60 / 60
95% → ~47 pts linear decline
90% → ~32 pts linear decline
≤80% 0 / 60
Dose accuracy 40 pts

Measured content vs. label claim. Overfilled vials (>100%) keep full marks but are noted.

90–110% of label 40 / 40
Below 90% — linear decline ↓ to 0
≤50% of label 0 / 40

Letter grades

Grade Score range
A
Meets claim
90–100
B
Minor variance
80–89
C
Below claim
70–79
D
Significant deficit
60–69
F
Fails claim
Below 60

"We measured 91% purity and 14 mg in a 20 mg vial" is a fact, not an opinion, and that is the entire point.

COA integrity

Reported beside the score, not part of it

COA Integrity is a two-part assessment of the vendor's certificate of analysis: first, where it came from (provenance), then, whether the numbers it claimed match what the lab actually found (accuracy).

Purity claim accuracy

Gap (claimed − measured) Result
≤2 points, or measured equal/higher Accurate
2–5 points Minor overclaim
5–10 points Material overclaim
>10 points Fabricated

Content claim accuracy

Measured / labeled Result
90–110% On-target
80–90% Minor underclaim
50–80% Material underclaim
Below 50% Fabricated

The five published flags

Verified Accurate Third-party batch COA; purity and content both within tolerance.
Accurate (in-house) Same result, but vendor's own lab — lower trust.
Overclaimed Material gap on purity or content — both numbers shown.
Fabricated Claims bear no relation to measured results, or identity is wrong.
No Verifiable COA None provided, or only a generic/non-lot document. Transparency flag — not automatically failing.

No COA means no honesty credit and a visible transparency mark, but the product is still scored normally on its measured purity and dose. A vendor that under-promises (measures better than claimed) is scored as accurate; honesty is never penalized. If identity testing shows the wrong molecule, the flag is Fabricated regardless of the purity and content numbers.

Identity verification

Where substitution risk is high, we confirm the molecule itself — not just its quality.

LC-MS confirmed

Molecular weight verified by mass spectrometry. Used on high-substitution-risk compounds.

Retention-time consistent

Sample elutes with a certified reference standard by HPLC — a consistency check, not definitive mass-based confirmation.

An identity mismatch overrides everything: the product fails and the COA is flagged Fabricated.

Safety screen

On selected products we run a full contamination panel.

Heavy metals (ICP-MS)
Bacterial endotoxin (USP 85)
Sterility

Why we keep it separate

The safety seal is reported separately and is never folded into the 0-to-100 score. Safety is not run on every sample, and mixing a sometimes-tested result into the score would make grades mean different things on different reports. Keeping it a separate verified seal means a VialReport score means exactly the same thing on every product we cover, while safety-screened products carry visible, additional proof.

Scope

What the score includes. What it does not.

The 0-to-100 score is measured product quality only: purity and dose. COA Integrity, Identity, and Safety are reported as separate, clearly labeled verifications rather than blended into the number. They are not measured identically on every sample, and folding them in would break the one thing that makes a grade trustworthy: that it means the same thing every time. A vendor can deliver a clean, accurate product and still earn a transparency mark for refusing to publish a verifiable COA. Those are different questions, and we keep them visibly separate so you can weigh them yourself.

Why we built it this way

Methodology manifesto

Our Methodology, and the Promises Behind It

Most of what is sold as research peptide "testing" online is compromised before the first sample is ever measured. Vendors publish their own certificates. Reviewers take vendor money. Some "independent" labs are owned by the people they grade. The result is a market where the people buying have almost no way to tell a real result from a marketing document.

VialReport exists to be the exception, and to be auditable about it. This page explains exactly how we test, how we score, what each result means, and just as importantly, what we will never do. If we ever break one of the promises on this page, you should hold it against us. That is the point of writing them down.

How we buy

We buy every product the same way you would: anonymously, on the open market, with no vendor involvement and no advance notice. Vendors do not know which of their products we have purchased, when, or under what name. They cannot send us a hand-picked batch, because they do not know a sample is being pulled at all.

This is the single most important thing we do, and it is the thing most of the market does not. A test means nothing if the seller got to choose the sample. Ours never do.

How we protect the sample

A peptide can degrade between the vendor's door and the lab bench. Heat and time break these molecules down. A low purity result on a sample that cooked in transit tells you nothing about the vendor, and it would be dishonest of us to publish it as if it did. So we control and document the entire journey:

We record the temperature the moment a package arrives, before anything is opened. We log storage conditions for as long as the sample is in our hands. The accredited lab independently records the temperature again when the sample arrives to them. We photograph and timestamp every step, sealed package to lab handoff, and keep that record on file.

Independent temperature confirmation at both ends means that when we publish a result, it reflects the product, not the shipping. It also means a vendor cannot wave away a bad grade by blaming the mail. We can show the chain.

Who tests it

Samples are relabeled with blind codes and submitted to an independent, ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory that never sees the vendor name. The lab is not affiliated with any vendor we cover. It cannot be, because a lab owned by or tied to a seller is not an independent check, it is a conflict wearing a lab coat. We measure by HPLC, and where substitution risk is high, we confirm the molecule itself by mass spectrometry.

How we score, and why it is built the way it is

Our score measures one thing only: the quality of the product in the vial, as physically measured by the lab. It runs 0 to 100 and has two parts: Purity (60 points) — the percentage of the contents that is the actual target peptide, by HPLC. Dose Accuracy (40 points) — how much active peptide the vial actually contains versus what the label claims.

We deliberately keep the score this narrow. "We measured 91% purity and 14 mg in a 20 mg vial" is a fact, not an opinion. That is the entire point. Three other things we verify — identity, COA honesty, and safety — are reported separately and clearly labeled, never blended into the number.

Why we will not blend safety into the score

Purity does not predict safety. A product can be 99% pure and still carry endotoxins, heavy metals, or sterility problems, because purity and contamination measure completely different things. Anyone who folds them into a single number is implying that a clean purity result means a safe product. It does not. We keep safety a separate, clearly marked seal so that a good purity score can never quietly hide a contamination risk, and so that a VialReport score means exactly the same thing on every report we publish.

What we tell you, and what we do not

We tell you what is in the vial. We rank products by their measured quality, the same way a consumer testing publication ranks any other product, and we will say plainly which vendor's version of a compound tested cleanest and most consistently. That verdict is the work. It is what separates a useful report from a wall of numbers.

Our line

We report on the contents and quality of a product. We do not tell anyone to use these compounds, how to use them, or in what amount. We do not provide medical, dosing, or treatment guidance, and nothing we publish should be read as encouragement to administer any substance to a human or animal. Our verdicts are about what the product is, never about what you should do with it.

That line is not a legal hedge bolted onto the bottom of the page. It is the discipline that keeps our analysis honest. The moment a testing publication starts telling people what to take, it stops being a testing publication and becomes something else with a very different set of motives. We are not that, and we do not intend to become it.

What we will never do

Five promises.

These are the promises. They are the reason to trust us over a faceless database or a vendor-funded badge, and you should treat any violation as disqualifying:

01

We will never take vendor money to test, grade, or feature a product. No sponsorships, no paid placement, no vendor-submitted samples, no badge a vendor can buy. Our income comes from readers, never from the companies we grade.

02

We will never let a vendor see or influence a result before it is published. No previews, no retests of failing results on request, no quiet edits. Retests happen only at our discretion and the original result stays on the record.

03

We will never hide a failure. We publish every result we commission, including the ugly ones, including the ones from vendors people like. A tester who only publishes good news is running a marketing program.

04

We will never gate the verdict that protects you. The grade, the safety pass or fail, and the identity pass or fail are free, always. We charge for the depth and the receipts behind the verdict, never for the warning itself.

05

We will never pretend a number is more than it is. We report only what was measured, scoped to exactly what the lab tested, and we say so. We do not imply broader validation than the data supports.

Who is behind this

A real person. Whose name is on this work.

S

Shawn [surname]

Founder, VialReport

[Founder bio — pending. Short 2–3 sentence bio from Shawn on why he started VialReport. This section and name are confirmed as the right structure; content is the remaining open item.]

Founder name + bio content pending from Shawn

VialReport is run by a real person whose name is on this work, not an anonymous system. That is deliberate. In a market full of shills hiding behind brand names and "objective" platforms that answer to no one, accountability means a human being willing to stand behind every grade and correct the record, in the open, when we get something wrong. We will make mistakes. When we do, we will fix them visibly and tell you what changed. That is what standing behind your work actually looks like.

Independent. Reader-funded. Blind-purchased. Every result on the record.

That is the whole promise, and it is the whole business.

Stay informed

Get new reports when they publish.

No membership required. Delivered via MailerLite — not promotions, just findings.

Powered by MailerLite. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.