Vendor dossiers

Twenty-one companies whose names appear most often on the label, reported as businesses rather than rated as brands. Each dossier carries a documented testing record, a correspondence log, an on-the-record reviews section, a box stating plainly what we verified, and an ordering box giving lead times, minimum quantities, what the certificate carries and how to obtain the batch record. Each dossier links the company’s own storefront, labelled and nofollowed, so a reader can check a claim against the seller — the Journal sells nothing, takes no commission, and a link is not a recommendation.

28 dossiers · last reviewed 30 June 2026 · how we score

Rank	Company	Base	Est.	Storefront	Grade	Reviews	Posture
1	BCH Bachem Holding (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.	Suzhou	2003	bachemholding.com	A	792	Documented; consistent across the run
2	ERP Shanghai ERP Biotechnology Co., Ltd.	Shanghai	2018	erpbiotechnology.com	A	832	Technically strong; documentation lot-specific
3	KP Zhuhai Kerui Biotechnology Co., Ltd.	Zhuhai	2016	keruipeptides.com	A	804	Cold chain exemplary; documentation complete
4	GL Biochem GL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd.	Shanghai	1998	glbiochem.net	A	2,048	Institutional; sponsor relationship disclosed
5	HYB Shenzhen Hybio Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.	Shenzhen, Guangdong	2003	hybiopharmaceutical.com	A−	962	Contract manufacturer; catalogue released on the same documentation
6	SSA Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology Co., Ltd.	Shanghai	2018	shanghaisigmaaudley.com	A−	864	Narrow catalogue; unusually complete documentation
6	GSP GenScript Biotech Corporation	Nanjing, Jiangsu	2002	genscriptpeptides.com	B+	696	In-house solid-phase synthesis; catalogue released on the custom-work documentation
7	QST Qingdao Saber Technology Pharmaceutical	Qingdao	2017	qingdaosabertechnology.com	A−	519	Release testing per lot; two-signature certificates
7	AMB AmbioPharm, Inc.	Beijing	2003	ambiopharm.net	A−	970	Contract active-ingredient manufacturer; catalogue released on the same documentation
8	QSC Qingdao Sigma Chemical Co., Ltd.	Qingdao, Shandong	—	qingdaosigma.com	A−	716	Regional stock; fastest transit in the directory
9	FGP Flourishglobal Peptide Biotech (Chengdu) Co., Ltd.	Chengdu	2019	flourishglobalpeptide.net	A−	799	Fastest correspondence; pre-dispatch photographs
10	HJ Hubei Jianxiang Bioscience Co., Ltd.	Xianning	2015	hubeijianxiang.net	A−	857	Makes what it lists; facility identifier on the certificate
11	GGPeps Nantong Guangyuan Chemical Co., Ltd.	Nantong, Jiangsu	—	ggpeps.net	A−	1,394	High volume; purification upgraded and documented
12	JEEP Guangzhou JEEP Biotechnology Co., Ltd.	Guangzhou, Guangdong	—	jeepbio.com	B+	722	Strong analytical record; factory-direct
13	TFC Tianjin Finder Chemical Co., Ltd.	Tianjin	—	tfcpeptides.com	B+	737	Verified with all four services; integration convention published
14	QYB ChinaPeptides Co., Ltd. (QYAOBIO)	Shanghai	2008	qyaobiopeptides.com	B+	838	Custom-synthesis depth; storefront panel priced separately
15	CPC Chinese Peptide Company Co., Ltd.	Hangzhou	2001	chinesepeptidecompany.net	B+	756	Long-established; technically literate correspondence
16	SGN Sangon Biotech (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.	Shanghai	2004	sangonbio.com	B+	707	Institutional; document control unusually complete
17	WWB Wuhan Wansheng Biotechnology Co., Ltd.	Wuhan, Hubei	—	wuhanwanshengbio.com	B+	923	Large published archive; strong service recovery
18	Homopeptide Hunan Aslsen Technology Co., Ltd.	Changsha, Hunan	—	homopeptide.net	B+	466	Verified by three services; fulfilment now scheduled
19	MKM Xi'an Mokemei Biotechnology Co., Ltd.	Xi'an	2016	mokemeibiotechnology.com	B+	954	Two orthogonal purity methods; identity supplied free
20	SWB Shanghai Wibson Biotechnology Co., Ltd.	Shanghai	2019	shanghaiwibsonbiotechnology.net	B+	771	Documentation rebuilt 2024 to 2026; address corroborated
21	WXT WuXi TIDES (WuXi AppTec Testing Division)	Wuxi	2002	wuxitides.net	B+	986	Documented; the Journal’s assessment is the most reserved in the set
23	SIG Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai) Trading Co., Ltd.	Shanghai	2005	sigmaaldrich.org	A−	712	Trading arm; catalogue released against its own written specification
24	ASY Asymchem Laboratories (Tianjin) Co., Ltd.	Tianjin	1998	asymchem.org	A-	705	In-house synthesis; four independent laboratories run against each released lot
25	SinoPep SinoPep Biotechnology (Changzhou) Co., Ltd.	Changzhou, Jiangsu	2011	sinopep.net	A-	798	In-house Fmoc solid-phase synthesis; catalogue released against its own written specification
26	PPG PolyPeptide Group (Hangzhou) Co., Ltd.	Hangzhou, Zhejiang	2006	polypeptidegroup.net	A−	884	Documented; in-house Fmoc solid-phase synthesis
27	TFS Thermo Fisher Scientific (China) Co., Ltd.	Shanghai	2006	thermofisherpeptides.com	A-	753	Shanghai plant synthesis; four independent laboratories per lot, and the superseded lot's certificate left published
Grades run A to C and are the Journal’s own composite of analytical record, documentation quality, correspondence responsiveness and fulfilment reliability. They are not comparable with any other publication’s figures, they are never sold, and they are revised at each quarterly review.

The rest of the market

The twenty-one above are the companies whose names recur often enough to justify a standing dossier, a quarterly letter and a link to their own storefront. The 188 below appear in the trade but not often enough, or with too little documentation behind them, for the Journal to open a file. They get a line each: the band and the report count are the raw directory figures the Journal was able to collect, not an assessment of ours, and the note says which of the four reasons applies — too thin a file, results spanning more than one band, documentation that does not stand on its own, or nothing verifiable at all.

No dossier, no Journal grade, no outbound link, and no profile page. That absence is the finding rather than an oversight, and it is what the twenty-one above have earned their way out of. Nothing in this list is an allegation about anybody: it is a statement about what this desk holds.

Company	Band	Reports seen	Note
Trusted Peptide	B	2	The evidence base extends to 2 submissions and no further. The figures are well behaved.
Risynth Bio	B	8	8 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. What is held is consistent; consistency across a handful of lots is weak evidence about a process.
NUPEPS Peptides	B	4	Coverage stands at 4 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. Consistency holds across the whole file.
Hunan GoodPeptides Biotech Co	B	2	The evidence base extends to 2 submissions and no further. No result in the set contradicts another.
Bulk Peptide Wholesale	B	20	20 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. What is held is internally consistent.
Paradigm Peptide	B	16	Coverage is genuine at 16 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. No result in the set contradicts another.
Orbitrex Peptides	B	17	17 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. The results cluster as they should.
Aavant Research	B	13	At 13 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The documentation supplied with these results does not stand on its own — a figure, a date, and no method behind either.
PeptiAtlas	B	4	4 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. What is held is internally consistent.
The Naughty Needle	B	2	The evidence base extends to 2 submissions and no further. Nothing in the file contradicts anything else in it, and the file is too short for that to mean much.
Lux Synth Aminos	B	2	2 reports are held. That is insufficient to support a dossier. Consistency holds across the whole file.
Huaian Hanyou Peptide	B	7	Coverage stands at 7 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. The figures are well behaved.
Lisa Biopeptide	B	11	At 11 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. Nothing in the file contradicts anything else in it, and the file is too short for that to mean much.
Lipeptides	B	7	At 7 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. What is held is internally consistent.
NextGen Health	B	3	The Journal holds 3 submissions concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. What is held is consistent; consistency across a handful of lots is weak evidence about a process.
OmegAmino	B	4	At 4 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. No result in the set contradicts another.
Xianhong Tong XHT Peptides	B	5	5 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. No result in the set contradicts another.
Diju Peptides Wellness and Co	B	4	4 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. The figures are well behaved.
Zhang TY	B	4	The record extends to 4 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. What is held is consistent; consistency across a handful of lots is weak evidence about a process.
SubQ Society	B	3	With 3 results on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. The figures are well behaved.
Bfflink	B	13	13 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. No result in the set contradicts another.
Laicuinuo LCN	B	7	7 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. Nothing in the file contradicts anything else in it, and the file is too short for that to mean much.
Cellupep	B	7	At 7 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. Nothing in the file contradicts anything else in it, and the file is too short for that to mean much.
Shanghai Leader Peptide Biotechnology	B	8	At 8 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. Consistency holds across the whole file.
Peptronix Bio PTB	B	13	At 13 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The figures are well behaved.
Yongkang Nuoao Trading Co	B	9	Coverage stands at 9 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. Consistency holds across the whole file.
Eros Peptides	B	3	The Journal holds 3 submissions concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. The figures are well behaved.
Champion Peptide	B	6	Coverage stands at 6 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. What is held is internally consistent.
Bio Pepz	B	4	Coverage stands at 4 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. What is held is internally consistent.
Shandong Nuoweiou Medical Technology Co	B	5	At 5 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. Nothing in the file contradicts anything else in it, and the file is too short for that to mean much.
PurePEPS	B	4	Coverage stands at 4 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. No result in the set contradicts another.
Rayshine Peptide Biochemicals	C	6	6 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. The figures are genuine and they are low.
HealthTide Biotech	C	6	6 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. Below threshold on the evidence held.
Dankang BioHealth	C	12	12 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. The placement follows from the numbers held and from nothing else; no allegation is made or implied about anybody.
Kits4less	C	7	7 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. Results sit beneath the range occupied by the assessed twenty.
Huayi Biotechnology	C	19	At 19 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. Below threshold on the evidence held.
Anlv Biotechnology	C	10	The record extends to 10 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. Placed below the working band on figures rather than on reputation.
Xingtai Pukelai Technology Co	C	6	At 6 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. The figures fall below the band the Journal reserves for its dossiers.
EHZ Peptides	C	39	At 39 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. Placed below the working band on figures rather than on reputation.
Zztai Peptide	C	30	Coverage is genuine at 30 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. The figures are genuine and they are low.
Chimera Peptides	C	8	The record extends to 8 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. Placed below the working band on figures rather than on reputation.
Hangzhou Mandy Biotechnology	C	14	The evidence base extends to 14 submissions and continues to move. The figures are genuine and they are low.
Yabang Peptide	C	10	At 10 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. The figures fall below the band the Journal reserves for its dossiers.
Evolve BioPep	C	7	At 7 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. Placed below the working band on figures rather than on reputation.
Quenna PMQ	D	15	The evidence base extends to 15 submissions and continues to move. The figures fall below the band the Journal reserves for its dossiers.
Nanjing Xiyuxun Technology XYX	D	3	The Journal holds 3 submissions concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. Placed below the working band on figures rather than on reputation.
Welon Peptide Solutions	D	5	At 5 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. Placed below the working band on figures rather than on reputation.
Xingtai Lesda Technology	E	6	Coverage stands at 6 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. Below threshold on the evidence held.
Qingdao Hongshengda Trading	E	4	4 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. Below threshold on the evidence held.
ZZQ Peptides	E	22	At 22 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The figures fall below the band the Journal reserves for its dossiers.
Changan District Sheng Peptide Trading	E	7	7 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. The figures are genuine and they are low.
UWA Elite Peptides	E	16	The evidence base extends to 16 submissions and continues to move. The figures are what they are and they are below the band the Journal reserves for the twenty it carries files on.
Hangzhou Youngpeptide Biotechnology HYB	E	15	15 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. The placement follows from the numbers held and from nothing else; no allegation is made or implied about anybody.
Modern Aminos	E	4	4 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. Placed below the working band on figures rather than on reputation.
Shanghai OuDaXin New Material Technology Center	E	43	At 43 reports the sample is adequate and the conclusion still turns on the band. A low band on a real file is a finding about the lots submitted, and the Journal has no basis for extending it further.
Shenzhen Jiechuang Trading	E	8	At 8 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. The figures are genuine and they are low.
Shaanxi Dideu Medichem	E	6	The record extends to 6 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. A low band on a real file is a finding about the lots submitted, and the Journal has no basis for extending it further.
Qingdao VitaConin International Trading	E	5	5 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. Results sit beneath the range occupied by the assessed twenty.
Guangzhou Lengiuanhuang Cosmetics	E	4	4 submissions permit an impression and do not permit a defence of one. Nothing here suggests misconduct; it suggests a process the submitted lots did not show under control.
Shanghai JinBei Chemical Technology	B	18	At 18 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The figures are well behaved.
Peptide Technologies	B	11	The record extends to 11 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. The figures are well behaved.
Pura Peptides	X	1	At 1 submission the honest editorial position is that the question remains open. No band is assigned, and assigning one would be worse than leaving it blank.
Peptide Partners	B to C	64	64 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. Where results straddle bands, the useful question for a buyer is which lot they have rather than which company.
Bfflist AMO	B to C	63	63 results are held. Volume is not the limiting factor. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Pure Tested Peptides	B to C	7	The record extends to 7 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
PeptiSlim	C to E	38	The evidence base extends to 38 submissions and continues to move. A file this wide cannot be summarised by an average, and the Journal does not publish one for it.
Glamgurcraft Innovations Foreign Trade	X	1	1 report is held. That is insufficient to support a dossier.
HkRoids	B to C	14	The evidence base extends to 14 submissions and continues to move. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Yiwu Aozuo Trading Co	B to E	91	The file extends to 91 submissions, so something may properly be said. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Peptide Haven	B	4	4 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. What is held is consistent; consistency across a handful of lots is weak evidence about a process.
Atomik Labz	B to C	40	The evidence base extends to 40 submissions and continues to move. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Bulk Peptide Supply	B to E	20	Coverage is genuine at 20 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
M-Peptides	B to C	17	17 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Mai Peptide	C to E	55	55 results are held. Volume is not the limiting factor. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Peptidology	B	16	16 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. The figures are well behaved.
Hazel	X	1	1 report is held. That is insufficient to support a dossier. No grade, there being nothing to grade.
TCI	X	1	The Journal holds 1 submission concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. Unrated: the data will not support a letter.
Uther	B to E	69	The file extends to 69 submissions, so something may properly be said. The spread is itself the finding.
Shandong Shengyuan Peptide Technology	B to E	24	24 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
LiliPeptide	C to E	185	185 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Xingruida XDR	B to D	64	64 results are held. Volume is not the limiting factor.
Eternal Peptides	B	23	23 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Consistency holds across the whole file.
Tianjin Ruiwang New Material Technology Co	B to E	107	107 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. The spread is itself the finding.
Polaris Peptides	B to D	97	At 97 reports the sample is adequate and the conclusion still turns on the band. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Injectify	B to E	29	Coverage is genuine at 29 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Precision Peptide Co	B to C	21	Coverage is genuine at 21 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
AKS Chem	X	1	The Journal holds 1 submission concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. No grade, there being nothing to grade.
Reta-Peptide	B to E	144	144 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Peptide-S	B to E	125	125 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. Two lots from this supplier can land in different bands, which is a different proposition from a supplier with a low mean.
Planet Peptide	B to D	59	59 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Henan Sahe Peptide	B to D	18	The evidence base extends to 18 submissions and continues to move. Better and worse lots are further apart than any difference of method would account for, so the spread is in the material.
Hunan Ruiwang Technology Center	B to C	14	14 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. Better and worse lots are further apart than any difference of method would account for, so the spread is in the material.
Skye Peptides	B to E	73	73 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Nuscience Peptides	B to D	47	The file extends to 47 submissions, so something may properly be said. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
NextechLabs	B to D	30	30 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Golden Eagle	B to C	17	The evidence base extends to 17 submissions and continues to move. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Peptide Worldwide	X	1	The evidence base extends to 1 submission and no further. Unrated: the data will not support a letter.
HK Peptides	B to E	343	Coverage is ample at 343 reports, which makes variance rather than the mean the material question. The spread is itself the finding.
Nexaph	B to E	200	Coverage is ample at 200 reports, which makes variance rather than the mean the material question. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
BeiBangAn	C to D	38	Coverage is genuine at 38 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Two lots from this supplier can land in different bands, which is a different proposition from a supplier with a low mean.
Shandong Aishi Biotechnology	D to E	37	At 37 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Xingtai Jiachuang Technology	C to E	31	31 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Zenith Jove Peptide ZJ	B to E	26	26 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Kerisite Shenzhen International	B to D	16	16 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. The spread is itself the finding.
YB Peptide	B to E	10	10 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Qing Li Peptide	B to E	260	The file extends to 260 submissions, so something may properly be said. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Shanxi Qianyecao Biotech QYC	D to E	66	At 66 reports the sample is adequate and the conclusion still turns on the band. Better and worse lots are further apart than any difference of method would account for, so the spread is in the material.
Verified Peptides	B to C	34	34 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. The spread is itself the finding.
Hebei Rimao Technology	C to D	32	The evidence base extends to 32 submissions and continues to move. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Pure Rawz	B to D	29	Coverage is genuine at 29 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Where results straddle bands, the useful question for a buyer is which lot they have rather than which company.
Heman Peptide HM	B to E	29	The evidence base extends to 29 submissions and continues to move. The spread is itself the finding.
Shanghai Baoju	B to E	21	21 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. Better and worse lots are further apart than any difference of method would account for, so the spread is in the material.
ZLZ Peptide	B to E	199	199 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. A file this wide cannot be summarised by an average, and the Journal does not publish one for it.
Peptide Sciences	B to E	123	123 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Allen Biotechnology Co ABC	B to E	43	43 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. The spread is itself the finding.
Peptide Crafters	B to D	39	The evidence base extends to 39 submissions and continues to move. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Simple Peptide	B to D	26	Coverage is genuine at 26 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Top Peptide	C to D	21	At 21 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Zen Peptides	B to C	13	13 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Amino Lair	B to D	12	The record extends to 12 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Oupeptide	B to E	149	Coverage is ample at 149 reports, which makes variance rather than the mean the material question. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Paramount Peptides	B to E	65	65 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. Two lots from this supplier can land in different bands, which is a different proposition from a supplier with a low mean.
Yimei	B to E	54	54 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
LSPL	C to E	40	Coverage is genuine at 40 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Royal Peptides	B to C	30	The evidence base extends to 30 submissions and continues to move. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Shenzhen Loga Tech LG LOGA	B to E	21	At 21 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
ZhuoYan lab	C to E	30	The evidence base extends to 30 submissions and continues to move. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Astro Peptides	B to E	29	29 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. The spread is itself the finding.
Mix Peptides	D to E	29	29 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Science	B to C	12	12 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
TSC Top Supplements China	C to E	99	99 submissions constitute a substantial file, and the question becomes what the spread does. The dispersion is the reportable fact here, and it is the reason no single band has been assigned.
HXNet	C to E	91	91 results are held. Volume is not the limiting factor. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Xian Yihang Technology	C to E	48	48 results are held. Volume is not the limiting factor.
Haikou Mingheng Technology	B to C	16	The evidence base extends to 16 submissions and continues to move. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
SRY Labs	B to E	111	Coverage is ample at 111 reports, which makes variance rather than the mean the material question. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Accelerate Labs	B to E	20	20 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. The spread is itself the finding.
PurePeptides	B to E	15	The evidence base extends to 15 submissions and continues to move. Where results straddle bands, the useful question for a buyer is which lot they have rather than which company.
Regenerative Research	X	2	With 2 results on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. Deliberately left unrated.
Zhejiang Yichenkang Biotechnology	B to E	58	58 results are held. Volume is not the limiting factor. The spread is itself the finding.
Biolongevity Labs	B to E	33	33 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Alpha-Gen	B to E	30	30 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Two lots from this supplier can land in different bands, which is a different proposition from a supplier with a low mean.
LN Peptides	B to E	28	At 28 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The spread is itself the finding.
Forever Young Pharmacy	B to E	26	26 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Better and worse lots are further apart than any difference of method would account for, so the spread is in the material.
Prime Peptides	B to E	19	19 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. Two lots from this supplier can land in different bands, which is a different proposition from a supplier with a low mean.
Haikou Mingheng Biotechnology	D to E	11	Coverage stands at 11 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Dragon Pharma	X	1	At 1 submission the honest editorial position is that the question remains open. Deliberately left unrated.
Liberty Peptides	B to E	16	16 results constitute a working sample rather than a testing history. Two lots from this supplier can land in different bands, which is a different proposition from a supplier with a low mean.
Amino Asylum	B to C	15	15 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Amino Amigos	B to E	37	37 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Platinum Cryo	B to E	24	The evidence base extends to 24 submissions and continues to move. The results span more than one band, which is the finding: the mean is a summary of two populations rather than a description of one.
Elite Research USA	B to E	47	At 47 reports the sample is adequate and the conclusion still turns on the band. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Limitless Life Nootropics	B to D	22	At 22 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Oasis Peptides	B to E	16	At 16 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. A file this wide cannot be summarised by an average, and the Journal does not publish one for it.
Suaway Lab Research	B to E	39	The evidence base extends to 39 submissions and continues to move. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Pharma Grade Peptides	B to E	18	At 18 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
PeptiLab Research	B to E	15	15 submissions are held — sufficient to discern a shape, insufficient for a dossier. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Tydes	C to E	41	Coverage is ample at 41 reports, which makes variance rather than the mean the material question. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Loti Labs	B to E	32	Coverage is genuine at 32 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Better and worse lots are further apart than any difference of method would account for, so the spread is in the material.
Wolverine Peptides	X	1	The evidence base extends to 1 submission and no further. No band is assigned, and assigning one would be worse than leaving it blank.
Amplified Amino	C to E	12	The record extends to 12 submissions, which is thin against a catalogue of this size. Results range across bands, which is a description of the process.
Alimo Peptide	D to E	7	7 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. The spread is itself the finding.
Richards Biotech Simply Richards	X	1	At 1 submission the honest editorial position is that the question remains open. No grade, there being nothing to grade.
Coastal Peptides	B to E	26	Coverage is genuine at 26 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. Better and worse results are separated by more than method variation accounts for.
Peptides 4 Research	C to E	20	The evidence base extends to 20 submissions and continues to move. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Deuschem	B to E	29	At 29 reports the trend is legible; the confidence interval is not. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Hybiopeptides	X	1	With 1 result on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. No band is assigned, and assigning one would be worse than leaving it blank.
Peptide Gurus	B to E	45	45 results are held. Volume is not the limiting factor. Lot-to-lot variance dominates whatever the average reports.
Swiss Chems	C to E	9	At 9 reports, sampling variation exceeds anything the figures would demonstrate. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
WllyBIO	X	1	At 1 submission the honest editorial position is that the question remains open. The honest editorial position is that nothing is known, which is a different statement from a poor result.
Biolabshop Limited	C to E	6	6 results are held: suggestive, and the Journal does not publish suggestive. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
Peptides For Sale	D to E	21	Coverage is genuine at 21 reports, though the picture it yields has not stabilised. The band is sufficiently wide that the mean does not summarise it.
NuLife Peptides	B	6	Coverage stands at 6 reports, below the threshold at which the Journal opens a dossier. The results sit inside one band, which is what a short file usually looks like whether or not the process behind it is stable.
Wuhan Newtop Biotech	X	2	With 2 results on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. No grade, there being nothing to grade.
LOOKBiotech	X	2	With 2 results on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. The entry exists so that the absence is visible. An absent supplier would look like an oversight; this is a finding.
PRIVATE	X	2	With 2 results on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. No band. An editorial position rather than an omission.
Peptide Ark	X	2	With 2 results on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. No band is assigned, and assigning one would be worse than leaving it blank.
Zhuoyue Biotechnology	X	1	The evidence base extends to 1 submission and no further. One or two submissions describe a vial. They do not describe a company, and the Journal will not treat them as though they did.
Hebei Chengtong Technology	X	1	The Journal holds 1 submission concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. Deliberately left unrated.
Coffee and Peppers	X	1	At 1 submission the honest editorial position is that the question remains open. No band. An editorial position rather than an omission.
Marvel Peptide	X	1	The Journal holds 1 submission concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. One or two submissions describe a vial. They do not describe a company, and the Journal will not treat them as though they did.
HK Fat Cat	X	1	At 1 submission the honest editorial position is that the question remains open. Unrated: the data will not support a letter.
Guangzhou Yuao Trading	X	1	The evidence base extends to 1 submission and no further. No band. An editorial position rather than an omission.
PepKits	X	1	With 1 result on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. One or two submissions describe a vial. They do not describe a company, and the Journal will not treat them as though they did.
Lejian Biotech Peptide	X	1	The Journal holds 1 submission concerning this supplier, which describes a vial rather than a company. No band is assigned, and assigning one would be worse than leaving it blank.
PepLab Solutions	X	1	With 1 result on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. No grade, there being nothing to grade.
Explicit Sarms	X	1	1 report is held. That is insufficient to support a dossier. Unrated: the data will not support a letter.
Weifang Xingbei International Trade	X	1	With 1 result on record, any characterisation would be extrapolation. Deliberately left unrated.
Advanced Technology and Industrial	X	1	1 report is held. That is insufficient to support a dossier. No band is assigned, and assigning one would be worse than leaving it blank.
Listed for completeness, ordered as the source directory orders them. A company appearing here has not been assessed by the Journal; the note records why the file is not strong enough to assess. Readers holding documents on any of these suppliers are invited to send them to the standards desk, which is how several of the twenty-one above first came to have a file.