PepHaus prices three plan lengths on one screen with the prepaid total shown beside each per-month figure, and it is the only seller on this roster whose own pages promise a certificate of analysis in the box. That certificate is not reachable anywhere on the site — not as a document, not as an image, not wired into any element.
What PepHaus charges
Sermorelin: $159/mo — per month on the monthly plan, the only tier that is billed monthly; the same page prints $151/mo on a quarterly plan and $143/mo on a 6-month plan billed $858.60, and advertises the $143 as its "from" price
NAD+: $199/mo — per month on the monthly plan, the only tier that is billed monthly; the same page prints $189/mo on a quarterly plan and $179/mo on a 6-month plan billed $1,074.60, and advertises the $179 as its "from" price
Glutathione: $159/mo — per month on the monthly plan, the only tier that is billed monthly; the same page prints $151/mo on a quarterly plan billed $453.15 and $143/mo on a 6-month plan billed $858.60, and advertises the $143 as its "from" price
PepHaus is not a paid partner; this link may earn a commission if that changes. Full disclosure.
By Nora Castellan, Standards EditorUpdated September 2026
Three plans, three figures, and the total beside each
Each peptide page carries the same block: a six-month plan at the lowest per-month rate with the amount actually charged printed next to it, a quarterly plan, and a monthly plan marked as the flexible one. All three per-month figures are visible at once.
The advertised price — the one in the navigation rail and in the page heading — is the six-month rate. So the number a reader arrives on is the one that carries the longest prepayment.
This site records the monthly plan instead, because it is the only tier that is actually billed by the month, and writes the other two rates and their prepaid totals into the qualifier. A board sorting sellers by monthly cost cannot honestly carry a rate that requires half a year up front.
The pages also itemise what a box holds: the vial and its supply length, the pre-measured syringes, the swabs, first-dose instructions and the provider visit. That is more specific than most sellers manage.
A certificate promised three times and produced nowhere
The phrase appears three times on each peptide page: as a line saying one comes in every box, as an item in the list of what a box contains describing it as showing purity and concentration, and as a trust badge alongside the pharmacy and shipping claims.
No certificate is reachable. The pages were searched for a linked document, for the attribute patterns that wire a certificate into a button rather than a link, for an image with a certificate class or filename, and for any document file at all. All four searches returned nothing.
That last check matters because a link is often not how these are published. On the best-documented sellers in this market the certificates hang off attributes on buttons or sit inside image lightboxes, where a crawler that only reads links finds none. Those patterns were looked for here specifically, and are absent too.
So the finding is not that this seller publishes no testing. It is that it claims testing and shows none, which is a different and more useful thing to record. A reader cannot check the claim before buying, and this site does not treat an unreachable certificate as third-party testing.
It draws the category line itself — and then prices its rivals
The sermorelin page carries a heading saying it is not a research-only website, and a passage saying research-chemical vendors ship raw powder stamped not for human use that the buyer is expected to reconstitute and mix, with no provider, no prescription and no real way to know purity or strength. It contrasts that with running the same molecule through a licensed provider and a licensed compounding pharmacy.
That is a seller stating its own legal category in its own words, on the page taking the order, which is the distinction this site exists to make legible.
It then goes further than any other seller here and prints a two-column table comparing itself against research-chemical sites on price, prescription status, pharmacy, certificate availability and labelling.
The price range in that table is a seller's characterisation of its competitors and is not repeated here. This site has measured no research-vendor prices of its own — no such seller is on this roster — so the range is neither confirmed nor contradicted, and saying so is more honest than borrowing a rival's number.
Who runs it, where it ships, and what is not named
A limited liability company is named on the privacy policy and again on the contact page with a mailing address. That is a clean answer, and a rarer one on this roster than it should be.
All three peptide pages state coverage in a sentence of their own, claiming every state with eligibility confirmed during intake before any charge is made.
The pharmacy is described by its licensing class on every page and never named, so a reader cannot look up the facility that will fill the order.
Two weight-loss compounds are named with a starting figure in the navigation rail on every page. Their own product pages were not opened this pass, so neither carries a price on this row — a figure in a navigation rail is not a reading of the page that sells the thing.
Who it's for
Readers who want every plan length priced on one screen with the prepaid total shown.
Buyers who want to see a seller state its own position on research-labelled material rather than infer it.
Anyone who wants the operating company named with a mailing address.
Shoppers who want the contents of a box itemised before ordering.
Who should look elsewhere
Anyone who wants to read the certificate before buying, since none is reachable on the site.
Readers comparing on the advertised figure, which is always the six-month rate.
Buyers who need the dispensing pharmacy named rather than described by licensing class.
Anyone who wants lab work inside the price, which no page describes.
Shoppers who take a seller's table about its competitors as market data.
Strengths
Prints three plan lengths side by side with the per-month figure and the prepaid total for each, so the commitment behind the lowest rate is visible
States its own position on research-labelled peptides on the product page, in its own words, rather than leaving the category to the reader
Claims all fifty states in its own sentence on every peptide page, with the eligibility caveat stated rather than implied
Lists what a box contains item by item, including the syringes, the swabs and the supply length
Trade-offs
Claims a certificate of analysis three times per page and publishes no reachable certificate anywhere — no document, no image and no attribute wiring one into the page
Its own comparison table characterises the research-chemical market's prices, which is a seller describing its rivals and is not evidence
The advertised "from" figure is the six-month rate, so the headline price always carries a prepayment
The compounding pharmacy is described by licensing class and never named
How we verified this
Loaded three peptide pages and two company pages with a full browser user-agent, printed the effective URL beside the requested URL on every fetch, and confirmed none redirected.
Ran a nonsense-path control on the host in the same run and confirmed a not-found response.
Joined the page's text nodes before matching any price, so a figure split across two elements could not read as an absence.
Read all three plan tiers off each page rather than the advertised figure alone, and recorded the tier that is genuinely billed monthly.
Searched each page's markup for a linked document, for attributes that wire a certificate into a button, for an image carrying a certificate class or filename, and for any document file of any name, because a certificate link is frequently not a link at all.
Recorded the certificate as claimed and unreachable rather than as absent, and rather than as testing performed.
Declined to repeat the seller's figures for its competitors' prices, and stated that this site has measured none of its own.
Read the privacy policy and contact page in full for the operating company, and confirmed the same name appears on both.
Took the coverage claim from the seller's own sentence on each peptide page, including its eligibility caveat.
A provider to compare PepHaus against
Trellis Vitality
Trellis Vitality frames its program around body-composition tracking rather than scale weight, pairing NAD+, glutathione and tesamorelin with at-home biomarker panels and a 90-day re-test, and names its dispensing pharmacy, VialsRX in Houston, by address.
The pages say so three times each. None is reachable — not as a document, not as an image, and not wired into any element. This site records that as claimed and unproduced.
Which figure does this site record?
The monthly plan rate, because it is the only tier billed by the month. The quarterly and six-month rates and their prepaid totals sit in the qualifier beside it.
Why not record the advertised price?
The advertised price is the six-month rate, which requires paying half a year in advance. Printing it as a monthly cost would compare a prepayment against other sellers' bills.
What does it say about research-grade peptides?
It says it is not a research-only website, describes research-chemical vendors as shipping raw powder labelled not for human use with no prescription and no assurance of purity, and contrasts that with a prescription filled by a licensed compounding pharmacy.
Are its claims about competitors' prices reliable?
They are a seller's account of its rivals. This site has measured no research-vendor prices of its own, so the range is recorded as the seller's claim and nothing more.
PepHaus is not a paid partner; this link may earn a commission if that changes. Full disclosure.