Methodology
How we score research peptide suppliers
The Batch Report ranks suppliers the way a careful laboratory buyer evaluates them: published proof first, everything else second. This page is the full rubric behind every score in our supplier ranking — including how a store gets demoted, and how this site earns money.
The five criteria
Each supplier receives a score from 0–10 on five criteria. The overall score is the weighted average, published to one decimal place.
| Criterion | Weight | What earns the points |
|---|---|---|
| Testing transparency | 30% | Independent third-party testing on every batch; the laboratory is named; the panel covers HPLC purity and LC-MS identity at minimum, with net content, endotoxin, heavy-metal or sterility data adding credit. A money-backed purity guarantee adds further credit. |
| COA access | 25% | The actual lot's Certificate of Analysis is readable before purchase — ideally on the product page, with prior lots archived. A public library scores well; "COA on request" scores poorly; no published COA scores near zero. |
| Price | 15% | Reference-compound prices (led by BPC-157 and GHK-Cu) against the market cluster recorded in the same review cycle, including shipping thresholds and volume tiers. |
| Payment options | 15% | Working card checkout and mainstream payment rails, published openly. Bank-transfer or Zelle-only checkout scores lowest; turning alternative rails into explicit discounts earns partial credit back. |
| Reputation | 15% | Independent review-platform scores and verified review volume, standing across the niche's comparison coverage, and public track record length. |
The conservative rule: where a category cannot be verified from public documentation, it is scored at a conservative midpoint and marked † in the ranking. Absence of evidence is scored as absence — a store is never credited for testing it does not publish. Any supplier may submit documentation (published COAs, lab agreements, policy pages) at any time and will be re-scored in the next update; two entries in the current edition carry † marks and an open invitation to do exactly that.
How the data is gathered
- Store pages, product pages, COA libraries and policy pages are read directly, and prices are recorded with the date of the review cycle (current edition: October 2026).
- Where a price appears on third-party vendor listings rather than the store's own checkout, it is labeled as such in our notes and weighted accordingly.
- Review-platform scores are taken from the platforms' public pages at the same date.
- We do not accept free product, and no supplier sees a score before publication.
What gets a store demoted
- Proof withdrawal: removing published COAs, breaking library links, or replacing lot-specific documents with a single sample certificate.
- Documentation decay: certificates that stop matching current lots, undated reports, or a named lab replaced by an unnamed one.
- Opacity creep: hiding prices behind accounts, removing published payment information, or quietly raising the free-shipping threshold.
- Reputation signals: a sustained drop in independent review scores, patterns consistent with review manipulation, or unresolved buyer reports of wrong or missing product.
- Compliance drift: marketing that crosses from research-use-only positioning into human-use claims. A supplier that starts selling its compounds as treatments does not belong in a research-supply ranking at all.
Demotions are applied at the next update and noted in the ranking. A store that fixes the underlying issue and documents the fix is re-scored on the same terms as everyone else.
How this site makes money
The Batch Report is reader-supported through affiliate commissions: when a reader buys through a "Visit store" link on this site, the supplier may pay us a percentage of the sale at no additional cost to the buyer. That is the site's only revenue model — no supplier can pay for placement, a higher score, or a softer review, and commission rates are never a scoring input. The full terms are in our affiliate disclosure.
Update policy
- Scores and reference prices are reviewed in full at least once per quarter, and sooner when a supplier materially changes its testing, documentation or policies.
- Every edition carries its review date; prices are historical records of that date, not live quotes.
- Corrections sent with documentation are applied and noted. Factual errors are fixed as soon as they are verified, regardless of the edition cycle.
Methodology version 1.0 — October 2026. All products discussed on this site are sold for laboratory research use only.