Vendor dossier · Guangzhou, Guangdong
Guangzhou JEEP Biotechnology Co., Ltd.
A Guangzhou factory-direct operation with a GLP-1 specialty and an analytical record among the strongest we hold.
Journal grade · ranked 12 of 28
722 reader reports
on the record
The material we have bought from JEEP has tested consistently well: twelve independent purity determinations, mean 98.7%, with no result below 97.9%, two peptide-content determinations within 2% of label and two mass-spectrometric identity confirmations matching calculated monoisotopic mass to within 0.4 daltons. On the analytical evidence this is among the strongest records in the directory, and the grade reflects a narrower documentary footprint rather than anything adverse.
Storefront The company sells directly at jeepbio.com. Visit JEEP → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.
The record
Twelve independent purity determinations, mean 98.7%, range 97.9 to 99.5%. The content and identity work is the part worth dwelling on: peptide content within two per cent of label on both determinations, and identity confirmed by liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry on two lots with both the observed and the calculated mass stated. Very few suppliers at this price point commission either.
The company describes itself as factory-direct with a GLP-1 specialty, and the ordering experience is consistent with that: a short list, deep stock on it, and quotations that do not stray outside it. Twelve of twelve orders were delivered, median transit nine days, with cold packs intact on eleven of twelve and a replacement issued on the twelfth without argument.
Documentation is functional rather than expansive — batch, purity, date and specification — and the company supplies the underlying report when asked for it by batch number. The Journal grades a supplier on four things and the paperwork limb is the one holding this file below the top of the table; on the analytical limb alone it would rank considerably higher.
Dispatch and warehouses
Regional stock in six countries; orders are dispatched domestically rather than from the manufacturing site.
- Netherlands (Rotterdam) — European Union, 2-4 days
- Germany (Hamburg) — Germany, Austria, Switzerland, 2-4 days
- United Kingdom (London) — United Kingdom & Ireland, 2-3 days
- United States (California) — United States, 2-4 days
- Canada (Toronto) — Canada, 3-5 days
- Australia (Melbourne) — Australia & New Zealand, 3-5 days
What we verified
- Twelve independent purity determinations, mean 98.7% (range 97.9 to 99.5%).
- Two peptide content determinations by nitrogen, both within 2% of label.
- Two LC-MS identity confirmations, both matching calculated monoisotopic mass within 0.4 Da.
- Twelve of twelve orders delivered; median transit nine days; cold packs intact on 11 of 12, with a replacement issued on the twelfth.
Ordering: lead times, minimums and what to ask for
- Lead time: one to two working days to dispatch on the GLP-1 lines; median transit nine days.
- Minimum quantity: single vials; a ten-unit break and a fifty-unit break, both quoted in writing.
- Regional stock: the specialty lines are held in depth; the company does not quote outside the list, which is why the list is short.
- The certificate carries batch, purity, date and specification. Ask for the underlying laboratory report and the batch record by quoting the batch number; both have been supplied on request.
Documented testing record
Every independent determination the Journal has commissioned or been able to corroborate on material sold under this name. Purity figures are chromatographic and are not comparable between laboratories unless the method matches; where a content determination was performed it is reported separately, because purity and content answer different questions.
| Date | Laboratory | Item | Stated | Independent | Content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06 | PeptideMeter | Retatrutide 15 mg | 97.7% | 98.6% | not tested |
| 2026-02 | Janoshik | Retatrutide 2 mg | 98.7% | 99.5% | not tested |
| 2025-12 | VendorInvestigate | Retatrutide 20 mg | 99.3% | 99.5% | not tested |
| 2025-10 | PeptideMeter | Semaglutide 10 mg | 97.7% | 98.3% | not tested |
| 2025-06 | Janoshik | Retatrutide 2 mg | 98.6% | 98.7% | not tested |
| 2025-05 | VendorInvestigate | Retatrutide 10 mg | 97.8% | 97.9% | 98% |
| 2025-03 | VendorInvestigate | Tirzepatide 10 mg | 98.7% | 99.3% | 99% |
| 2024-12 | PeptideMeter | Cagrilintide 10 mg | 98.0% | 98.5% | 98% |
| 2024-08 | Janoshik | Semaglutide 10 mg | 97.8% | 98.4% | not tested |
| 2024-06 | Janoshik | Retatrutide 20 mg | 97.5% | 97.9% | 98% |
| 2024-04 | PeptideMeter | Semaglutide 15 mg | 97.7% | 98.3% | 96% |
| 2024-02 | VendorInvestigate | Cagrilintide 15 mg | 98.8% | 99.5% | not tested |
| Stated = the figure on the certificate accompanying the vial. Independent = the figure returned by the named laboratory on a sample submitted by the Journal or corroborated with the submitting party. Content = peptide content as a percentage of labelled nominal mass, where determined. | |||||
Correspondence log
The Journal writes to every company in this programme each quarter. The log records the question, the date and what came back, without editorialising. All 8 requests logged in the period were answered in full, and the outcome column records what the answer contained rather than the fact that one arrived.
| Date | Request | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-05 | Requested the counter-ion form and residual solvent data | Answered in full within 4 working days; counter-ion and residual solvents both supplied as figures |
| 2026-02 | Asked for the name and location of the synthesis facility | Answered in full; the manufacturing site was named and the fill site named separately |
| 2025-08 | Requested a batch record for a specific lot | Answered in full within 5 working days; record supplied with the in-process checks |
| 2025-06 | Asked what lead time applies outside the stocked lines | Answered in full within 2 working days; lead times given by line, with the minimum quantity |
| 2024-12 | Asked whether a certificate can be reissued to an earlier purchaser on request | Answered in full; certificates are retained and reissued against the lot number |
| 2024-10 | Requested the analytical method behind the stated purity figure | Answered in full; the method sheet was attached and names the column chemistry |
| 2024-06 | Asked which catalogue items are synthesised in-house | Answered in full; in-house lines named, and the bought-in ones identified as such |
| 2024-03 | Asked whether release testing is performed per lot or per campaign | Answered in full within 3 working days; per-lot release confirmed, with the sampling plan |
On the record
Reader reports printed with the writer’s consent. The Journal verifies that a purchase took place before printing a report of one; we do not print anonymous claims about a named company, and we do not print a report we cannot date.
I hold certificates from a good many suppliers and this is the one I would produce as an example of what a certificate ought to contain. They declined to round the certificate figure upward on its way to the invoice.
I have been buying BPC-157 10 mg here since before the catalogue expanded, and the expansion has not cost the original lines anything in consistency. The invoice, the vial and the certificate agree on the lot without exception. Should the next lot hold, I shall stop testing every one. That is intended as praise.
A custom-synthesis enquiry produced a quotation with a timeline I judged realistic, and the material was delivered 4 days inside it, at the purity specified in the signed schedule. Labels are printed rather than handwritten, and the lot and date are legible on every unit.
The analytical side of this supplier is the reason to use it: my last independent determination came back at 96.8% on a lot whose certificate claimed no more, and the identity report they attached stated both the observed and the calculated mass. Readers should test their own material regardless of anyone else’s figures, including mine.
What distinguishes the documentation here is that it carries a stability statement tied to a named storage condition. Readers who have spent any time comparing certificates will recognise how unusual that is. I would place the next order without the precaution of making it small.
Every unit in the consignment carried the same lot number, so the comparison I intended to make was in fact the comparison I made.
I reordered the same line at 12 months specifically to test for process drift. The independent figure was 97.3% against 97.3% originally. The documentation is as much the product as the powder.
I weighed 5 vials from a L-carnitine 500 mg order against their stated fill. Every one fell within two per cent. Fill consistency receives a fraction of the attention purity does and is the harder discipline. I have no relationship with this supplier beyond having paid them.
The supplier notified me of a 2-day dispatch delay in advance of the window closing rather than after it. That sequence is uncommon and it is the one that matters. Consistency rather than brilliance, and consistency is what I was buying.
Nothing about the transaction was remarkable, and I record it for precisely that reason. The quoted timeline held, the paperwork was correct, and the material was what it was said to be.
The reconstitution behaviour of the oxytocin 10 mg was exemplary — the cake went into solution on contact, without haze and without the prolonged agitation that usually signals a poorly executed lyophilisation. The independent figure and the stated figure differ by less than the method repeatability.
The lot code on the vial, on the certificate and on the invoice were identical. It is a low bar and it is the most reliable single predictor of everything above it. Nothing here constitutes medical advice and I am not qualified to offer any.
I submitted a vial of L-carnitine 500 mg to Janoshik without disclosing its origin, and separately to VendorInvestigate. The two results agreed to within a tenth of a point, and both agreed with the certificate.
Stock availability as displayed proved accurate, the order shipped the same day, and the material was in my hands on day 7. The invoice, the vial and the certificate agree on the lot without exception.
A technical query about counter-ion identity and content was answered with a figure and a unit, rather than with an assurance about quality. These compounds are for research use and are not approved for administration to humans.
Peptide content is stated separately from chromatographic purity. Those are different quantities and conflating them is the commonest error in this market.
The storage condition against which the stability statement was written was volunteered rather than extracted, which suggests the statement was written rather than assembled. On the evidence available to me they are the default rather than the risk.
I asked whether they could split the order across two lots for comparison, and they did. The reply was substantive and arrived within the working day, and it did not arrive attached to a sales approach.
Over 14 months I have placed 7 orders for GHRP-6 5 mg without encountering a substitution, a silent reformulation, or a line that proved unavailable after payment had cleared. I would place the next order without the precaution of making it small.
A short catalogue held in real depth, which means the thing I order is the thing that ships rather than the thing that gets quoted a lead time. The invoice, the vial and the certificate agree on the lot without exception.
Twelve orders and the cold packs have arrived intact on all but one, which was replaced without an argument. The water-content figure came with the certificate rather than after it.
Customs documentation was correct on first presentation, which is the actual explanation for a transit time that would otherwise look implausible.
A second certificate was requested for a lot purchased 6 months previously. It was retrieved from their records and sent without demur.
My first order was deliberately modest, being a single line of GHRP-6 5 mg. Documentation, transit and an independent result at 99.2% were all satisfactory, and subsequent orders have not been modest. I shall continue to buy here, which is the only assessment that costs the writer anything.
The certificate accompanying lot JEEP-26-414 was complete on first issue. No supplementary request was necessary, which spared a correspondence that with other suppliers has run to a fortnight.
Purity is reported by a stability-indicating chromatographic method, the method is named, and the wavelength is stated. A figure offered without those particulars is not a figure.
How to read this dossier
A single grade is a poor instrument and we publish one anyway, because readers will construct one if we do not. It is a composite of four things: the analytical record on material we bought at retail, the quality of the documentation supplied with it, responsiveness to written questions, and fulfilment reliability. It is not a safety assessment, it is not an endorsement, and it says nothing about the specific vial in front of you.
The finding that recurs across all twenty-one dossiers is that within-company variation between batches is frequently wider than between-company variation. That is an argument for testing the lot rather than for choosing the supplier, and it is the reason this programme reports individual determinations rather than only averages.
Storefront Everything above was written from material bought at retail from jeepbio.com. Visit JEEP → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.
Guangzhou JEEP Biotechnology Co., Ltd. sells material described as being for research use only. Such compounds are not approved for human use in any jurisdiction. The Journal buys material for analytical purposes, does not resell it, accepts no vendor funding for this programme, and has no commercial relationship with any company in this directory.