Public COA audit
TB4/BPC-157 Blend · BPC-157
Audited September 5, 2026
Missing panels or key metadata — not enough evidence to treat this as a full certificate.
- Legitimacy
- 45
- Confidence
- 75%
- Panels
- 0/7
Scored poorly because the file is incomplete or not a full COA, limited panel coverage (0/7), 3 critical findings, and notable note: "No analytical panels present". 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
- TBB20N061825
- Sample date
- 2025-06-27
- Issue date
- 2025-06-29
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.
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 certificate file · core
Compound identity confirmed (e.g. HPLC, mass spec).
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.”
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 analytical panels present
This report shows only mass/weight measurements (mg quantities) for two peptides in a blend. No identity confirmation (HPLC, MS), purity analysis, or safety panels (endotoxin, heavy metals, microbial, sterility) are documented.
No purity data
The results section lists only mass quantities (BPC-157: 9.97/9.43/9.95 mg; TB-500: 10.60/10.02/10.54 mg). No percentage purity, HPLC chromatogram, or related impurities are reported.
No identity confirmation
No HPLC, mass spectrometry, or other identity verification method is documented. The report only confirms mass quantities, not molecular identity.
Batch number present
Batch TBB20N061825 is clearly stated.
Dates are consistent and valid
Testing ordered 25 JUN 2025, sample received 27 JUN 2025, analysis conducted 29 JUN 2025. All dates are sequential and on or before 2026-09-05.
Known testing lab
Janoshik is a recognized third-party peptide testing laboratory. Contact info ([email protected], www.janoshik.com) and verification URL with unique key (HTJFQRVVZFU3) are provided.
Minimal report scope
This appears to be a quantitative assessment (mass per vial) rather than a full Certificate of Analysis. The 'Tests requested' section states 'Assessment of a peptide vial or vials' without specifying analytical methods. This is consistent with a basic gravimetric or reconstitution check, not a comprehensive COA.
Timing & next steps
Practical follow-ups based on document age and gaps.
coa age
This COA was issued over a year ago (433 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.