Public COA audit
BPC-157 · TB-500 (TB4)
Audited July 29, 2026
Missing panels or key metadata — not enough evidence to treat this as a full certificate.
- Legitimacy
- 45
- Confidence
- 75%
- Panels
- 0/7
Document details
Fields extracted from the certificate — not order or payment data.
- Batch / lot
- TBB20N061825
- Sample date
- 2025-06-27
- Issue date
- 2025-06-29
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.
0 of 7 present · 0 passed · 0 failed · 0 reported · 7 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
Not on this COA · core
Reported purity percentage for the analyte.
No evidence for this panel. That lowers thoroughness — whether it matters depends on what you care about.
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.
No analytical panels present
Document only shows mass measurements (mg) for two compounds in triplicate, but provides no identity confirmation, purity analysis, HPLC/MS data, or any other standard COA testing panels
No purity data
No HPLC purity percentage, chromatogram, or analytical method reported. Only mass measurements provided
No identity confirmation
No mass spectrometry, amino acid analysis, or other identity verification method reported
Unusual test report format
Document is labeled 'TEST REPORT' rather than 'Certificate of Analysis' and only reports mass measurements, not typical analytical testing
Known testing laboratory
Janoshik is a recognized peptide testing laboratory with verification system
Batch number present
Batch TBB20N061825 clearly identified
Dates present and logical
Testing ordered 25 JUN 2025, sample received 27 JUN 2025, analysis conducted 29 JUN 2025 - all dates are sequential and reasonable
Timing & next steps
Practical follow-ups based on document age and gaps.
coa age
This COA was issued over a year ago (395 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.