Public COA audit

BPC-157

Audited July 29, 2026

Mostly consistent, with concerns

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

Legitimacy
72
Confidence
82%
Panels
1/7
Purity (printed)
99.4%

Document details

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

Batch / lot
BPC20N040725
Sample date
2025-04-16
Issue date
2025-04-18

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 · 0 passed · 0 failed · 1 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

    Not on this COA · core

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

    No evidence for this panel. That lowers thoroughness — whether it matters depends on what you care about.

  • Purity

    Tested · result on file · core

    Reported purity percentage for the analyte.

    99.400%; 99.337%; 99.330%

  • Heavy metals

    Not on this COA

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

    No evidence for this panel. That lowers thoroughness — whether it matters depends on what you care about.

  • Microbial

    Not on this COA

    Bioburden / microbial limits testing.

    No evidence for this panel. That lowers thoroughness — whether it matters depends on what you care about.

  • Endotoxin

    Not on this COA · core

    LAL or chromogenic endotoxin assay.

    No evidence for this panel. That lowers thoroughness — whether it matters depends on what you care about.

  • Sterility

    Not on this COA

    Sterility testing where applicable.

    No evidence for this panel. That lowers thoroughness — whether it matters depends on what you care about.

  • Residual solvent / water

    Not on this COA

    Residual solvents or water content limits.

    No evidence for this panel. That lowers thoroughness — whether it matters depends on what you care about.

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

Not on this certificate. Lowers thoroughness; you decide if that panel matters for your use case. PeptIQ’s score still factors coverage.

Findings

Evidence-linked observations from this audit.

  • High purity reported

    Three measurements showing 99.3-99.4% purity, consistent with high-quality research peptide. This is normal and expected for BPC-157.

  • No identity confirmation method stated

    The report does not explicitly state the analytical method used for identity confirmation (e.g., MS, NMR). Only purity values and mass measurements are provided.

  • Limited testing scope

    Only purity testing is documented. No heavy metals, microbial, endotoxin, sterility, or residual solvent testing is shown. This is common for basic peptide testing but limits comprehensive quality assurance.

  • Janoshik Analytical is a known testing lab

    Janoshik is a recognized third-party analytical laboratory in the peptide/research compound space. Contact information and verification URL are provided.

  • Batch number present

    Batch BPC20N040725 is clearly stated, allowing traceability.

  • Dates are consistent and recent

    Testing ordered 12 APR 2025, sample received 16 APR 2025, analysis conducted 18 APR 2025. Timeline is logical and all dates are in the past relative to 2026-07-29.

  • Minimal detail in results section

    The results table shows mass measurements and purity percentages but lacks chromatograms, detailed method parameters, or pass/fail criteria. This is typical for Janoshik summary reports but reduces transparency.

Timing & next steps

Practical follow-ups based on document age and gaps.

  • coa age

    This COA was issued over a year ago (467 days) — consider whether a retest is warranted for this batch.

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.