← Back to Methodology Overview
Framework 02

Vendor Transparency Score

7 dimensions· 100 points· Process transparency only· v1.0 · 2026

The Vendor Transparency Score grades a vendor on how openly and verifiably they document their process, using only signals a stranger can confirm from public materials. It applies the same discipline as our Research Quality Score, aimed at a different target. RQS measures the quality of the research behind a compound. VTS measures how transparent a vendor is about how they operate. Neither one tells you whether to buy anything.

VTS measures
Whether a vendor's process claims are documented, current, lot-matched, and independently verifiable from their own public materials. Transparency, in the literal sense: can an outsider check the work.
VTS does not measure
Product safety, purity, potency, or efficacy. Whether a compound works, or is safe to use. Whether a vendor is "legitimate," "certified," or "approved." A vendor can score High on transparency and still sell something you should not put in your body. Transparency is not endorsement.

The Seven Dimensions

DimensionWhat it measuresMax
Third-Party Testing Practice Whether the vendor tests at all, how often, and how broadly. Per-batch testing scores highest, then periodic, then occasional spot-checks, then none. Full-catalog coverage scores above flagship-only. The single most predictive signal of whether a vial matches its label, so it carries the most weight. 30
Batch Traceability & Verification Whether a customer can tie the vial in hand to a specific result. A scannable code that resolves to the testing lab's own system, showing that exact lot, is the gold standard and hardest signal to fake. Lot-numbered COAs matchable by the buyer score next. Generic "representative" documents with no lot linkage score lowest. 20
COA Accessibility How a buyer reaches the COA before purchase. Openly published and searchable scores highest, then behind an email request, then behind an account login, then shown only as an image in a listing (not independently openable or verifiable), then absent entirely. 15
COA Completeness What the COA actually shows. Identity confirmation by mass spectrometry plus purity by HPLC, with the underlying chromatogram present, scores highest. Sterility and endotoxin testing where the format warrants it. A bare purity percentage with no method or provenance scores lowest. 15
Testing Recency Whether published COAs are dated and current relative to the product on sale. Recent, dated results score highest. Undated or years-old COAs on a currently sold product score lowest. 10
Policy Transparency Whether reship and refund terms are published and specific, versus vague or absent. A narrow dimension, but a real transparency signal. 5
Operational Track Record Time in market as a proxy for whether an operation is established versus fly-by-night. Verifiable through domain age and public archive history. 5
Total 100

Score Bands

High Transparency80–100Process is documented, current, lot-matched, and independently checkable across the board.
Moderate60–79Solid on the core signals, with meaningful gaps in verifiability, completeness, or recency.
Limited40–59Some documentation exists, but it is hard to verify, incomplete, or not tied to what you receive.
Low20–39Little verifiable documentation. Most process claims cannot be independently checked.
Opaque0–19No meaningful public documentation of process. Nothing an outsider can verify.

Community Signal - A Separate Column

Community experience sits beside the score, never inside it, exactly as our Anecdotal Signal Score sits beside RQS. Real-world reports are informative, but they are not verifiable on the same terms as a published document, and letting sentiment move the number would corrupt the discipline that makes the score worth reading. So it lives in its own labeled field, with two streams kept distinct:

Independent Test Results
Cases where a community member bought product independently, sent it to a lab, and published the result. Because the vendor did not choose the sample, this is arguably more objective than the vendor's own COA. Displayed as signal and weighted accordingly in the write-up, but it does not enter the seven-dimension score.
Community Experience
Aggregated real-world reports on reship behavior, refund handling, and consistency. Directional context, not measurement. Never scored.

Viability Flag

Separate from the score, a vendor can carry a Viability Flag when there is public, verifiable evidence the operation may be defunct: the storefront is down, the domain has lapsed, or a disclosed operating entity shows as dissolved or forfeited in its registering jurisdiction. The flag is an override that can cap the band regardless of a vendor's documented process, because documentation is meaningless if the vendor no longer exists.

Which Vendors Are Scored

A vendor is eligible to be scored whether or not they want to be, and a low score for opacity is a valid, publishable result. This is the rule that keeps the score honest: the moment the roster is limited to vendors who look good, or who pay, the score stops being measurement and becomes marketing. We seed coverage with the vendors people are already trying to evaluate, since that is where the score is most useful.

Every scored point links to the specific public page, COA, or record it was drawn from. If a vendor disputes a result, the evidence is their own published material.

Vendor Scoring Log

Every vendor in the PeptideClear catalog has been scored using the rubric above. Click any vendor to see the full per-dimension breakdown and scoring notes.

Vendor Score Band Log
BioLongevity Labs 94 High View Log →
Protide Health 88 High View Log →
Umbrella Labs 81 High View Log →
Verified Peptides 80 High View Log →
Ion Peptides 78 Moderate View Log →
Peptide Crafters 76 Moderate View Log →
Eternal Peptides 76 Moderate View Log →
Ascension Peptides 76 Moderate View Log →
Titan Peptide Lab 75 Moderate View Log →
Behemoth Labz 75 Moderate View Log →
NuScience Peptides 69 Moderate View Log →
Limitless Life Nootropics 68 Moderate View Log →
Peptide Pro 67 Moderate View Log →
SwissChems 66 Moderate View Log →
Sko Compounds 65 Moderate View Log →
Alpha Omega Peptides 64 Moderate View Log →
Nexaph 63 Moderate View Log →
Evolve BioPep 61 Moderate View Log →
Biotech Peptides 59 Limited View Log →
PureRawz 59 Limited View Log →
Peptime 57 Limited View Log →
Blue Sky Peptide 55 Limited View Log →
Precision Peptide Co 44 Limited View Log →
Apex Peptides 44 Limited View Log →
Skye Peptides 38 Low View Log →
Penguin Peptides 38 Low View Log →
CellVita Research Labs 38 Low View Log →
GenX Peptides 35 Low View Log →
Felix Chemical Supply 34 Low View Log →
Core Peptides 28 Low View Log →
Rebirth Labs 28 Low View Log →
Biomax Peptides 27 Low View Log →
Planet Peptide 26 Low View Log →
Simple Peptides 24 Low View Log →
Polaris Peptides 21 Low View Log →
Atomik Labz 20 Low View Log →
Strate Labs  ⚑ ARCHIVED Closed Jul 2026 View Log →
Scored by the PeptideClear editorial team using publicly available vendor materials. Sources per vendor are listed on each individual scoring log. Scores are reviewed on a rolling basis as vendor practices and documentation change. Band labels: High (80-100), Moderate (60-79), Limited (40-59), Low (20-39), Opaque (0-19). Vendors marked ⚑ Archived have received a Viability Flag - the storefront is defunct or the operating entity is no longer active.

Note on vendor links: Links to vendor websites are included for identification and source attribution only - they are the direct sources this scoring draws from. PeptideClear has no affiliate, referral, or commercial relationship with any scored vendor. Clicking a vendor link generates no revenue for PeptideClear. A vendor's presence in this catalog does not constitute an endorsement.
Citing this framework? A reference summary with citation formats for both RQS and VTS is at peptideclear.com/cite →