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. Any brand that meets the criteria for a given tier qualifies for it.
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.
- 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 — whether the brand claims cGMP compliance.
- Product form — whether the product is a minimally processed resin versus a capsule, powder, tablet, or blend.
- Patent claim — whether the brand holds a manufacturing patent. This is displayed on product pages but not scored; see the reasoning below.
- Source region — where the raw material originates. This is displayed on product pages as context but not scored, because geographic labelling alone cannot be independently verified from product listings.
Ingredient text and blend composition are collected where available but are not currently used in scoring because they are absent from the majority of product listings and cannot be fairly compared across products.
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 11 points.
Signal weights
| Signal | Points | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| COA publicly available | +4 | Highest weight: the FTC and FDA both require that testing claims be substantiated and results be “available for review.” Publicly posted results are the gold standard — only ~33% of products in our database qualify. |
| Named third-party testing lab | +3 | Naming the specific laboratory makes results checkable and accountable. An unnamed “independent lab” claim cannot be verified. Only ~31% of products name their lab. |
| Manufacturing country: USA | +2 | US manufacturers are subject to FDA 21 CFR Part 111 cGMP regulations, providing regulatory accountability and third-party audit trails beyond a self-reported GMP claim. |
| COA available on request | +1 | Partial credit: the product has been tested but results are gated. Testing without public disclosure limits consumer verifiability. |
| Manufacturing country: other stated country | +1 | At minimum, the manufacturing origin is disclosed and traceable — even if outside a strong regulatory framework. |
| GMP certified | +1 | A documented manufacturing standard, but ~80% of products in our database claim it, making it a weak differentiator. Awarded one point as evidence of a documented process. |
Grade thresholds (max 11 points)
| Grade | Score required | Example profile |
|---|---|---|
| A | ≥ 9 | Public COA + named lab + US manufacturing (9) |
| B | ≥ 6 | Public COA + US manufacturing + GMP (7) |
| 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: how does this product’s form and documented verification stack up against the scientific criteria for high-quality shilajit? It is determined by a strict checklist — no scoring, no partial credit. Tiers are not brand-specific; any brand meeting all criteria for a tier qualifies.
Tier criteria
| Tier | All of the following must be true |
|---|---|
| Ultra-Premium | Resin form and COA publicly available and named third-party lab and manufacturing country stated and GMP certified |
| Premium | Resin form and COA public or on request and named third-party lab and manufacturing country stated |
| Average | COA public or on request, or named lab (but not qualifying for Premium) |
| Poor | No COA of any kind, and no named third-party lab |
Why resin form matters
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 Capsules, powders, tablets, and liquid extracts undergo additional processing steps that can alter or dilute this matrix. Resin form is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the highest tiers.
ISO 19822:2018, the international standard for shilajit/mumijo raw material, also specifies compositional criteria (fulvic acid content, ashless humic acid content) that are most faithfully preserved in minimally processed resin form.6
Why GMP is required at Ultra-Premium but not Premium
GMP certification is claimed by approximately 80% of products in our database, making it a weak standalone signal. However, when combined with all four other Ultra-Premium criteria, its presence indicates that the brand’s manufacturing process has been evaluated against a documented standard — consistent with the principle of traceable, controlled manufacturing described in the scientific literature on shilajit quality assurance.3
3. Overall Grade (F – A+)
The Overall Grade is a single composite score combining all quality signals. The maximum is 14 points.
Signal weights
| Signal | Points | Scientific basis |
|---|---|---|
| COA publicly available | +4 | Contaminant and heavy metal testing with publicly available results is the most important consumer safety signal. Heavy metal contamination is a documented concern for shilajit raw material.11 |
| Named third-party testing lab | +3 | Independent verification by a named, checkable laboratory is the second-most critical signal. Lamar et al. (2014) demonstrated that standardised humic substance testing requires specific analytical methods — naming the lab confirms which protocol was applied.5 |
| Form = Resin | +2 | Least-processed form; best preserves fulvic-humic molecular matrix (Piccolo 2002).1 Weighted below verified independent testing: a well-tested capsule demonstrates more verifiable quality than an untested resin. |
| Manufacturing country: USA | +2 | FDA 21 CFR Part 111 mandates identity, purity, strength, and composition testing for dietary supplements manufactured in the US — providing a regulatory audit trail beyond self-certification. |
| COA available on request | +1 | Testing exists but is not openly disclosed; guide criteria say results should be “available for review.” Partial credit only. |
| Manufacturing country: other stated | +1 | Origin is disclosed, enabling traceability even without a strong local regulatory framework. |
| GMP certified | +1 | A documented process standard; low discriminative value at 80% prevalence but still evidence of a baseline manufacturing protocol. |
| Patent claim | display only | See note below. |
Grade thresholds (max 14 points)
| Grade | Score required | Example profile |
|---|---|---|
| A+ | ≥ 12 | Public COA + named lab + resin + USA + GMP (12) |
| A | ≥ 9 | Public COA + named lab + USA (9); or public COA + named lab + resin (9) |
| B | ≥ 6 | Public COA + resin + USA (8); or public COA + named lab (7) |
| C | ≥ 3 | Public COA + other stated country (5); or resin + COA on request (3) |
| D | ≥ 2 | COA on request + stated country (2) |
| E | ≥ 1 | A single weak signal (e.g., GMP claimed only) |
| F | 0 | No verifiable quality signal of any kind |
Why patent claim is displayed but not scored
A manufacturing patent represents a proprietary process, but patent status does not in itself indicate superior product quality for the following reasons:
- No independent consumer authority (NSF International, USP, ConsumerLab, FDA, or FTC) uses patent status as a supplement quality signal.
- Approximately 28% of products in our database claim a patent, but a YES/NO field provides no information about what the patent covers or whether it is relevant to final product composition.
- Patents are granted for novelty and non-obviousness — not for demonstrable superiority over competing products.
Patent claims are displayed prominently on individual product pages where consumers can evaluate them in context. Awarding scoring points for a patent claim would conflate intellectual property with verified quality — a distinction the FTC has also emphasised in supplement marketing guidance.
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 five 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, or similar body.
- Third-party testing lab
- A laboratory independent of the brand that performs and issues the COA. Named labs include organisations such as Eurofins, Covance, ChromaDex, and Cambium Analytica, 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., Pal, D., Gupta, A. K., Ganguly, P., Majumder, U., & Seal, T. (2009). Beneficial effect of processed shilajit on swimming exercise induced impaired energy status of mice. Pharmacologyonline, 2, 817–825. Full text (PDF)
- Li, X. H., McGrath, S. P., Tibbett, M., & Zhao, F. J. (2016). Plant-available selenium fractions in soil and their controls. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 100(6), 2445–2460. PubMed
- Carrasco-Gallardo, C., Guzmán, L., & Maccioni, R. B. (2012). Shilajit: A natural phytocomplex with potential procognitive activity. International Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 2012, 674142. PMC3296184
- 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
- US Patent 10,130,656 B2 — Shilajit composition and process. (2018). Google Patents
- WJ Pharmaceutical. (2025). Review of bioactive components and quality assessment methods for shilajit. World Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Research. Full text (PDF)
- Meena, H., Pandey, H. K., Arya, M. C., & Ahmed, Z. (2010). Shilajit: A panacea for high-altitude problems. International Journal of Ayurveda Research, 1(1), 37–40. PMC2876922
- Rezeb, et al. Humic acids in traditional medicine: a review of properties and mechanisms. DergiPark. Full text (PDF)
- Stohs, S. J., & Bagchi, D. (2020). Safety and efficacy of shilajit (mumie, moomiyo). Frontiers in Pharmacology, 11, 1–10. PMC7041307