What this is
A community-maintained directory of research peptides, their upstream manufacturers, the storefronts that resell them, and the independent test results (COAs) that confirm or contradict vendor claims.
Every record is sourced. Every score is derived from inputs you can inspect on the entity's page. Nothing here is medical advice or an endorsement to purchase or use any compound — most peptides listed are not approved for human therapeutic use.
Merit Score methodology
The Merit Score (0-100) measures how much observable verification
evidence a vendor has earned. It is derived only from signals we can observe
and publish — no reviews, no third-party rankings, no price. A vendor earns up
from zero:
+ up to 40pts from independent COAs (each weighted by lab reputation and
decayed by age — a year-old test is worth about half a fresh one)
+ up to 20pts from the number of distinct independent labs behind those COAs
(1 lab = 8, 2 = 14, 3+ = 20; multiple labs are hard to fake)
+ up to 25pts from median measured purity (0 below 95%, full at 100%)
+ up to 10pts from evidence breadth (distinct peptides and lots tested)
+ up to 5pts for years active (1pt/year)
A vendor with no independent COA on file is shown as "Unscored — insufficient
evidence", not a number. Vendors marked "scam-flagged" are floored to 0.
Confirmed forgery / shared-batch flags will subtract points once that data is
live. Tiers: Strong (75+), Moderate (50-74), Limited (25-49), Minimal (1-24).
Scores are recomputed every time data is re-seeded, and the per-vendor
breakdown is stored alongside the score so any number traces to its inputs. Data sources
Scraped from public vendor websites, manufacturer disclosures, third-party
rankings (such as reptides.co/market),
and academic citation databases. Every record carries a _meta
block with its source URL and verification timestamp.
Contributing / corrections
Found stale or wrong data? Open a PR against
/data/ in the repo. The schema is enforced by
Zod; CI will reject malformed submissions.