Vol. I · Independent · Evidence-linked · Re-auditable

Real Peptide Scores.

We audit what peptide vendors publish, not what we test in a lab. Every grade is mechanical: it falls out of the public evidence — COAs, lab portals, Wayback snapshots — and every claim links back to an artifact a third party can re-check.

Vendors audited
12
COAs documented (90d)
134
Top-ranked vendor
Oath Research

By the numbers

The audit, summarized.

Vendors audited 12 across the consumer-research peptide market
COAs in last 90 days 134 verified across the audited cohort
Active vendors (90d) 2 of 12 publishing COAs in the last 90 days
Grade-A vendors 2 of 12 cleared the active third-party verification bar

What we audit

Four data points. One evidence trail per claim.

The grade is mechanical. It falls out of the public evidence below — and only from the public evidence.

COA cadence

Per-batch, monthly, quarterly, or one-off. We count COAs and date them against the vendor's product range.

Lab verification

Is the issuing lab named? Can the COA be verified through a lab portal or third-party lookup?

Image authenticity

Do the COAs reference branded vials matching the vendor, or generic images shared across resellers?

Domain history

Wayback Machine first-seen date and rough domain age, sourced from public archive snapshots.

Audit results

Twelve vendors, ranked.

Ranked by recent COA cadence. Sort, search, and follow any vendor to its full evidence trail.

Last audited 2026-05-09
Vendor Score COAs found Avg/mo (90d) Days since last COA Lab verified Last audited
Oath ResearchARecommended14236.34d Verifiable
Loti LabsARecommended508.344d Verifiable
Bio PeptideCCaution — stale program300129d Unverifiable
EQNO ScientificDAvoid — thin evidence40362d Verifiable
Amino AmigosDAvoid — thin evidence500417d Unverifiable
Velocell BioDAvoid — thin evidence30463d Unverifiable
PureRawzDAvoid — thin evidence500681d Unverifiable
Vigor PeptidesDAvoid — thin evidence0 Verifiable
Atomik LabzFDo not buy — no verifiable evidence00 Unverifiable
Mod PeptideFDo not buy — no verifiable evidence00 Unverifiable
Polaris PeptidesFScam risk — fabricated rankings cited elsewhere00 Unverifiable
Power PeptidesFDo not buy — no verifiable evidence0 Unverifiable

Sort, search, and paginate. Click a vendor name for the full audit record and evidence trail.

Why this site exists

Real Peptide Scores was built in response to peptidescore.com — a fabricated peptide review site that publishes false rankings and defamatory claims about real US-based peptide vendors.

peptidescore.com presents itself as an “independent, non-profit consumer protection organization.” The evidence on the live site contradicts that framing in six observable ways. Every URL and quote below can be re-checked at peptidescore.com today.

  1. Fabricated rankings, no underlying data. peptidescore.com ranks Polaris Peptides #1 in five peptide categories (BPC-157, Tirzepatide, Retatrutide, NAD+, CJC-1295) — but Polaris publishes zero public COAs and names no laboratory anywhere on its site. Polaris's domain entered the Wayback Machine three weeks before our audit. The peptidescore.com ranking does not track to any verifiable evidence. See full audit →
  2. Auto-generated content, never reviewed by a human. Every category description on the peptidescore.com homepage — Semaglutide, Tirzepatide, Retatrutide, BPC-157, NAD+, CJC-1295 — claims rankings are “calculated from the test scores of Tirzepatide samples.” A category description copy-pasted across six different peptides is the residue of a templated content pipeline that nobody read.
  3. Self-contradicting site statistics. The same homepage simultaneously claims “99 samples from 147 vendors,” “76 samples from 114 vendors,” and “96 vendors.” A real audit operation knows how many tests it has run.
  4. No laboratory, anywhere on the site. Every claim references a “PeptideScore” test, but no issuing laboratory is named. There is no chain-of-custody, no lab letterhead, no report verifiable through a lab's own portal. The “View Report” links do not lead to lab reports.
  5. Pay-to-remove defamation. Each vendor profile carries a banner: “Editing the description is available only for Premium vendors. Please upgrade to a Premium plan.” peptidescore.com asserts a defamatory finding against a vendor, then offers to let the vendor pay for the right to edit it. This is the structural model of an extortion site, not a consumer-protection organization.
  6. Broken outbound links — JavaScript template artefacts shipped as published links. Multiple vendor profiles on peptidescore.com link to https://undefined?utm_… rather than a real vendor URL. The site ships its own internal placeholder strings as published content.

peptidescore.com is not a consumer-protection site. It is a fabricated review site that publishes false rankings, ships unsourced laboratory claims, and monetizes the defamation it generates. Real Peptide Scores documents what a verifiable audit actually looks like — and links every grade to a public artifact a third party can re-check.