Our Scoring Methodology
Every product is scored out of 10 using a weighted average across five criteria. We apply the same criteria to every product in a category — no exceptions for popular brands or products with good marketing.
Formulation Quality / Protein Purity (30%)
For protein products: actual grams of protein per gram of serving weight — verified against label claims and, where available, independently tested batch COA data. Below 70% purity on a non-flavored product is a red flag. Below 65% with amino spiking indicators is scored accordingly. For other supplements: whether the active ingredient is at a clinical dose, and whether the form used is the most bioavailable evidence-supported option (e.g. magnesium glycinate vs oxide, KSM-66 vs generic ashwagandha extract). Branded, clinically-studied forms score higher.
Value for Money (25%)
Cost per serving divided by the active ingredient content, benchmarked against the full Indian market category average. For protein: rupees per gram of verified protein. For vitamins: rupees per clinical dose unit. For adaptogens: rupees per milligram of the active standardized compound. This score is updated when prices change significantly. Import premium is factored in with context — paying more for NSF certification is noted, not penalized without explanation.
Label Transparency (20%)
Does the label clearly disclose: individual ingredient amounts, blend ratios, and standardization levels? Proprietary blends are penalized proportionally to how much they hide. Brands that publish batch-level Certificates of Analysis from FSSAI-registered or NABL-accredited labs score higher. Amino spiking indicators — taurine, glycine, or creatine listed without amounts in a protein powder — reduce this score significantly. A history of label accuracy controversies is noted with appropriate context.
Ingredient Quality (15%)
Are branded, clinically-studied forms used where they matter? KSM-66 vs generic ashwagandha, Creapure creatine vs unverified Chinese-sourced monohydrate, methylcobalamin vs cyanocobalamin B12, triglyceride form omega-3 vs ethyl ester. Where a product claims a branded ingredient, we verify this is possible from the label and pricing context. Unnecessary fillers, artificial colors with no functional purpose, and additives that could cause harm to a segment of users are noted.
Taste & Mixability / Real-World Usability (10%)
Based on our own testing where accessible, and aggregated verified purchase reviews from Amazon India (filtered to remove obvious fake reviews and non-Indian reviewers). We note when the 10% usability score is based entirely on aggregated reviews rather than direct testing. For unflavored products, this criterion is adjusted to assess mixability and practical daily usability rather than flavor preference.
How Lab Data Influences Scores
Where a brand has published FSSAI batch Certificates of Analysis, or where NSF Certified for Sport, Informed Sport, or Labdoor has published test results for a product available in India, we incorporate that data into the Formulation Quality and Label Transparency scores.
Products with no independent test data are not automatically penalized — absence of evidence is not evidence of inaccuracy. But products where available test data contradicts label claims are scored accordingly, with full citation of the source data.
Every review displays a clear lab data status badge: green for verified independent data available, amber for no independent data found.