Janoshik vs Finnrick vs Freedom Diagnostics: Peptide Testing Compared

Janoshik vs Finnrick: A Lab and a Platform

Janoshik vs Finnrick is a common search, but the two are different kinds of organisation. Janoshik (Janoshik Analytical) is an analytical laboratory in Prague. Its legal entity is Janoshik s.r.o., Kaprova 42/14, Prague 1, company ID 17668727.^[13] The Czech business register lists the company as active and incorporated on October 25, 2022.^[14] The lab itself states more than ten years of chemical-analysis experience; the current legal entity dates from 2022.^[15] It says it sells no products and does not recommend or comment on vendors.^[16][17]

Finnrick does not run a laboratory. In its own words, it “sources samples from vendors and sends them to third-party labs”, then turns the results into public product and vendor rankings.^[1][18] Its consumer testing is open to US residents only; under its separate Partner Service Terms, vendors outside the US can also send samples.^[19][7] It says it does not sell peptides, recommend vendors or accept payment to change ratings.^[18] Its official site is finnrick.com.

Freedom Diagnostics describes itself as a peptide purity testing laboratory at 133 Holiday Ct, Franklin, Tennessee, established in 2023 by its own account. It says it is aimed mainly at vendors and has no vendor affiliations; individuals can also submit samples.^[3][20][21]

The three are linked. Finnrick’s table of partner labs lists 200 published Janoshik tests (April 14 to September 9, 2025) and 225 published Freedom Diagnostics tests (April 25 to September 13, 2025).^[2] Today neither lab can be ordered through Finnrick, and Finnrick’s page for each says the lab has not answered its ten-question methodology questionnaire.^[22][23] Finnrick says it compares labs using overlapping tests on samples from the same batch,^[2] but we found no published accuracy figure for either lab from that work.

Side by Side: The Comparison Table

Each row is sourced in the sections that follow. Where a cell repeats what a provider says about itself, it is the provider’s claim, not our finding. Prices and turnaround are compared separately below.

Janoshik Reviews: Is Janoshik Legit?

Searches for Janoshik reviews mostly lead to forum threads and testimonials. Those cannot be verified, so this page does not rely on them. These facts can be checked:

• A registered company. Janoshik s.r.o. is active in the Czech business register, with company ID 17668727 and an incorporation date of October 25, 2022.^[14]
• Reports that can be checked against the lab. Janoshik counts a report as legitimate only if it matches the version stored in its own system.^[24]
• Stated independence. The lab says it sells no products and does not comment on vendors.^[16][17]
• Scale, as the lab reports it. In April 2026 Peter Magic, whom Janoshik lists as its owner and CEO, told the Guardian that the number of samples arriving each month had risen to about 5,000. That is the lab’s own figure, not an independent count.^[25][15]
• Outside use. Finnrick has published 200 tests it commissioned from Janoshik, dated April to September 2025, and says not every test it commissioned there was published.^[2][22]
• No accreditation. Janoshik makes no accreditation claim, and the Czech national accreditation body lists no record for it (see below).^[8]

What is missing is an independent measure of accuracy. We found no published proficiency-test results or inter-lab comparison for Janoshik, or for Freedom Diagnostics. A genuine report and an accurate result are different questions: verification answers the first, not the second.^[24]

Janoshik vs Freedom Diagnostics: What Each One Tests

Janoshik

Janoshik’s standard peptide tests report identity, amount and purity, and the lab names HPLC as the testing method. For a lyophilised sample, the result is given as mg per vial and peptide purity. Its GLP-1 “blind test” works out which of semaglutide, tirzepatide or retatrutide is present without being told; in Janoshik’s usage, “blind” means the compound is not declared.^[4] The lab defines peptide purity as the share of the peptide content that is the intact target peptide, and it gives no purity figure for blends.^[26] For blends, see GLOW vs KLOW vs Wolverine.

Everything else is an add-on: an LC-MS screen for contamination by other peptides, which “gives only identification” and covers only peptides on its price list; CHNS elemental analysis for net peptide content; endotoxin; TAMC/TYMC; heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury); TFA; and variance testing of several pieces from one batch.^[4] Its endotoxin test uses the LAL assay and reports a number in EU per vial, from 1 to 1,000; values below 1 EU/vial are estimates.^[27]

Freedom Diagnostics

Freedom Diagnostics lists purity by HPLC, identity by LC-MS (“confirms by molecular mass that the compound is what the label says”), net content, endotoxins, sterility by PCR, conformity testing of additional vials from the same lot, heavy metals, a fentanyl screen and pH on request. It says every COA includes both HPLC purity and LC-MS identity.^[3] That last point is the lab’s own claim.

Finnrick

Every Finnrick sample starts with identity, purity and quantity by HPLC at a partner lab; endotoxins, heavy metals, residual solvents and sterility are add-ons.^[28] The method is “typically HPLC-UV or HPLC-MS depending on the compound and the partner lab”.^[29] Its endotoxin add-on uses LAL or recombinant assays.^[30] Finnrick then grades each sample pass or fail against a named standard. Its home-page leaderboards use Purity Focus: purity of at least 99.5% and a quantity within 35% of the label.^[19] Other standards change the thresholds: two strict modes raise purity to 99.8% and Accuracy Focus lowers it to 98%; three narrow the quantity window to 25%, 20% or 15%; three require a minimum label score; and only Accuracy Focus fails a measured endotoxin result above 40 EU per sample. The measurements stay the same when the standard changes.^[1][31]

Why the identity method matters

An HPLC identity call and an LC-MS mass confirmation are different strengths of evidence. ICH’s guideline on analytical validation says an identification test should be shown not to give a positive result for closely related molecules, and that where one procedure is not specific enough, other procedures should make up for it.^[32] That does not make an HPLC identity worthless, or a mass result infallible. It means the report should say which method produced the identity line.

One Word, Three Tests: What “Sterility” Means

All three providers offer something called sterility testing, and each means a different test.

Janoshik’s PASS “means that no microbial colonies were detected after cultivation”.^[33] Finnrick’s sterility add-on follows a USP-aligned method, and the only lab listed for it is PharmLabs.^[34] Freedom Diagnostics screens for microbial contamination by PCR.^[3]

TAMC and TYMC are the pharmacopoeial microbial enumeration tests for non-sterile products: they count bacteria and fungi that grow under aerobic conditions.^[35][36] They are not a sterility test, which is why Remy Research’s batch dataset labels its one TAMC/TYMC result as microbial enumeration.^[37] Endotoxin answers yet another question. In Finnrick’s words, sterility testing detects living microorganisms, while endotoxin testing detects bacterial toxins that can remain after the bacteria are gone.^[34]

Who Sends the Sample, and Who Writes the Header

Janoshik accepts samples from anywhere in the world, and several people can share one order.^[4] The client name, sample name, manufacturer and batch number on the report are header details the customer enters. The client name is “Anonymous” by default, and the details can be changed until the package arrives.^[38] The customer can also buy extra copies of the same result with different header details, such as another client name, for $50 each. They must be ordered before testing finishes, by the person who placed the order.^[4][39]

Freedom Diagnostics prints the client name “exactly as entered” on the certificate, and it issues duplicate COAs under additional company names for $50 per sample, per company, except that every fifth duplicate of a sample (the 5th, 10th and so on) is charged at that sample’s full testing price.^[21]

Finnrick works the other way round. It buys samples itself, openly or by mystery shopping, takes public submissions, and labels vendor-submitted samples as such.^[18][40] Samples are anonymised before they reach the lab.^[28] It publishes a result only when it can establish where the sample came from, and about a third of its completed tests are not published for that reason.^[40] Certificates from its public testing carry no vendor name or batch ID by design; the link to a product lives on Finnrick’s site.^[6] Testing that a vendor buys privately under Finnrick’s Partner Service Terms works like the labs: the vendor enters the vendor name and batch identifiers, and “What Partner enters is what the laboratory prints.”^[7]

What this means for a reader: a genuine Janoshik or Freedom Diagnostics report, like the COA from a vendor’s private Finnrick order, shows what the lab measured in the sample it received. The name and batch number printed on it show what the customer entered. Janoshik’s terms say so directly: a report speaks only for the sample or aliquot the lab received from the client.^[13]

Verifying a Report: Janoshik, Finnrick and Freedom Diagnostics

• Janoshik. Find the task number at the top of the report and the unique key at the bottom. Enter both on the lab’s verification page, typing the key in capital letters, or scan the QR code. If either identifier is missing, the report cannot be verified, and it counts as legitimate only if it matches the stored version.^[24] Our guide on how to verify a Janoshik COA walks through the batch and sample checks.
• Finnrick. Enter the 7-character certificate ID on finnrick.com/verify. Unpublished tests are shared privately and cannot be verified there, and Finnrick says results should be shared as a link to its site rather than as a PDF.^[6]
• Freedom Diagnostics. Look the certificate up by its Search Code (the first four characters of the company name followed by the accession number), by accession number, or by company name.^[10]

On the pages we reviewed, Janoshik and Freedom Diagnostics do not state how long a report stays verifiable; Freedom Diagnostics says only that records are kept in line with laboratory record-keeping requirements.^[20] Finnrick says its published results remain permanently available, while unpublished tests cannot be verified on its site.^[7][6] Janoshik’s terms say the lab cannot access a report once it has been sent, so keep your own copy and link.^[13] As one data point, Janoshik’s server still opened report 86428, for batch RETP002 (analysed in November 2025, one of the batches Remy Research publishes), on October 12, 2026.^[41]

Janoshik Price List vs Finnrick and Freedom Diagnostics

The figures below are list prices in US dollars, as shown on each provider’s site or order form on October 12, 2026. Prices change, so check the provider before ordering.^[42][19][21]

Janoshik’s GLP-1 test shows how quickly a full panel adds up. Seven of its add-ons (endotoxin, TFA, CHNS, heavy metals, TAMC/TYMC, the LC-MS screen and GLP-1 aggregates) together cost $1,365 on top of the $360 base, a total of $1,725, about 4.8 times the base price.^[4] A public listing costs $85 for two months.^[5] The help centre gives an average of 7 business days from receipt and at least 14 business days for TAMC/TYMC; RUSH delivers within 2 business days of receipt for a 100% surcharge, but the TAMC/TYMC test cannot be rushed.^[43][44]

Finnrick’s free route is for individuals, needs full vial details and publishes the result; the Standard route keeps results private; custom orders let the buyer choose the partner lab, and keeping a custom result private costs $99.^[19][31][22] Its turnaround figures are estimates, not guarantees.^[45] Freedom Diagnostics states 1–3 business days, counted from accessioning, and an expedite fee of 20%; endotoxin or sterility testing needs one extra vial, and heavy metals another.^[21]

Is Janoshik ISO 17025 Accredited? What Each One Claims

• Janoshik makes no accreditation claim on the pages we reviewed: its site, help centre and terms. The database of the Czech Accreditation Institute (ČIA), the national accreditation body, returned no record when searched by name or by company ID; a control search for an accredited Czech laboratory returned its record.^[8]
• Freedom Diagnostics states that it is “Compliant with ISO 9001 Quality Management Principles” and follows Good Laboratory Practice principles. It gives no certificate number or certifying body and makes no ISO/IEC 17025 claim.^[10] The directory of A2LA, a US accreditation body, returned no record for it; a control search worked.^[9]
• Finnrick is not a laboratory and makes no accreditation claim of its own. Its lab pages describe two of its current partner labs, PharmLabs and Harrens Lab, as ISO/IEC 17025-accredited, and state no accreditation for Janoshik or Freedom Diagnostics.^{[7][11][12][22][23]}

Two cautions. A statement of compliance with “principles” is not an ISO 9001 certificate or an accreditation.^[10] And a missing entry in one directory is not proof of absence everywhere: we searched ČIA for Janoshik and A2LA for Freedom Diagnostics, not every accreditation body.^[8][9]

Peptide COA Testing: What a Report Should Show

Whichever provider issued it, a useful certificate of analysis lets you answer these questions:

• Who tested it, and can the lab confirm it? A lab name plus a way to check the report with that lab: a task number and key, a certificate ID or an accession number. A screenshot is not enough.^[24][6][10]
• What sample, from which batch? The sample name, batch and dates, read as what the customer entered.^[38] A batch number printed on the vial itself is stronger than one on an insert or a website, which is how Finnrick’s label score ranks it.^[1] For a pre-filled pen, the report should describe the filled pen, not the powder; see peptide pens vs vials.
• Identity, with the method named. HPLC and LC-MS identity lines are different strengths of evidence.^[32]
• Purity, read correctly. Peptide purity is the share of the peptide content that is the intact target peptide. It is not the amount in the vial, and there is no single purity figure for a blend.^[26]
• The measured amount against the label. In mg per vial, mg/mL, or net peptide content by an elemental method.^[4][3]
• Safety tests named by method. Endotoxin by LAL with a number or a stated limit, “sterility” read as one of the three tests above, and heavy metals listing the elements.^[27][4]

For a line-by-line reading of purity, assay and safety results, see the peptide COA and HPLC purity guide.

The Limits of a Single Certificate

Each provider says, in its own terms, that a report covers what was tested. Janoshik’s terms say a report speaks only for the sample or aliquot it received, and the sample is destroyed within 48 hours of the report.^[13] Finnrick states that a certificate of analysis “is only valid for a single product batch” and that earlier batches’ COAs are not a good predictor of future quality.^[6]

One unit is not evidence about a whole lot. As an analogy only: US current good manufacturing practice rules for finished drugs (21 CFR part 211) call for representative samples of each incoming lot, and for laboratory testing of each finished batch against its specifications, under written sampling plans, before release.^[46][47] Research peptides are not made or released under those rules. The providers’ own routes to testing several units of one lot are Janoshik’s variance testing and Freedom Diagnostics’ conformity testing.^[4][3]

Purity is not content. Peptide content is a separate measurement, and in a comparison of assay methods for the peptide thymalfasin, elemental CHN analysis was recommended for peptide content.^[48] Janoshik’s CHNS add-on is an elemental measurement of this kind; Freedom Diagnostics offers a net content test but does not name its method.^[4][3]

A 2026 preprint shows why purity alone misleads. Mendias and Awan analysed more than 6,400 public Finnrick results: median HPLC purity was 99.80%, yet 41.6% to 71.1% of samples failed, depending on the benchmark, most often because the measured amount missed the label while purity passed. Purity did not track endotoxin. The authors note that the dataset is not a random or representative sample, because submissions are voluntary, and the paper has not been peer reviewed.^[49]

Finally, passing a standard is not a safety finding. Finnrick says so itself: passing “does not establish that a product is safe to use”.^[31] For the wider sourcing picture, see grey market peptides explained.

The Janoshik Reports Remy Research Publishes

Disclosure: Remy Research sells research peptides, and all 14 batch reports it publishes are Janoshik reports. Read this section as a description of our own documentation, not as a rating of the lab.

Remy Research publishes 14 Janoshik reports covering 5 batches, listed in the lab results library and the open batch dataset.^[37] The five batches cover a small part of the catalogue; a product with no listed batch has no published report. On all 14 reports, the Client and Manufacturer fields name the product’s brand, not Remy Research; like any header, they show what the person who ordered the test entered.^[37][41][38] The brands’ supplier published these reports first, and Remy Research republishes them and links each one to Janoshik’s own copy.^[37] How Remy publishes reports is set out on the methodology page.

The limits above apply to these reports too. Each is a single-sample result for the sample Janoshik received; none is a variance or conformity test of several units. Three batches have one HPLC report each. Only RET-20-V-2604-001 has an LC-MS screen, and only RT-40-V-001 has a TAMC/TYMC result.^[37] Where the report’s sample line gives the label amount in the same unit as the result, the measured amount was 104.6% of it for RET-20-V-2604-001 (20.92 mg against 20 mg), 120.9% for RETP002 (12.09 against 10 mg/mL) and 124.5% for RT-40-V-001 (49.80 against 40 mg). These are measurements of one sample each, not a statement about other units.^[37] Remy Research supplies these products for in-vitro laboratory research only, not for human or veterinary use.

What This Page Does Not Claim

• It does not rank the three or say which is most accurate. We found no published comparison of their accuracy.
• It does not treat the pass rates on Finnrick’s lab pages as lab scores.^[22][23] In our reading they describe the samples each lab happened to receive, not the lab.
• It does not use forum posts, reviews or testimonials as evidence, and it does not name or rate any peptide seller.
• It does not say that any report shows a product is safe to use.^[31]