Creatine gummy lab test tracker: every brand that passed — and failed — independent testing

Match lab results to product-specific certification

A registry entry describes a specific product, form and sometimes lot. Historical sample tests remain part of the evidence even if a product later has a certification. Use both dates and do not treat the number of flavor listings as a quality score.

How to read any of this without getting burned

• Check the date of the test. The NOW round is the oldest of the three; SuppCo and the James Smith / Eurofins round both landed in mid-2025. Create failed the NOW round and then passed both later rounds. Formulations change. An old failure is a reason to look for a newer result, not an automatic verdict.
• Prefer ongoing certification over one-off tests. NSF Certified for Sport and Informed Sport re-test batches continuously and publish searchable registries.
• Ignore star ratings entirely. All four products that failed the SuppCo round had strong Amazon ratings, and together sold roughly 50,000 units in a single month.
• Ask for a batch COA. Any brand confident in its product will send one. The response time tells you a lot on its own.

Cite this dataset

The JSON and CSV contain 29 rows from three public rounds: 28 gummy product tests (16 Fail, 12 Pass) and one Round 2 row that summarizes the five powders tested alongside them (all passed). That matches the “16 of 28” figure used across this site. NOW Foods reported 13 brands with 7 failures, but published coverage names only six of the failing brands, so the seventh row is listed as “name not published.”

Suggested citation. GummyGains. Creatine Gummy Lab Test Tracker. Compilation of publicly reported creatine gummy tests, last verified September 15, 2026. https://getgummygains.com/creatine-gummies-lab-tested. Machine-readable: https://getgummygains.com/data/creatine-gummy-lab-results.json and https://getgummygains.com/data/creatine-gummy-lab-results.csv. License: CC BY 4.0. The measurements belong to the labs named on each row.

NSF listing counts inside the file are a September 15, 2026 directory snapshot, not a live search. The five powders tested in Round 2 share one summary row and are not counted in the 28 gummy tests. Read primary_label_checks for the September 15, 2026 Create Watermelon label photo before you treat that photo as a personal test.

Creatine impurities: DCD, DHT and what brands publish

Merged from our former standalone page on October 26, 2026. Prices and listings keep the dates shown.

What DCD and DHT actually are

Creatine monohydrate is made industrially, most commonly by reacting sarcosine with cyanamide. Two byproducts of that reaction are the ones the trade watches:

• Dicyandiamide (DCD) — an unreacted starting-material residue. It is the most commonly specified impurity in creatine raw material.
• Dihydrotriazine (DHT) — a side-reaction product, specified at much lower ceilings than DCD because the tolerances applied to it are tighter.

Neither is an ingredient anyone adds on purpose. Both are controlled by specification at the raw-material stage, which means the ceiling is set long before a gummy is moulded — by whoever the brand buys its powder from, not by the brand's own factory.

Why this is a different question from the label-claim tests

The three independent rounds we track — NOW Foods, SuppCo and James Smith/Eurofins — measured how much creatine was in the product against how much the label promised. That is the right first question, and 16 of 28 product tests failed it. But a product can contain exactly the creatine it claims and still have been made from a low-grade raw material.

Purity is upstream of dose. A brand that publishes its impurity ceilings is telling you something about the material it buys; a brand that only says “third-party tested” is telling you something about a single downstream measurement, if that.

What we could and could not verify

Create's quality page also states that every batch is tested for purity, potency and label accuracy, and re-tested over time to check that potency holds across shelf life. Stability testing matters more for gummies than for powder, because the degradation route that produces creatinine is a water-and-heat problem and a gummy is made with both.

Questions about the testing

Research sources. Uzzan et al., Effect of water activity and temperature on the stability of creatine during storage (Drug Dev Ind Pharm, 2009): creatine breaks down faster with more water and heat.

Content review. Reviewed and approved by Henry Nguyen, founder of GummyGains, on October 29, 2026, against the research sources above. He is not a doctor or dietitian; ask a qualified healthcare provider about your own situation.

This article is for information only and is not medical advice. Talk to a qualified healthcare provider before starting any supplement.

Editorial update: September 24, 2026. This edit clarifies wording and comparisons. Prices, label photos, certification checks and original tests retain their individual dates; they have not all been rechecked today. What the dates mean.

2026 data report: what the three rounds add up to

Methodology of this report

Three public testing rounds are the basis for every number on this page:

• NOW Foods (HPLC testing): 13 creatine gummy brands purchased and tested by high-performance liquid chromatography. 6 met their label claim; 7 did not.
• SuppCo (ISO 17025-accredited lab): 11 products purchased off the shelf — 5 powders and 6 gummies. All 5 powders passed. 4 of the 6 gummies failed, two with no detectable creatine.
• James Smith / Eurofins (July 2025): 9 creatine gummy products tested. 4 were reported within range of their claim and 5 had borderline-undetectable creatine.

GummyGains did not commission any of these rounds. We compiled, cross-referenced, and cite all three directly. Testing dates and lots differ between rounds and formulations change over time — treat every figure as a dated data point, not a permanent verdict on a brand. Full product-by-product detail, including source links and caveats, is maintained on our lab test results page.

Three findings worth quoting

1. Amazon star ratings did not predict a lab pass. A top-rated bestseller in the SuppCo round measured 0.005 g of creatine against a 5 g label claim — roughly 2,000 gummies for one real dose.
2. Gummies are the only creatine format where labs found brands with functionally zero active ingredient. Every powder tested in the same SuppCo round passed.
3. A brand's own "lab tested" claim carried no weight in these results. One brand advertised its own certified testing and then failed independent testing twice, on two different lots.

Embed this data

Citing this report on your own site or story? Use this line and link back to this page:

Download the underlying CSV

Dataset version: September 3, 2026. Each row identifies the testing round, product, stated dose, measured result where publicly available, outcome and source. You may quote or reuse the compilation with attribution and a link to this report. The original publishers retain ownership of their underlying test reports.

For source clarification, chart assets, or a data request, contact us via the details on our About page.