Public COA audit

MOTS-C

Audited September 5, 2026

Evidence suggests fabrication

Multiple signals on this document conflict with known lab formats or verification patterns.

Legitimacy
15
Confidence
92%
Panels
2/7
Purity (printed)
99%

Scored poorly because audit signals point to fabrication or reused paperwork, limited panel coverage (2/7), 3 critical findings, and notable note: "Suspicious lab entity". To improve: replace this file with an original lab certificate that verifies on the lab portal and include identity, purity, and endotoxin at minimum.

Document details

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

Identity method
HPLC with reference chromatogram comparison
Sample date
2026-02-23
Issue date
2026-02-09

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.

2 of 7 present · 2 passed · 0 failed · 0 reported · 5 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).

    Peak matched reference chromatogram

  • Purity

    Tested · passed · core

    Reported purity percentage for the analyte.

    99%

  • 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.

  • Suspicious lab entity

    Laboratory of Analysis / Madsen Akademie with Polish address (Wroclaw) but German-style formatting. Company name 'Analiza Białek sp. z o.o.' (KRS: 0000966168, NIP: 8992922970) appears to be fabricated or unverifiable. No web presence or verification URL provided.

  • Watermark overlay suggests template misuse

    Heavy 'MADSEN AKADEMIE' watermark repeated across entire document is atypical for legitimate analytical lab reports and suggests this may be a template or sample document being misrepresented as an actual COA.

  • Missing batch/lot number

    Batch number field shows dashes (-----) instead of actual lot identifier, which is essential for traceability and is present on all legitimate COAs.

  • Issue date precedes start date

    Receive date (2026-02-09) is listed before Start date (2026-02-23), which is logically impossible. Testing cannot begin before sample receipt.

  • No chromatogram provided

    Document mentions reference chromatogram comparison but does not include the actual HPLC chromatogram trace, which is standard practice for identity confirmation.

  • Limited testing scope

    Only identity and purity testing performed. No heavy metals, microbial, endotoxin, sterility, or residual solvent testing. While not automatically disqualifying, this is minimal for research-grade peptides.

  • Unprofessional presentation

    Photo of vial with barcode label appears staged. Order number (100012481) matches barcode but overall document lacks professional polish expected from accredited analytical labs.

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.