Scoring Methodology
This database grades shilajit products using objective, publicly verifiable signals. We do not make medical claims, and we do not assess efficacy. Our goal is to give consumers a clear, impartial picture of how transparently a brand documents its product — and how that documentation stacks up against established quality criteria in the scientific literature.
Every product receives three independent scores: a Transparency Grade (A–F), a Quality Tier (Poor → Ultra-Premium), and an Overall Grade (F → A+). These scores are computed deterministically from structured data; no brand receives preferential treatment.
Separately, some outbound purchase links on this site are affiliate links, and ShilajitDB may earn a commission on qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you. Affiliate relationships play no role in how a product is scored — see our affiliate disclosure for details of which links this applies to.
What we measure — and what we don’t
We only score signals we can verify from public sources:
- COA status — whether a Certificate of Analysis is publicly available, available on request, or not disclosed.
- Named third-party testing lab — whether the brand discloses the specific independent laboratory that issued the COA. Where we have reviewed the COA document, it has to be that document naming an independent laboratory: a brand’s own name, its contract manufacturer, or a COA issued by either does not count.
- Manufacturing country claim — whether the brand states where the product is manufactured (USA carries additional regulatory weight; any stated country receives partial credit for transparency).
- GMP certification — recorded, but not scored. About 80% of products claim it, and none of the brands we checked publishes a certificate or registrar listing that can be verified, so a GMP claim tells a buyer very little. It counted for one point until September 2026.
- What the COA reports — whether a real lab document has been reviewed for this product, who issued it, whether heavy metals are reported as actual concentrations or only pass/fail, whether the test covered the finished product or only the incoming ingredient, whether a microbial panel is included, and whether the COA carries a batch or lot code and a recent date.
- Product form and patent claims — recorded and displayed, but not scored as points. Form instead sets the highest Overall Grade a product can reach (see below). A manufacturing patent says nothing about what a laboratory measured.
- Source region — where the raw material originates. Displayed on product pages as context but not scored, because geographic labelling alone cannot be independently verified from product listings.
1. Transparency Grade (A–F)
The Transparency Grade answers: how openly has this brand documented its product’s safety and origin? The maximum score is 10 points.
Publishing a COA only counts if a buyer can actually find it. A certificate that exists but sits behind a collapsed accordion, or is linked as nothing more than “Learn more,” loses part of its credit; one that is public at its URL but not linked from the product page at all loses more. Discoverability affects this grade only — it has no bearing on the Quality Tier or the Overall Grade.
Signal weights
| Signal | Points | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| COA publicly available | +4 | Highest weight: publicly posted testing results are the gold standard for consumer safety. Only ~33% of products in our database qualify. |
| COA embedded on page | +2 | COA visible on product page as an image — not independently downloadable or auditable, but visible to consumers. |
| Named third-party testing lab | +3 | Naming the specific laboratory makes results checkable and accountable. An unnamed “independent lab” claim cannot be verified, and where we have reviewed the COA these points require that document to name an independent lab — not the brand itself or its contract manufacturer. About 27% of products qualify. |
| Manufacturing country: USA | +2 | US manufacturers are subject to FDA 21 CFR Part 111 cGMP regulations, providing regulatory accountability beyond a self-reported GMP claim. |
| COA available on request | +1 | The product has been tested but results are gated. Testing without public disclosure limits consumer verifiability. |
| Manufacturing country: other stated | +1 | At minimum, the manufacturing origin is disclosed and traceable. |
| Published COA is buried | −1 | The COA is linked, but collapsed inside an accordion or labelled so vaguely that a buyer scanning the page would not find it. Published in name, not in practice. |
| Published COA is not linked | −2 | The document is public at its own URL, but nothing on the product page points to it — so only someone who already has the link can read it. |
Grade thresholds (max 10 points)
| Grade | Score required | Example profile |
|---|---|---|
| A | ≥ 9 | Public COA + named lab + US manufacturing (4+3+2 = 9) |
| B | ≥ 6 | Public COA + named lab + a non-US stated country (4+3+1 = 8) |
| C | ≥ 3 | Public COA only (4) |
| D | ≥ 1 | COA on request + stated country (2) |
| F | 0 | No COA, no disclosed manufacturing country |
2. Quality Tier
The Quality Tier answers: does this product meet the verifiable criteria for high-quality shilajit? It is determined by a strict checklist — no scoring, no partial credit. Any brand meeting all criteria for a tier qualifies. Product form then caps the tier: only resin can be Ultra-Premium; liquid extracts, powders, capsules and tablets can reach Premium; gummies, honey sticks and blends can reach Average at most.
Tier criteria
| Tier | All of the following must be true |
|---|---|
| Ultra-Premium | Verified COA from an independent laboratory and that laboratory named on the COA and numeric heavy metal results for the finished product and a microbial panel and a batch or lot code |
| Premium | Verified COA from an independent laboratory and numeric heavy metal results |
| Average | Some testing transparency present (COA of any type, or named lab) — but does not meet Premium criteria |
| Poor | No COA of any kind, and no named third-party lab |
How product form limits the grade
Shilajit in its natural resin form requires minimal processing and, according to Piccolo (2002), best preserves the humic substance molecular matrix — the complex of fulvic acids, humic acids, and trace minerals that characterises authentic shilajit.1 Liquid extracts are processed out of the whole resin. Powders go further: the extract is dried at high temperature (typically by spray-drying) into a powder, and that same powder is what fills capsules and is pressed into tablets. Gummies go furthest: extract that has already been heated and spray-dried is heated again into a sugar, glycerin, and gelatin base, and most deliver 50–200 mg per piece against the 250–500 mg/day used in clinical trials. How shilajit gummies are made.
No clinical trial has compared forms head to head, so form is not scored as points. Instead it sets a ceiling: the Overall Grade cannot exceed what the product’s format can deliver, however clean its COA. The Quality Tier is capped the same way: only resin can be Ultra-Premium, and gummies, honey sticks and blends stop at Average.
| Form | Highest Overall Grade |
|---|---|
| Resin | A+ |
| Liquid extract | A |
| Powder, capsules, tablets, other formats | B |
| Gummies, honey sticks, blends | C |
3. Overall Grade (F – A+)
The Overall Grade is a single composite score built from what a product’s Certificate of Analysis actually documents. The maximum is 13 points, of which 11 come from laboratory evidence: whether a real COA has been verified, who issued it, whether heavy metals were measured as actual concentrations on the finished product, whether the laboratory is named on the document, and whether the report carries a microbial panel, a batch code, and a recent date. Product form, patent claims, and stated fulvic acid percentages are not scored; product form then caps the resulting grade as described above.
Signal weights
| Signal | Points | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Numeric heavy metals, finished product | +4 | Actual lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury concentrations for the product as sold. Heavy metal contamination is the documented safety risk in shilajit,11 and only real numbers let a buyer compare a result against a limit. Halved when the test covers the incoming ingredient rather than the finished product, and halved again on a COA the manufacturer issued. |
| Verified COA from an independent laboratory | +3 | A real lab document for this product has been opened and read, not merely claimed. A COA issued by the brand or its own manufacturer scores +1 instead, as does a COA that is claimed but cannot be verified. |
| Testing laboratory named on the COA | +2 | The document itself names the laboratory, so the analytical protocol is checkable and the result accountable.5 A lab named only in marketing copy earns nothing. |
| Microbial panel on the COA | +1 | Total plate count, yeast and mould, E. coli, Salmonella and Staphylococcus testing — a second real safety check beyond heavy metals. |
| Batch or lot code on the COA | +1 | Ties the result to the material actually sold. Without a batch code, a COA cannot be matched to the jar in front of you. |
| COA dated within the last 24 months | +1 | Testing reflects a point in time. An old report says little about current production, so recency earns a point rather than counting forever. |
| Manufacturing country stated | +1 | Origin is disclosed, enabling traceability. Every supplement sold in the United States falls under FDA 21 CFR Part 111 regardless of where it is made, so no country receives extra credit. |
Grade thresholds (max 13 points)
| Grade | Score required | Example profile |
|---|---|---|
| A+ | ≥ 13 | Verified independent COA + numeric finished-product heavy metals + lab named + microbial panel + batch code + recent date + stated country (3+4+2+1+1+1+1 = 13). Resin only |
| A | ≥ 10 | The same profile missing a microbial panel or a batch code (3+4+2+1+1+1 = 12) |
| B | ≥ 7 | Verified COA with a named lab but no heavy metal values (3+2+1+1+1 = 8); or a manufacturer-issued COA reporting numeric heavy metals (1+2+1+1+1+1+1 = 8) |
| C | ≥ 4 | A verified COA the manufacturer issued, with pass/fail heavy metals, a batch code and a stated country (1+1+1+1 = 4). A COA that cannot be verified tops out at 3 — a D |
| D | ≥ 2 | COA claimed but unverified, plus a stated country (1+1 = 2) |
| E | ≥ 1 | A single weak signal (e.g. a stated country of manufacture only) |
| F | 0 | No verifiable quality signal of any kind |
Impartiality statement
No brand is hard-coded into the scoring algorithm. Every signal in every scoring function is applied identically to all products. The Ultra-Premium tier is awarded to any product that meets all six stated criteria simultaneously; any brand that publishes the necessary documentation qualifies.
We update data as brands publish new documentation. If you believe a product’s data is outdated, use the “Report an update” link on the product page.
Definitions
- Certificate of Analysis (COA)
- A document issued by a laboratory reporting the results of testing performed on a specific product lot. COAs for shilajit products typically cover heavy metals (lead, arsenic, cadmium, mercury), microbial contamination, and may include fulvic acid or humic acid content.
- Manufactured in vs sourced from vs packaged in
- Manufactured in — where the product is processed into its final form. Sourced from — where raw shilajit resin originates (geological source region). Packaged in — where filling and labelling occur (may differ from manufacturing). We score manufacturing country only, as sourcing and packaging country are more difficult to verify.
- cGMP / GMP certified
- Current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations (US: FDA 21 CFR Part 111) establish minimum standards for manufacturing, packaging, labelling, and storing dietary supplements. GMP certification typically involves third-party audit by an NSF, NPA, UL or similar body. ShilajitDB records whether a brand claims GMP but does not score it: the claim is near-universal and, in our checks, never backed by a public certificate.
- Third-party testing lab
- A laboratory independent of the brand that performs and issues the COA. Named labs include organisations such as Eurofins, Cambium Analytica, Matrix Sciences, and Envirolab, whose methods and accreditations can be independently verified.
References
- Piccolo, A. (2002). The supramolecular structure of humic substances: a novel understanding of humus chemistry and implications in soil science. Advances in Agronomy, 75, 57–134. ResearchGate
- Bhattacharyya, S., et al. (2009). Beneficial effect of processed shilajit on swimming exercise induced impaired energy status of mice. Pharmacologyonline, 2, 817–825.
- Lamar, R. T., et al. (2014). Determination of humic substances content in agricultural and horticultural products. Journal of AOAC International, 97(3), 721–730. Full text (PDF)
- International Organization for Standardization. (2018). ISO 19822:2018 — Shilajit/Mumijo raw material — Requirements. ISO 19822:2018
- Stohs, S. J., & Bagchi, D. (2020). Safety and efficacy of shilajit (mumie, moomiyo). Frontiers in Pharmacology, 11, 1–10. PMC7041307