PLATE 02 / PRODUCT QUALITY
Peptriva Product Quality
Per-lot Peptriva results read off the certificates rather than the marketing.
- PUBLISHABLE LOTS
- 8
- LOWEST REPORTED
- 99.58%
- HIGHEST REPORTED
- 99.90%
- MEAN OF THE EIGHT
- 99.74%
The headline numbers
Every publishable lot on file reports at or above 99.58 percent purity by HPLC-UV, area percent, and every one reports a measured net content alongside it[1]. The pairing is the useful part. A purity figure alone describes composition and says nothing about quantity, and a large share of certificates in this category stop there.
The table below is the complete set of publishable lots, transcribed from the certificate ledger with accession numbers so a reader can pull the source document rather than trust the transcription. The numbers are the laboratory's, the transcription is ours, and where the two disagree the certificate governs and this page is wrong[1][8].
| Product | Purity | Lot | Accession | Net content reported |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KPV | 99.90% | KPV10-260504 | 2606300404 | 11.30 mg |
| CJC-1295 / Ipamorelin | 99.86% | CP10-260428 | 2606300406 | Ipamorelin 5.14 mg, CJC-1295 5.26 mg |
| GHK-Cu | 99.85% | CU50-260503 | 2606300412 | 57.46 mg |
| TB-500 (Thymosin Beta-4) | 99.80% | TB500(B4)-260428 | 2606300398 | 13.28 mg |
| MOTS-c | 99.73% | MS10-260508 | 2606300410 | 11.16 mg |
| NAD+ | 99.61% | NJ500-260503 | 2606300392 | 527.61 mg |
| GLOW Blend | 99.60% | GLOW70-260504 | 2606300414 | GHK-Cu 60.42 mg, BPC-157 11.12 mg, Thymosin Beta-4 11.83 mg |
| BPC-157 | 99.58% | BC10-260504 | 2606300400 | 11.24 mg |
All figures are the independent laboratory's reported values on certificates received 30 June 2026 and reported 2 July 2026[1][2].
By compound
Read down the purity column and the striking thing is how little separates the lots. The spread across all eight is 0.32 of a percentage point, which is narrower than the difference between a certificate that reports identity and one that does not. Treating 99.90 as meaningfully better material than 99.58 is over-reading an area percent figure.
The differences that do carry information are elsewhere in the table. The blue copper lot is recorded under the appearance assay as a blue lyophilized powder, which is a description a buyer can confirm on arrival[1]. The NAD+ lot reports 527.61 mg of measured net content, an order of magnitude more material than the peptide vials and a case where the mass figure is the whole of the useful information. The two-component lot reports each component separately rather than as a combined mass. And the GLOW lot reports three components separately, which is discussed below because blends are where certificates in this category usually go quiet.
What is Peptriva's average purity?
The eight publishable lots report 99.90, 99.86, 99.85, 99.80, 99.73, 99.61, 99.60, and 99.58 percent. The mean of those eight values is 99.74 percent, and the range is 99.58 to 99.90 percent[1].
The mean is the less useful of the two figures, and it is given here mainly so that a reader who wants it does not have to take an unshown number on trust. An average across eight lots of eight different compounds is an arithmetic exercise rather than a property of the material: nobody buys the average, they buy a lot, and the lot has its own certificate with its own number on it.
It is also worth being exact about what an area percent figure is. HPLC-UV separates the sample into components, measures the area under each detected peak, and reports the target peak as a share of the total detected area. So 99.58 percent on lot BC10-260504 means the target compound accounted for 99.58 percent of what the detector saw, with the remaining 0.42 percent spread across other detected peaks. Anything the ultraviolet detector does not see is outside the denominator, and the figure says nothing about which compound sits in the main peak. That is why identity by LC-MS sits on the same certificate, and why a purity number quoted without an identity result is a weaker document than it looks.
What peptides does Peptriva sell?
Forty products are listed in the catalogue and thirteen are currently in stock, all thirteen with an independent certificate behind them[1][5]. The catalogue groups them into nine categories: cytoprotective, GH secretagogues, peptide analogs, mitochondrial, copper peptides, nootropic and neuropeptide, melanocortin, senescence and antioxidant, and lab consumables[5].
Eight lots are tabled above. Four more sit on a restricted tier where active litigation risk in this category governs how a compound may be presented, and this issue neither builds pages around them nor reprints their figures. Their certificates are real, public, and produced under the same five-assay panel by the same laboratory, and a reader who wants those numbers reads them at the ledger[1]. The thirteenth is the lab solvent, tested by microbial analysis and endotoxin rather than by a purity assay, because no purity assay applies to a solvent.
Blends tested at the same tier as single compounds
Blends are the usual weak point of a certificate archive. A combined product is easy to certify loosely: report one purity figure, name the components, and never say how much of each is in the vial. Two of the eight lots here are multi-component, and both are reported component by component.
The two-component lot CP10-260428 reports Ipamorelin at 5.14 mg and CJC-1295 at 5.26 mg. The three-component GLOW lot, GLOW70-260504, reports GHK-Cu at 60.42 mg, BPC-157 at 11.12 mg, and Thymosin Beta-4 at 11.83 mg[1]. Each carries the same five-assay panel, the same laboratory, the same accession format, and the same date pair as the single-compound lots.
That is the tier claim worth making, and it is narrow enough to be true: a blend on this ledger is documented to the same standard as a single compound, with each component weighed rather than the mixture weighed once.
What the numbers do not tell you
- They do not describe every batch that could ever be shipped. They describe these lots, tested once, in one submission window. A future lot is covered by the release rule, not by this table[1].
- They do not establish reproducibility. No lot here has been tested twice by the independent laboratory, so there is no second figure to compare a first against.
- They carry no biological meaning. Identity, purity, net content, endotoxin, and appearance are analytical chemistry. Nothing on this page implies an effect of any kind, and the material is sold for in vitro research use only, not for human or veterinary use by any route[3].
- They are not sterility results. No sterility assay was run, and the published terms state the material is not sterile[3].
- They are a transcription. The certificate is the record and this table is a copy of it.
Pricing and the value question, briefly
Listed prices run from $19.99 to $129.99 across the catalogue[5]. This issue does not rank the catalogue on value, and the reason is methodological rather than diplomatic: a price comparison against suppliers whose certificates report purity without identity or net content is a comparison between two different products, one of which is documented and one of which is described.
What the record supports is narrower and more useful. A buyer paying a catalogue price here is paying for a lot that could not have been listed without two certificates, one of them published with an accession number, a measured mass, and a duplicate endotoxin result against a citable standard[1][6]. Whether that documentation is worth a price difference is a judgement for the buyer. It is at least a judgement about something concrete, which is more than the category usually offers.