Public COA audit

BPC-157 · TB-500

Audited September 5, 2026

Mostly consistent, with concerns

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

Legitimacy
72
Confidence
88%
Panels
2/7
Purity (printed)
99.36%

Scored moderately because the document is mostly consistent but carries soft concerns, limited panel coverage (2/7), 3 soft concerns, and notable note: "High purity results". To improve: include identity, purity, and endotoxin at minimum.

Document details

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

Batch / lot
B-4339222-P
Identity method
UPLC/MS
Sample date
2026-06-22
Issue date
2026-06-22

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).

    BPC-157 confirmed; TB-500 confirmed

  • Purity

    Tested · passed · core

    Reported purity percentage for the analyte.

    BPC-157: 99.36%; TB-500: 99.12%

  • 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.

  • High purity results

    BPC-157 at 99.36% and TB-500 at 99.12% are both excellent purity values for research peptides and meet the ≥98% specification.

  • Identity confirmed by UPLC/MS

    Both compounds show UPLC chromatograms with clean single peaks and MS spectra with expected molecular ion patterns. BPC-157 shows m/z consistent with its ~1419.5 g/mol weight, TB-500 shows m/z consistent with ~4963 g/mol.

  • Same lot number for two different compounds

    Both BPC-157 and TB-500 share the identical lot number B-4339222-P. While the '-P' suffix suggests this is a purity-focused report (possibly part of a split testing protocol), it is unusual for two chemically distinct compounds to carry the same lot identifier unless they were co-synthesized or this represents a batch identifier rather than a unique sample ID.

  • Sample and analysis dates are valid

    Lab received date and analysis conducted date are both 06/22/2026, which is before the current date of 2026-09-05. Same-day turnaround is plausible for UPLC/MS purity testing.

  • Lab verification not independently confirmed

    Horizon Analytical is listed with [email protected] and a searchable URL horizonanalytical.com. The document includes a QR code for validation. However, I cannot verify the lab's actual existence, accreditation status, or whether the URL is operational from this document alone.

  • Purity/identity report file

    This certificate file looks like a purity/identity report. Many vendors publish a separate endotoxin report for the same lot — missing endotoxin on this file alone does not prove the lot was never tested.

  • Professional presentation

    The document is well-formatted with clear tables, chromatograms, mass spectra, and a signature from Aleksey Yevtodiyenko PhD. The layout is consistent across both compound sections.

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.