Public COA audit
GHK-Cu (glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine) · KPV
Audited July 28, 2026
Missing panels or key metadata — not enough evidence to treat this as a full certificate.
- Legitimacy
- 45
- Confidence
- 82%
- Panels
- 1/7
Scored poorly because the file is incomplete or not a full COA, limited panel coverage (1/7), 2 critical findings, and notable note: "No purity analysis". To improve: upload the full certificate (or the matching sibling purity/endotoxin report) and include identity, purity, and endotoxin at minimum.
Document details
Fields extracted from the certificate — not order or payment data.
- Batch / lot
- N260710-001
- Identity method
- HPLC
- Issue date
- 2026-07-17
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.
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.
1 of 7 present · 1 passed · 0 failed · 0 reported · 6 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).
GHK-Cu, KPV, TB-500, BPC-157 identified by HPLC
Purity
Not on this certificate file · core
Reported purity percentage for the analyte.
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.”
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
Not on this certificate file · core
LAL or chromogenic endotoxin assay.
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.”
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.
No purity analysis
COA reports only assay (quantity) measurements for four peptides but provides no purity percentage or chromatographic purity data. This is a fundamental omission for peptide quality control.
Identity confirmation unclear
HPLC methods listed (TESTMET-CH-310, TESTMET-CH-321) appear to be assay methods. No explicit identity confirmation method (e.g., mass spectrometry, amino acid analysis) is documented.
Missing critical safety panels
No heavy metals, microbial contamination, endotoxin, sterility, or residual solvent/water testing reported. These are standard for research peptides intended for any biological use.
No sample/test dates
COA shows issue date (2026-07-17) but no sample collection date or testing completion date, making it impossible to assess sample age or testing timeline.
Lab verification not possible
Qalitex Inc. claims ISO/IEC 17025:2017 accreditation (AGS-US050824-1) but no verification URL or QR code link provided. Independent verification of accreditation status cannot be performed from this document.
Unusual assay reporting
Results show mass quantities (e.g., '56 mg' vs specification '50 mg') rather than percentage purity or concentration. This is atypical for peptide COAs and suggests quantity verification rather than quality analysis.
Batch identification present
Batch number N260710-001 and lot number SP26-KLV80 clearly documented.
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.