The practical answer
Treat a certificate as unverified until three things line up: the lot on the report matches the lot on your vial, the named laboratory exists and confirms it issued that report number, and the test is within the laboratory's accreditation scope if accreditation is claimed. ILAC lists the signatory accreditation bodies, and many of them publish directories you can search. A certificate that fails any of these is a document problem, not proof of a bad product. [1] [2]
Evidence, method & source dates ↓Why reused certificates happen
A certificate of analysis describes one sample from one lot on one date. Problems start when the same report is shown for later lots, when a "representative" certificate is presented as if it were yours, or when a PDF is edited to change the lot, date or result. Some of this is careless rather than fraudulent, but your file cannot tell the difference without checking.
Supplier wording can make the gap visible. Peptides EU, for example, says that selected independent certificates from Janoshik Analytical are published and that researchers wanting more assurance may submit samples to an accredited independent laboratory of their choice. [3] "Selected" means a published certificate may not cover the lot you receive. Its homepage states purity of 99% or more, independently verified by Janoshik, and testing by HPLC and mass spectrometry. [4] Read that kind of statement as an invitation to ask for your lot's report.
Red flags on the document itself
None of these proves forgery on its own. Each is a reason to ask a specific question before relying on the report.
| Red flag | Why it matters | Question to send |
|---|---|---|
| Lot on the report differs from the lot on the vial or invoice | The result describes other material | Please send the report for lot X, as printed on the label |
| Test date earlier than the stated manufacture date | The sample tested could not have come from this lot | Which lot was tested on that date? |
| Same chromatogram (identical peak shapes, retention times and noise) on reports for different lots or products | Suggests one trace reused across documents | Please provide the raw data file or instrument export for this lot |
| No laboratory name, address or report number | Nobody can confirm the report exists | Which laboratory issued this, and what is its report number? |
| Accreditation logo but no certificate number or body named | The claim cannot be checked in a directory | Which accreditation body and certificate number cover this test? |
| Fonts, alignment or resolution change around the lot, date or result | Common sign of local edits | Please send the report directly from the laboratory |
| Purity stated, no method, column or integration details | A number with no traceable method | Which method and acceptance criteria were applied? |
| Signature is a pasted image, or no reviewer is named | No accountable person for the result | Who reviewed and approved this report? |
Check the laboratory, not just the logo
If a report claims ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation, find the accreditation body first. ILAC says its MRA signatories are accreditation bodies peer-evaluated under ISO/IEC 17011 that accredit laboratories to standards such as ISO/IEC 17025, and for many signatories it also links to the accreditation body's online directory of accredited facilities. [1] A2LA, one such body, links a public organization directory from its homepage. [2]
In the directory, confirm three things: the legal name and address match the report, the accreditation is current, and the scope lists the test performed (for example, HPLC purity or mass spectrometry). Accreditation for one test does not cover another. Our separate guide on verifying ISO 17025 accreditation walks through scope documents in detail.
Contact the issuing laboratory
Laboratories can usually confirm whether they issued a report number, even if they will not discuss results with a third party. Keep the request short and factual so it can be answered quickly.
Template: "We received a certificate that names your laboratory. Report number: [number]. Sample or lot reference: [lot]. Test date: [date]. Could you confirm whether your laboratory issued a report with this number and lot reference, and whether the copy attached matches your record? We are not asking you to disclose client information beyond that confirmation." Attach the PDF exactly as received.
Record the date sent, the address used (taken from the laboratory's own website, not from the certificate), and the reply. If the laboratory says it has no record, keep that reply with the file and stop relying on the certificate.
When the lot on the vial does not match the certificate
Photograph the label and the certificate side by side before opening anything further. Write to the supplier with both lot numbers and ask for the report for the lot you received. Keep the material segregated and labelled as unverified until the matching report arrives.
Check the supplier's claim window at the same time. OMNI Peptides, for example, asks for damaged, missing or incorrect order claims within 48 hours of delivery, with photos and a description, and offers replacement, store credit or partial refund. [5] If a lot mismatch might be treated as an incorrect item, raise it inside that window rather than waiting for a reply about the certificate.
| Outcome | What to record | Status in your file |
|---|---|---|
| Supplier sends a report for the received lot and the lab confirms it | Report number, lab confirmation date | Verified for this lot |
| Supplier sends a report, lab does not reply | Request dates and follow-up | Unresolved |
| Supplier says the certificate is representative only | Exact wording of the reply | Not lot-specific; unverified |
| Lab says it did not issue the report | Lab reply, original PDF | Rejected document; escalate to supplier |
Keep the review proportionate
A certificate you cannot verify does not tell you the material is bad. It tells you the document cannot support a decision. If identity or purity matters for your work, the stronger option is your own test at a laboratory you chose and checked, which is what Peptides EU itself suggests. [3] Our guide to commissioning an independent test covers costs and sample amounts.
Store every version you received, with file names that include the date received, so you can show which document you relied on and when. This guide covers laboratory documentation only and gives no guidance on any use of the material.
Questions before you decide
The supplier says its certificate is from Janoshik. How do I check it?
Ask for the report number and lot, then confirm with the laboratory through contact details on its own website. Peptides EU states it publishes selected Janoshik certificates, so check that the one you have covers your lot.
Is a missing signature enough to reject a COA?
It is a reason to ask who approved the report and to get it confirmed by the laboratory. Record it as unresolved rather than rejected until you have an answer.
Can a supplier legitimately reuse a COA?
A report can only describe the sample it tested. A supplier can share an earlier lot's report as an example, but it should be labelled as such and is not evidence about your lot.
Check the underlying evidence
Sources & review dates
- ILAC: ILAC MRA and Signatories ↗Accessed 29 Oct 2026
- A2LA: homepage with link to the accredited organization directory ↗Accessed 29 Oct 2026
- Peptides EU: frequently asked questions ↗Accessed 29 Oct 2026
- Peptides EU: homepage testing and payment statements ↗Accessed 29 Oct 2026
- OMNI Peptides: refunds and returns policy ↗Accessed 29 Oct 2026
Sources are documentary evidence. They do not establish firsthand testing of a listed supplier.