Public COA audit

Glutathione

Audited September 5, 2026

Mostly consistent, with concerns

Several fields check out, but we found issues worth reviewing before you rely on this document.

Legitimacy
72
Confidence
85%
Panels
3/7
Purity (printed)
99.18%

Scored moderately because the document is mostly consistent but carries soft concerns, limited panel coverage (3/7), 3 soft concerns, and notable note: "High HPLC purity". To improve: include identity, purity, and endotoxin at minimum.

Document details

Fields extracted from the certificate — not order or payment data.

Batch / lot
g8k5ahp
Identity method
HPLC-UV-MS
Sample date
2026-02-26
Issue date
2026-03-03

Original certificate

Embedded copy of the stored COA PDF or image. Download it for your records — PeptIQ’s audit is separate from the lab document itself.

Loading original certificate…

7-panel checklist

Had data + good, had data + bad, reported without pass/fail, or missing. Missing lowers thoroughness — you decide whether that panel matters; PeptIQ’s score still factors coverage.

3 of 7 present · 3 passed · 0 failed · 0 reported · 4 missing

Missing is a thoroughness gap — not automatically bad. PeptIQ’s legitimacy score still weighs panel coverage; you can down-weight panels that don’t matter for your use case.

  • Identity

    Tested · passed · core

    Compound identity confirmed (e.g. HPLC, mass spec).

    ID Confirmed

  • Purity

    Tested · passed · core

    Reported purity percentage for the analyte.

    99.18%

  • Heavy metals

    Not on this certificate file

    Lead, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, or similar limits.

    No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”

  • Microbial

    Not on this certificate file

    Bioburden / microbial limits testing.

    No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”

  • Endotoxin

    Tested · passed · core

    LAL or chromogenic endotoxin assay.

    <0.5 EU

  • Sterility

    Not on this certificate file

    Sterility testing where applicable.

    No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”

  • Residual solvent / water

    Not on this certificate file

    Residual solvents or water content limits.

    No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”

How to read this

Had data · good

Panel present with a pass (or clear acceptance).

Had data · bad

Panel present with a fail — a concrete quality signal.

Had data · unclear

Value reported without an explicit pass/fail mark.

Missing on this file

Not on this certificate file. Lowers file thoroughness; a sibling endotoxin/purity report for the same lot may still exist. PeptIQ’s score still factors coverage.

Findings

Evidence-linked observations from this audit.

  • High HPLC purity

    99.18% chromatographic purity is excellent and normal for research-grade glutathione

  • Mass spectral confirmation

    Identity confirmed by HPLC-UV-MS with reference spectrum match shown on page 2

  • Batch/lot number present

    Lot g8k5ahp clearly marked with vial photos showing matching lot number

  • Dates are valid

    Sample received 2026-02-26, testing completed 2026-02-28 to 2026-03-03, all dates are on or before 2026-09-05

  • Lab name discrepancy

    Document header shows 'Finnrick Analytics' and 'Finnrick.com' but footer and signature reference 'Krause Analytical LLC' - appears to be a vendor/reseller (Finnrick) using contract lab (Krause) services, which is common but creates potential confusion

  • Verification URL domain mismatch

    Verification URL is https://finnrick.com/verify but testing lab is Krause Analytical - verification should ideally be through the testing lab's domain

  • Heavy metals method described but not tested

    Page 3 describes USP/NF 233 ICP-MS method for metals testing, but no results appear in the COA - method may be available but not performed for this sample

  • Endotoxin testing present

    Endotoxin testing performed via USP 86 LAL method with result <0.5 EU, passing specification

  • Professional presentation

    Multi-page report with chromatogram, mass spectrum, methods summary, and vial photos - consistent with legitimate analytical lab format

PeptIQ COA reports analyze document content and publicly verifiable lab signals. They are educational and not a guarantee of product quality, legality, or safety. Always consult a qualified professional before making health decisions. We never publish purchase prices, shipping details, or uploader identity.