Vendor dossier · Shanghai
Sangon Biotech (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
A large, genuinely industrial Shanghai life-sciences supplier where the paperwork behaves like paperwork in a big organisation.
Journal grade · ranked 16 of 28
707 reader reports
on the record
SGN is not primarily a peptide company. It is a broad life-sciences supplier — oligonucleotides, enzymes, reagents, sequencing services — that also makes peptides, and the institutional maturity shows in everything the customer touches. Order confirmations, dispatch notes, invoices and certificates carry the same document numbers and cross-reference correctly. Nothing was ever missing and nothing had to be chased.
Storefront The company sells directly at sangonbio.com. Visit SGN → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.
The record
Eight independent purity determinations, mean 97.5%, range 96.8 to 98.4%, consistent across the run and each inside the specification. Certificates are template documents from a large organisation: a method code, a specification and a quality-assurance signature block. The method behind the code is supplied on request, which is worth knowing, because the code alone is not readable from outside.
Process discipline is the reason to buy here. Complete, internally consistent document sets arrived on eight of eight orders, every one cross-referenced to the order. That sounds unremarkable until you have chased paperwork from several suppliers in the same quarter, and it is the single most reliable thing in this file.
The 2004 incorporation is documented, the company has a published patent portfolio and a physical campus, and the scale of the operation can be read off public filings rather than inferred from a website. Peptides are a small line among thousands, which is a fact about the catalogue rather than about the product.
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
- Eight independent purity determinations, mean 97.5% (range 96.8 to 98.4%), all inside the stated specification.
- Complete, internally cross-referenced document sets on 8 of 8 orders — confirmation, dispatch note, invoice and certificate sharing document numbers.
- 2004 incorporation, physical Shanghai campus and published patent portfolio, all independently corroborated.
- A named quality-assurance signatory on 8 of 8 certificates, with the method behind the certificate’s method code supplied on request.
Ordering: lead times, minimums and what to ask for
- Lead time: catalogue items dispatch within three working days; the peptide line runs to the same schedule as the rest of the catalogue.
- Minimum quantity: single units across most of the catalogue, with institutional account pricing on volume.
- Regional stock: held centrally at the Shanghai campus, with distributor stock in several markets.
- The certificate carries a method code, a specification and a QA signature. Ask for the method behind the code, and for the batch record, by quoting the document number printed on the confirmation.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03 | Janoshik | Survodutide 2 mg | 96.8% | 97.3% | 97% |
| 2026-02 | PeptideMeter | Tirzepatide 5 mg | 96.6% | 96.9% | not tested |
| 2025-08 | Medutest | Survodutide 10 mg | 97.9% | 98.3% | not tested |
| 2025-06 | Janoshik | Tirzepatide 5 mg | 97.0% | 97.5% | not tested |
| 2025-02 | VendorInvestigate | Liraglutide 10 mg | 96.3% | 96.8% | 97% |
| 2024-09 | VendorInvestigate | Liraglutide 5 mg | 96.7% | 97.4% | not tested |
| 2024-06 | Janoshik | Liraglutide 10 mg | 97.6% | 98.4% | not tested |
| 2024-03 | PeptideMeter | BPC-157 15 mg | 97.1% | 97.4% | 99% |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-04 | 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 |
| 2026-01 | Requested confirmation of the registered entity name and incorporation number | Answered in full within 2 working days; both supplied and consistent with the register |
| 2025-07 | Asked for the name and location of the synthesis facility | Answered in full within 4 working days; site named, with the province and the line |
| 2025-04 | Asked how long finished stock is held before dispatch | Answered in full within 3 working days; holding period given per line, with the storage condition |
| 2025-03 | Asked whether release testing is performed per lot or per campaign | Answered in full; release is per lot, confirmed in writing and now printed on the certificate |
| 2024-10 | Requested the specification against which a lot is released | Answered in full within 4 working days; specification sent, with the tighter internal limit noted |
| 2024-07 | Requested the cold-chain arrangement between the fill site and dispatch | Answered in full; the chain was described leg by leg, with the indicator specification |
| 2024-01 | Asked what lead time applies outside the stocked lines | Answered in full; a synthesis window was quoted per sequence length, in writing |
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. The cold pack was still solid when the outer was opened. On the evidence available to me they are the default rather than the risk.
I have been buying sermorelin 5 mg here since before the catalogue expanded, and the expansion has not cost the original lines anything in consistency. Release was signed and dated by an identified individual. Readers should test their own material regardless of anyone else’s figures, including mine.
A custom-synthesis enquiry produced a quotation with a timeline I judged realistic, and the material was delivered 3 days inside it, at the purity specified in the signed schedule. Peptide content was reported at 96.9%, permitting a direct conversion to working mass. I would place the next order without the precaution of making it small.
The document control here is what you get from an organisation that ships thousands of lines: confirmation, dispatch note, invoice and certificate all cross-referencing correctly, on every order. The material returned 99.2%. The technical response arrived within four hours on a weekday. I record no complaint worth the Journal’s column inches.
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. A residual-solvent screen was included without being requested. The documentation is as much the product as the powder.
Every unit in the consignment carried the same lot number, so the comparison I intended to make was in fact the comparison I made. Vial-to-vial mass variation across the consignment was under two per cent. I have no relationship with this supplier beyond having paid them.
I reordered the same line at 15 months specifically to test for process drift. The independent figure was 98.5% against 98.5% originally. The cold pack was still solid when the outer was opened. Consistency rather than brilliance, and consistency is what I was buying.
I weighed 3 vials from a ipamorelin 5 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. Release was signed and dated by an identified individual. I shall continue to buy here, which is the only assessment that costs the writer anything.
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. Peptide content was reported at 98.3%, permitting a direct conversion to working mass. I offer this as one reader’s record and not as a general finding.
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 technical response arrived within four hours on a weekday. Nothing here constitutes medical advice and I am not qualified to offer any.
The reconstitution behaviour of the ipamorelin 5 mg was exemplary — the cake went into solution on contact, without haze and without the prolonged agitation that usually signals a poorly executed lyophilisation. A residual-solvent screen was included without being requested. The price differential is justified by the paperwork alone.
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. Vial-to-vial mass variation across the consignment was under two per cent. A single purchaser is not a dataset and I do not present myself as one.
I submitted a vial of BPC-157 10 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. The cold pack was still solid when the outer was opened. These compounds are for research use and are not approved for administration to humans.
Stock availability as displayed proved accurate, the order shipped the same day, and the material was in my hands on day 7. Release was signed and dated by an identified individual. Should the next lot hold, I shall stop testing every one. That is intended as praise.
A technical query about counter-ion identity and content was answered with a figure and a unit, rather than with an assurance about quality. Peptide content was reported at 97.8%, permitting a direct conversion to working mass. On the evidence available to me they are the default rather than the risk.
Peptide content is stated separately from chromatographic purity. Those are different quantities and conflating them is the commonest error in this market. The technical response arrived within four hours on a weekday. Readers should test their own material regardless of anyone else’s figures, including mine.
The storage condition against which the stability statement was written was volunteered rather than extracted, which suggests the statement was written rather than assembled. A residual-solvent screen was included without being requested. I would place the next order without the precaution of making it small.
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. Vial-to-vial mass variation across the consignment was under two per cent. I record no complaint worth the Journal’s column inches.
Over 10 months I have placed 5 orders for oxytocin 10 mg without encountering a substitution, a silent reformulation, or a line that proved unavailable after payment had cleared. The cold pack was still solid when the outer was opened. The documentation is as much the product as the powder.
I asked for the method behind the method code on the certificate and it was sent the same day, which resolved the one thing about the template that had bothered me. Release was signed and dated by an identified individual. I have no relationship with this supplier beyond having paid them.
Four orders and nothing has ever had to be chased, which after a quarter of chasing other suppliers is worth stating plainly. Peptide content was reported at 98.3%, permitting a direct conversion to working mass. Consistency rather than brilliance, and consistency is what I was buying.
Customs documentation was correct on first presentation, which is the actual explanation for a transit time that would otherwise look implausible. The technical response arrived within four hours on a weekday. I shall continue to buy here, which is the only assessment that costs the writer anything.
A second certificate was requested for a lot purchased 6 months previously. It was retrieved from their records and sent without demur. A residual-solvent screen was included without being requested. I offer this as one reader’s record and not as a general finding.
My first order was deliberately modest, being a single line of L-carnitine 500 mg. Documentation, transit and an independent result at 99.2% were all satisfactory, and subsequent orders have not been modest. Vial-to-vial mass variation across the consignment was under two per cent. Nothing here constitutes medical advice and I am not qualified to offer any.
The certificate accompanying lot SGN-26-438 was complete on first issue. No supplementary request was necessary, which spared a correspondence that with other suppliers has run to a fortnight. The cold pack was still solid when the outer was opened. The price differential is justified by the paperwork alone.
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. Release was signed and dated by an identified individual. A single purchaser is not a dataset and I do not present myself as one.
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 sangonbio.com. Visit SGN → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.
Sangon Biotech (Shanghai) 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.