Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Finding aid

Supplier comparison — all 20 dossiers

Every assessed supplier in one sortable, filterable table. The default order is alphabetical and no ranking is published.

The Institute assesses documentation, not product. It has purchased nothing, tested nothing and inspected nothing. Every score on this page is a judgement about the completeness and interpretability of the records a supplier publishes or supplied on request. A high score means that a supplier documents its material well. It is not a statement that any product is pure, correctly identified, correctly filled, sterile, or safe, and it is not a purchasing recommendation. The Institute makes no purchasing recommendations.

§1Comparison table

Showing 0 of 20

Table 1. All assessed suppliers. Sort on any column. Sorting on the total produces something a reader will treat as a ranking, which is why the coverage limitation of each dossier appears in the table rather than behind a link.

SupplierCodeCountryCityEst.Certificate-of-ana…Independent…Identity confirmat…Documentation…Storage, packaging…Responsiveness to…TotalCoverage limitation
Bachem Holding (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.BCHCNSuzhou200344444480.0Assessment covers the peptide catalogue only.
ChinaPeptides Co., Ltd. (QYAOBIO)QYBCNShanghai200855544493.0The custom-synthesis model means each order is effectively a distinct batch, which the Institute notes both raises the importance of per-order documentation and makes systematic assessment…
Chinese Peptide Company Co., Ltd.CPCCNHangzhou200144444480.0Assessment covers the peptide catalogue. Injectable-oil and raw-material lines were not assessed.
Flourishglobal Peptide Biotech (Chengdu) Co., Ltd.FGPCNChengdu201934343470.0Identity is reported as a mass value without stated resolution or expected mass, which limits its interpretability for near-isobaric pairs.
GL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd.GL BiochemCNShanghai33433363.0The assessment covers research-grade custom synthesis. The Institute didn't assess any GMP-designated activity, which falls outside its remit.
Guangzhou JEEP Biotechnology Co., Ltd.JEEPCNGuangzhou44444480.0The assessment covers the GLP-1 and incretin lines, for which documentation is most complete. Coverage of the growth-hormone-axis and repair-peptide lines is materially thinner and the…
Hubei Jianxiang Bioscience Co., Ltd.HJCNXianning201544444480.0Assessment based on 16 catalogue lines.
Hunan Aslsen Technology Co., Ltd.HomopeptideCNChangsha55544493.0Identity documentation was absent or limited to retention time for seven of the eleven lines sampled. The Institute regards a retention-time-only identity claim as insufficient for any…
Nantong Guangyuan Chemical Co., Ltd.GGPepsCNNantong34333365.0The distributed warehouse model means material may be held at several points between synthesis and dispatch. The Institute couldn't verify temperature control across the network and records…
Qingdao Saber Technology PharmaceuticalQSTCNQingdao201733333360.0Identity documentation was absent for four of the twelve lines sampled, which caps the identity score.
Qingdao Sigma Chemical Co., Ltd.QSCCNQingdao44444480.0Certificates in the sampled set reported a purity percentage without naming the method. The Institute cannot assess whether a stability-indicating method was used, and therefore cannot…
Sangon Biotech (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.SGNCNShanghai200455544493.0Assessment covers research-peptide lines.
Shanghai ERP Biotechnology Co., Ltd.ERPCNShanghai201855544493.0Assessment based on 14 catalogue lines and one round of correspondence.
Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology Co., Ltd.SSACNShanghai201844443478.0Assessment based on documentation for 22 catalogue lines and two rounds of written correspondence.
Shanghai Wibson Biotechnology Co., Ltd.SWBCNShanghai201955544493.0Peptide content is absent from certificates across all sampled lines, which prevents a mass balance and caps the certificate-completeness score at 3.
Tianjin Finder Chemical Co., Ltd.TFCCNTianjin54333375.0Shipment conditions for light- and oxidation-sensitive compounds were not documented in any material reviewed, which caps the handling score at 2. Two of the compounds in the sampled set (a…
Wuhan Wansheng Biotechnology Co., Ltd.WWBCNWuhan55544493.0The published third-party report library is the largest in the assessment set by count. The Institute was able to match 41 of 60 sampled reports to a specific catalogue batch; the remaining…
WuXi TIDES (WuXi AppTec Testing Division)WXTCNWuxi200245444485.0The oldest established supplier in the set and the broadest catalogue, which means the assessment necessarily samples rather than covers it. Documentation quality was consistent across the…
Xi'an Mokemei Biotechnology Co., Ltd.MKMCNXi'an201645544590.0One catalogue description was found inconsistent with the corresponding certificate during the assessment; the inconsistency was corrected after correspondence but the transparency score…
Zhuhai Kerui Biotechnology Co., Ltd.KPCNZhuhai201655544493.0Correspondence in the current cycle required two enquiries before a substantive response was received, which is reflected in the responsiveness score.
Criterion scores are on the anchored zero-to-five scale published in the rubric. The total is the weighted sum out of 100. Domains are not reproduced in this table; each dossier carries its supplier's domain as plain text.

§2How to read this table

  • The total conceals more than it shows. Two suppliers with the same total may differ entirely in which criteria they meet, and the per-criterion columns are the informative ones.
  • Coverage differs. The last column states what each assessment covered. A score obtained over a supplier's incretin lines says nothing about its growth-hormone-axis lines.
  • No column measures product. Every column measures documentation.
  • Absence is not a judgement. A supplier not in this table has not been assessed, which is different from having been assessed and scored poorly.
Mean score by criterion across the assessment setScore awarded against each weighted criterion of the supplier evaluation rubric.Criterion (weight)Score, 0 to 5Certificate-of-analysis completeness25 %4 / 5Independent third-party testing record25 %4 / 5Identity confirmation practice15 %4 / 5Documentation transparency and consistency15 %4 / 5Storage, packaging and cold-chain evidence10 %4 / 5Responsiveness to documented enquiry10 %4 / 5
Figure 1. Mean score across all 20 assessed suppliers, by criterion. The pattern is consistent across the set: purity is reported, the method producing it often is not, and content, water and counter-ion are absent often enough that a mass balance cannot be formed for most sampled certificates.
Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.