No single regulator oversees the research-peptide market. Into that gap have stepped several independent, or semi-independent, rating services. They use different methods, different scales, and different levels of independence from one another. Here is what each one publishes about itself, and how peptideone.org uses them. Everything below is attributed to each service's own site. None of it is medical advice, and none of these vendors' products are approved for human consumption (research use only).
The Four Services at a Glance
| Service | Model | Score / Scale | Independence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finnrick | Procures samples itself; sends to commercial labs; publishes per-vendor grades per peptide | A–E safety grade (per-sample 0–10) | Independent — it commissions and pays for its own testing |
| PeptideBenchmark | Meta-aggregator; normalises Finnrick data + Peptide Critic community ratings into one score | 0–10 benchmark + board-rank | NOT independent of Finnrick — blends Finnrick as a primary input |
| VialAudit | Places anonymous blind test orders; ships to two rotating undisclosed labs; vendor leaderboard | 0–100 composite (per its published rubric) | Independent — blind ordering, rotating labs |
| Peptigrity | Aggregates per-test HPLC records (lab-attributed) and community reviews into a 0–100 Trust Score | Trust Score 0–100 + per-test purity % | Independent — no ads, sponsors, or affiliates |
Finnrick
Finnrick (finnrick.com) buys peptide samples on the open market and ships them to commercial laboratories for testing. As of mid-2026 its site reports 8,026 tests across 225 vendors and 15 peptides. Those results are summarised as per-vendor, per-peptide A–E safety grades, where A means great and E means bad; an X appears when too few tests exist. Each individual sample is scored 0–10, combining purity, quantity accuracy versus the label, and batch-information quality, and those scores roll up into the letter grade. Finnrick commissions and pays for its own testing rather than republishing vendor-provided certificates of analysis. That makes it a primary data generator, not a curator.
PeptideBenchmark
PeptideBenchmark (peptidebenchmark.com) is a meta-aggregator. It merges Finnrick's vendor table with Peptide Critic community ratings (a 5-star scale normalised to 10 points) and outputs a single 0–10 benchmark score. The ordering uses a stricter "board-rank" model, so that thin, single-source perfection does not outrank deeper consensus. As of mid-2026 it lists roughly 286 vendors, of which about 275 are scored. Finnrick is a core input, so PeptideBenchmark is not independent of it. Use both in one composite and you double-count the same underlying lab results.
VialAudit
VialAudit (vialaudit.com) runs as an independent audit desk. It places anonymous orders under an alias, so vendors do not know they are being evaluated, and ships samples to two independent third-party laboratories it deliberately does not name publicly. It rotates between those labs so a vendor cannot pre-screen by lab signature. Audits run on quarterly cycles for the vendors it covers. The published score is a 0–100 composite weighted, per its own rubric, across purity, label accuracy, shipping, and customer service — purity 40%, label accuracy 25%, shipping 20%, service 15%. Beyond the leaderboard, VialAudit publishes a public corrections log and a peptide pricing index. It works as a vendor-reputation index rather than a simple COA repository.
Peptigrity
Peptigrity (peptigrity.com) leads with raw, lab-attributed transparency. Each test record shows the peptide, the vendor, the measured purity percentage, the test date, the tested-versus-labelled quantity, and the specific laboratory that ran the test. That lab is frequently Janoshik, among other named labs, often with a link to the lab's own verification record. On top of those records it now also publishes a vendor-level Trust Score on a 0–100 scale. Per its site, the score blends independent lab purity with community reviews, weighting lab data more heavily than reviews, then scales the result by how much data backs it. As of mid-2026 its site reports coverage well into the hundreds of shops and several thousand lab tests. The tagline "we don't sell peptides — we verify them," and a stated "no ads, no sponsors, no affiliates" policy, reflect its independence.
A note on the underlying labs
Most of these services rely on the same handful of commercial labs. Janoshik is the most widely used in the research-peptide community. One thing to know for context: Janoshik is a Prague-based lab that is not ISO 17025-accredited, so its results are not intended for formal regulatory submissions, even though the community treats them as a de-facto standard. peptideone.org surfaces lab-attributed results where available, precisely so that this provenance is visible rather than hidden.
How peptideone.org Weights These Sources
PeptideBenchmark blends Finnrick's data, so including both in the same composite would overweight Finnrick's lab tests. peptideone.org therefore excludes PeptideBenchmark and builds its 0–10 score from three independent signals. It uses Peptigrity's underlying lab-purity data, not its blended Trust Score, so the inputs stay independent of one another:
| Source | Weight |
|---|---|
| Finnrick | 0.45 |
| VialAudit | 0.30 |
| Peptigrity HPLC purity | 0.25 |
PeptideBenchmark data is surfaced for reference on vendor profiles but is not included in the composite score calculation.
Choosing a Source for Your Research
- Breadth across vendors and peptides: Finnrick's 8,000-plus tests offer the widest single-source coverage.
- Holistic vendor due diligence: VialAudit's composite captures fulfilment and service alongside purity.
- Lab-level traceability: Peptigrity is the service built around tracing each result to a named laboratory.
- Single normalised number across sources: PeptideBenchmark provides this, but understand it is downstream of Finnrick.
No single service covers every vendor or every peptide. None is a regulator, and none replaces a vendor's own documentation. Cross-referencing them, with awareness of their interdependencies and of the labs behind them, gives the most complete picture currently available.