🍪 CompoundTalk uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsCOA & Analytical TestingHow to commission independent testing — labs that accept consumer samples

How to commission independent testing — labs that accept consumer samples

PurityPaulOR Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 8:07 AM 9 replies 430 viewsPage 1 of 2
PurityPaulOR
Senior Member
1,890
7,890
Mar 2024
Oregon
Feb 27, 2026 at 9:32 AM#1
I've used both Finnrick Analytics and Janoshik Analytical extensively and I keep seeing people ask which one is better. The answer isn't simple, so let me lay out a detailed comparison. Janoshik Analytical (est. ~2015) - Location: Czech Republic - Focus: General analytical testing for research chemicals, peptides, AAS, SARMs - Business model: Paid testing service - Pricing: $120-420 depending on test type - Turnaround: 5-10 business days after sample receipt - Payment: Crypto (discount), bank transfer - Track record: 8+ years, thousands of samples, well-established reputation Finnrick Analytics (est. ~2025) - Location: United States - Focus: Primarily peptides, especially GLP-1 agonists - Business model: Hybrid (free community testing + paid services + vendor database) - Pricing: Free for qualifying peptides, $120-350 for paid tests - Turnaround: 7-12 business days - Payment: Crypto, credit card, bank transfer - Track record: ~1 year, growing rapidly Both are legitimate analytical services, but they serve somewhat different roles in the community. Let me break down the pros and cons. ⚖️
24 17Dr.LeslieOBGYN, MikeNYC_runner and 21 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.GastroMayo
VIP Member
2,345
13,456
Jan 2024
Mayo Clinic, MN
Feb 27, 2026 at 9:49 AM#2
Great comparison foundation. Let me add my perspective on the analytical quality: Janoshik — Analytical Strengths: - Longer track record means more validated methods - Handles a wider range of compounds (not just peptides) - Mass spec capability for definitive compound identification - Results have been cross-validated against university labs multiple times - Extremely detailed chromatographic data in reports Finnrick — Analytical Strengths: - US-based means faster shipping for North American members (no international customs) - Free testing program lowers the barrier to entry - Vendor rating system provides aggregated, easy-to-understand data - Newer equipment (they claim state-of-the-art HPLC instrumentation purchased in 2025) - Faster turnaround on average My hot take: Janoshik is the established gold standard with proven reliability. Finnrick is the promising newcomer with innovative community features. I wouldn't say one is "better" than the other — they complement each other.
46 21VendorMark, COA_Karl, MikeFit_NJ and 43 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
PurityPaulOR
Senior Member
1,890
7,890
Mar 2024
Oregon
Feb 27, 2026 at 10:06 AM#3
If I can only afford to test one sample and I'm in the US, which should I use? I have a new tirzepatide vendor I want to verify.
46 3Admin, Dr.Martinez, mike_mod and 43 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing

Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.

Verify Your Peptides
TirzTom
Senior Member
2,789
9,876
Feb 2024
Florida
Online
Feb 27, 2026 at 10:23 AM#4
If you're in the US with a new vendor, try Finnrick's free testing program first. If your vendor isn't already in their database, you'll likely qualify for free HPLC purity + identity testing. You'd only pay for shipping (~$10 domestic vs $15-20 international to Czech Republic). If Finnrick's free program isn't available (vendor already well-tested, compound not eligible, etc.), then Janoshik at ~$180 for identity + purity is the reliable fallback. > For US members: Finnrick first (possibly free), Janoshik as backup. > For EU members: Janoshik first (faster shipping), Finnrick if free test available. > For everyone: ideally, use both over time for cross-validation.
48 22SandraNC_45, Dr.EndoIndy, tom_AK and 45 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
BethLabQueen
Senior Member
1,234
5,678
May 2024
Virginia
Online
Feb 27, 2026 at 10:40 AM#5
Let me address the elephant in the room: can we trust Finnrick as much as Janoshik? This comes up a lot and it's a fair question. Janoshik has 8+ years of consistent, verified results. Finnrick has about 1 year. Trust is earned over time. Arguments FOR trusting Finnrick: - Their results have been consistent with Janoshik results when both tested the same vendor/batch - Several members have sent split samples to both services and gotten concordant results - They publish their methodology openly - Their vendor rating system has correctly identified bad vendors that were later confirmed by Janoshik tests Arguments for CAUTION with Finnrick: - Shorter track record means less historical validation - Their business model (free testing, vendor database) creates potential conflicts of interest that Janoshik's simple paid model doesn't have - Some concern about whether vendors could influence ratings through selective submissions My position: Finnrick has earned initial trust through consistent results, but they haven't yet earned the deep institutional trust that Janoshik has built over nearly a decade. Give them time. So far, so good.
19 9wei_SG, cory_ATX, lori_vegas and 16 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

HPLC vs UPLC for peptide purity — method comparison study18 replies
Mass spectrometry for peptide identity verification — ESI-MS guide7 replies
Endotoxin testing methods — LAL vs recombinant Factor C17 replies
Red flags on COAs — how to spot a fake certificate5 replies
USP reference standards for peptide verification — sourcing guide3 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register