Methodology
How grading works
A grade summarises documentation, not quality of goods. We record what is published, name what is missing, and let the score lapse when documentation ages out.
Scored dimensions
Identity
20%
Company identity, operating history, contactability and consistency of the entity behind the storefront.
Documentation
25%
Whether certificates are published, batch-linked, complete and attributable to a named laboratory.
Testing
25%
Independence of the laboratory, method disclosure, and whether identity and purity are both covered.
History
20%
Length of the tracked record, recurrence of documentation, and any logged inconsistencies.
Fulfilment
10%
Listing accuracy, handling disclosures and shipping representations as published by the source.
Status definitions
Verified
Current independent documentation on file, reviewed within the last review cycle.
Documentation available
The source publishes documentation and names a laboratory, but independent review is not complete.
Under review
A review is open; records are being collected and checked.
Verification expired
Documentation was previously current but has passed its review window.
Flagged
Recorded inconsistencies in documentation, laboratory identity or listings.
Unreviewed
Listed in the index with no documentation reviewed yet.
What we never do
- — Accept payment for placement, status or ranking position.
- — Infer a purity figure that no certificate states.
- — Treat a source-published document as independent verification.
- — Recommend a compound, dose or protocol of any kind.
Review cadence
- — Verified records are re-checked every 180 days.
- — Documentation older than its cycle moves to “verification expired”.
- — Any logged inconsistency opens a review and can flag the record.
- — Corrections are applied to the record, with the review date updated.