What the score means
The scorecard measures documented transparency and verification, not medical efficacy, safety or suitability for human use. A high score means more relevant evidence could be verified; it is not a guarantee of product quality.
Our criteria
Testing transparency
Availability and clarity of batch-specific analytical documentation, including named methods and laboratories where verifiable.
Batch traceability
Whether documents can be connected to a specific lot and product rather than generic catalogue claims.
Evidence coverage
How much of the framework can actually be verified from public or directly documented evidence.
Business transparency
Clarity around company identity, policies, contact information and research-use positioning.
Documentation quality
Whether supporting records provide enough detail to understand what was tested, by whom and when.
Editorial confidence
A separate signal showing how strong the evidence base is, so missing information cannot masquerade as a perfect score.
Evidence first, score second
We show the underlying evidence and verification date alongside any score. Missing, disputed or outdated evidence remains visible instead of being converted into an unjustified number.
Evidence status used in reviews
Verified
We can inspect the relevant source or document and establish what it supports.
Provider-verified
An identifiable issuing laboratory or provider offers a verification route for the document or record. This supports document attribution, not product safety or chain of custody.
Supplier-provided
The information comes directly from the supplier but has not been independently established beyond the supplier's own publication.
Secondary / aggregated
An external database or index preserves or summarizes the evidence. Material commercial relationships are disclosed and aggregation alone is not treated as laboratory verification.
Unverified / unavailable
We cannot currently establish the claim from sufficient evidence. This is not treated as positive evidence.
How scoring will work
When numerical scores are published, each criterion will have a documented definition, a stated weight and an evidence status. Evidence quality and evidence coverage will be kept conceptually separate: a supplier can publish many documents without every document being independently verifiable, and a verified document can still cover only one batch.
We will not assign precise scores where the available evidence is too weak to justify that precision. A COA or high purity result will never be converted automatically into a claim of overall product quality.
Affiliate independence
Affiliate relationships will be disclosed separately and will not increase a supplier's score. Commercial relationships and editorial evidence are kept distinct. If an external evidence database has a commercial relationship with a supplier, that source will be identified and treated as secondary evidence rather than automatically as independent evidence.