Janoshik vs Freedom Diagnostics: tests, turnaround, reports and same-batch results compared

Janoshik vs Freedom Diagnostics in one table

Janoshik offers the broader menu and a blind GLP-1 test. Freedom Diagnostics sells HPLC purity and LC-MS identity together and publishes a shorter turnaround. The table compares what each lab lists on its own site and shows on its reports.

	Janoshik	Freedom Diagnostics
Based in	Czech Republic	Franklin, Tennessee, US
Menu	About 80 peptides, plus steroids, SARMs and other compounds	Peptides and blends; does not accept HGH, HCG, HMG or testosterone products
Standard peptide test	HPLC: mg per vial and purity	HPLC purity with LC-MS identity; net content (mg) as an add-on
Identity shown on the report	The peptide is named; no identity evidence printed	Mass spectrum image; no expected mass or error value
Raw data on the report	Not on the standard report; sold as an add-on	Chromatogram and spectrum images; no peak table
Blind GLP-1 test	Yes: semaglutide, tirzepatide, retatrutide or a mixture	Not listed
Endotoxin	LAL, as an add-on or on its own	LAL per USP <85>, 2 replicates, reported as pass or fail
Sterility	Microbial count (TAMC and TYMC), pass or fail, 14 days	PCR screen for microbial DNA
Other add-ons	TFA, fentanyl check, variance across vials, pH, CHNS, LC-MS contamination screen	Extra vials on one report (conformity), fentanyl screen, pH on request
Vial photo	On the verify page, not on the report	On the report, at no charge
Published turnaround	Average 7 business days; sterility 14 days	Average 1–3 business days, from when the sample is logged in
Report check	Task number, 12-character key and QR code	Public lookup by company name or search code
Payment	Card, bank transfer, crypto	Card kept on file, charged when testing starts

Neither lab claims ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation on its site. Neither prints a measurement uncertainty or a version number on the reports in our research.

What each lab does well

Janoshik. Breadth is the main strength: one lab for peptides, HGH (with dimer and larger proteins), steroids and SARMs. The blind GLP-1 test names which of semaglutide, tirzepatide or retatrutide is in the vial, or whether it is a mixture, without telling the lab the label. The key and QR open the lab’s own copy of each report, so a buyer can match any copy against it. Peptides Weekly ranks Janoshik first in its Q3 2026 lab guide, and Peptide Critic lists it as “Preferred”. More in our Janoshik review and Janoshik alternatives.

Freedom Diagnostics. Speed and identity are the main strengths. The lab says it never issues HPLC purity without LC-MS identity, and the report carries the lab’s own vial photo. Its public lookup lets anyone find a company’s reports. Freedom has more certificates than any other lab on Peptigrity (4,790) and Disclosed Labs (2,327). Peptides Weekly ranks it second. More in our Freedom Diagnostics review and Freedom Diagnostics alternatives.

How the rating sites list the two labs

Each site measures something different, so the rows do not add up to one verdict. Our guide to peptide rating sites explains each method.

Rating site	Janoshik	Freedom Diagnostics
Finnrick: published tests (window)	195 (Apr–Sep 2025)	216 (Apr–Sep 2025)
Peptigrity: certificates / average purity	2,556 / 99.5%	4,790 / 99.5%
Disclosed Labs: COAs / average purity (%) ± SD	1,035 / 99.56 ± 0.47	2,327 / 99.54 ± 1.27
Merit Verified: lab score	30, Limited	70, Moderate
Peptides Weekly, Q3 2026	Ranked first	Ranked second
Peptide Critic	Preferred	Standard

Finnrick also shows a pass rate on each lab’s recent tests: 33% for Janoshik and 64% for Freedom. Those figures describe the vendor samples each lab received in 2025. The two labs tested different sets of vendor samples, so the pass rate is not a measure of lab accuracy. Merit Verified builds its lab score from factors that include accreditation, methods and independence.

Same batch, different numbers: the published cases

On 13 August 2026, the Substack writer Krysia published results for batches tested at more than one lab. These are single published cases, not a controlled study. Each lab received different vials from the same batch.

Product (label)	Janoshik	Freedom Diagnostics	Other labs, same batch
Tesamorelin	97.779% purity, 11.057 mg (average of three measurements)	99.985% purity, 10.055 mg (average of two vials)	None reported
Epitalon (50 mg)	None reported	99.935% purity, 47.3 mg	Chromate 95.915%, 55.5 mg; Accumark 99.27%, 83.64 mg (average of two vials)

On tesamorelin, Freedom’s purity was 2.2 percentage points higher and its mg was 1 mg lower. On epitalon, the mg results ran from 47.3 to 83.64 mg on a 50 mg label. For more cases, see our report on same-batch comparisons.

Why two labs can disagree on one batch

Purity depends on what the software counts

HPLC purity is the main peak’s share of all UV peak area the lab detects. The wavelength, the column, the gradient and the integration settings all change which small peaks are counted. Printed digits are not the same as precision. In its answers to Finnrick’s method questionnaire, Krause Analytical says its values are valid to two significant figures.

The mg depends on the basis

Freeze-dried peptide powder also contains counter-ions (such as TFA or acetate) and water. Bachem’s worked example: 5 mg of powder with 85% net peptide content and 98.7% purity holds 4.195 mg of the target peptide. In Krysia’s 2 August 2026 piece, Janoshik said it standardises its own reference standards by CHNS and NMR, and reports net peptide without counter-ions. A lab that weighs total powder can report more mg. Peptigrity says that in September 2026 about 40% of single-compound certificates that report both figures were above 110% of label, and it marks the basis as not stated where a certificate does not give it. Our guide to net peptide content explains the gap.

Reference standards and single injections

Content per vial is measured against a reference standard. If two labs assign different content to their standards, every result shifts by the same proportion. Finnrick’s May 2026 blog describes one unnamed lab whose five reports were all off by the same proportion, which pointed to a calibration error. Some labs run one preparation and one injection per sample (Krause says so in its questionnaire answers), and vials in a batch differ.

How to compare the two labs on your own batch

1. Take two vials from the same batch on the same day.
2. Send one to each lab, and withhold the label amount if the lab allows it.
3. Ask both labs which basis the mg uses (net peptide or total powder) and which reference standard they used.
4. Ask for the chromatogram, and compare the peaks, not only the headline number.

What HK Analytical offers

We report purity (HPLC), identity (LC-MS) and content per vial, and we can add counter-ion (TFA, acetate) and water content (Karl Fischer), which explain much of the gap between powder weight and peptide. We also run endotoxin (LAL), blind GLP-1 identification, residual solvents and vial-to-vial consistency, in any mix per sample. Results within days of receipt. Sterility (USP <71>, 14 days) is the one test that takes 14 days, because the method incubates for 14 days.

Every number comes with its raw data, and each report is a signed record you can check on /verify. We do not hold ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation. Quotes are on request.