Reference
Last updated May 5, 2026. Version 1.0.
DosedWise Scoring Methodology
Version 1.0, April 27, 2026
This document explains exactly how DosedWise scores supplements. The methodology is public, the formula is transparent, and the criteria are fixed. We publish this so you can verify our scoring logic, reproduce our calculations, and hold us accountable.
Why methodology transparency matters
Most supplement review sites operate as black boxes. They give a score with no explanation. They claim independence while taking sponsorship money. They don't show their math.
DosedWise does the opposite. Every score on this site is calculated using the formula below. Anyone can verify it. No score is influenced by brand payments, advertising deals, or affiliate commission rates.
If a score doesn't match this formula, it's a bug. Email hello@dosedwise.com and we'll fix it.
The EDE Score (Effective Dose Engine)
The EDE Score is a 0-100 rating that combines seven weighted criteria. The total weight is 100%. Every product is evaluated identically.
Scoring formula
EDE Score =
(Dose Efficacy × 0.30) +
(Bioavailability × 0.20) +
(Third-Party Testing × 0.15) +
(Label Transparency × 0.15) +
(Manufacturer Reputation × 0.10) +
(Community Sentiment × 0.05) +
(Price Per Effective Dose × 0.05)
Each input is normalized to a 0-100 scale before weighting.
Verdict tiers
| EDE Score | Verdict | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 90-100 | TOP PICK | Buy with confidence. Best in class. |
| 75-89 | BUY | Solid product. Buy if it fits your stack. |
| 60-74 | WATCH | Acceptable. Better options usually exist. |
| 40-59 | WATCH-SKIP | Has significant issues. Situational use only. |
| 0-39 | SKIP | Underdosed, opaque, or overpriced. Avoid. |
Criterion 1: Dose Efficacy (weight 30%)
This is the most heavily weighted criterion because it's the most important question: does the product contain enough of each active ingredient to actually do anything?
How we calculate it
For each active ingredient in the product:
- We find the dose used in published human clinical studies
- We compare the product's dose to that clinical dose
- We calculate the percentage match
Dose Efficacy per ingredient = (product_dose / clinical_effective_dose) × 100
If the product contains the clinical dose or more: 100 points. If the product contains 50% of the clinical dose: 50 points. If the product contains less than 25% of the clinical dose: 0 points (sub-therapeutic).
For products with multiple active ingredients, we average the dose efficacy across the ingredients that have established clinical evidence.
What counts as "clinical effective dose"
We use doses from:
- Peer-reviewed human studies in adult men (PubMed-indexed)
- NIH Office of Dietary Supplements (ODS) fact sheets
- Examine.com Human Effect Matrix
We do NOT use:
- Animal studies (extrapolation to humans is unreliable)
- In vitro studies (test tube data doesn't translate)
- Brand-funded studies that haven't been replicated
Special cases
Ingredients with weak human evidence (Fadogia Agrestis, Tribulus Terrestris, Maca for testosterone): We mark these as "evidence: weak" and don't penalize the product for under-dosing them. We also don't reward inclusion. They simply don't count toward dose efficacy because there's no reliable human dose to match against.
Proprietary blends: If individual ingredient doses aren't disclosed, we use our Proprietary Blend Unlocker (see below) to estimate doses based on FDA labeling rules and known clinical references. The dose efficacy score is capped at 60% confidence when relying on estimation.
Criterion 2: Bioavailability (weight 20%)
The form of the ingredient matters as much as the dose. Magnesium oxide is 4% bioavailable. Magnesium glycinate is over 90% bioavailable. Same dose, different effect.
How we score forms
| Bioavailability | Examples | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Excellent | Glycinate, threonate, picolinate, methylated B vitamins, patented forms (KSM-66, Furosap, Magtein) | 90-100 |
| Good | Citrate, malate, gluconate | 70-85 |
| Acceptable | Standard extracts, ratios cited in studies | 50-70 |
| Poor | Oxide forms, sulfate, carbonate, generic extracts | 20-40 |
| Terrible | Inactive forms, degraded compounds | 0-20 |
For products with multiple ingredients, we average the bioavailability scores of the active ingredients.
Patented forms get extra weight
When a product uses a patented, clinically-tested form (KSM-66 ashwagandha, Furosap fenugreek, Magtein magnesium L-threonate, Sensoril ashwagandha), bioavailability scoring trends toward 90+. These forms have specific clinical data tied to them.
Criterion 3: Third-Party Testing (weight 15%)
Independent lab verification that the product contains what the label says it contains, free from contaminants.
Scoring scale
| Status | Score |
|---|---|
| NSF Certified for Sport | 100 |
| USP Verified | 100 |
| Informed Sport / Informed Choice | 95 |
| ConsumerLab approved | 85 |
| Brand publishes Certificate of Analysis (CoA) per batch | 75 |
| Brand claims "third-party tested" without disclosure | 30 |
| No third-party testing mentioned | 0 |
We verify these claims directly against the certifying body's database when possible. If a brand claims certification but isn't listed, we score 0.
Criterion 4: Label Transparency (weight 15%)
Can a buyer see exactly what they're getting?
Scoring scale
| Transparency level | Score |
|---|---|
| Every active ingredient with exact mg dose disclosed | 100 |
| Most ingredients disclosed, minor proprietary blend | 70 |
| Significant proprietary blend (>30% of active ingredients hidden) | 40 |
| Mostly proprietary blend | 15 |
| Pure proprietary blend with no individual doses | 5 |
Proprietary blends are a red flag. They allow brands to hide whether each ingredient is at a clinical dose or just a sprinkle for label decoration. We penalize them aggressively.
Criterion 5: Manufacturer Reputation (weight 10%)
History matters. Brands with FDA recalls, lawsuits, or pattern of misleading marketing get penalized.
Scoring criteria
We evaluate:
- FDA warning letters in past 10 years
- FDA recalls in past 10 years
- Pattern of FTC settlements for deceptive marketing
- Public commitment to GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice) compliance
- Years in operation
- Founder/scientific team transparency
Scoring scale
| Reputation | Score |
|---|---|
| Practitioner-grade brand, decades of clean record (Thorne, Pure Encapsulations, Designs for Health) | 95-100 |
| Mainstream reputable, no major issues | 75-90 |
| Mid-tier, some minor issues | 50-70 |
| Has had warning letters or recalls in past 5 years | 30-50 |
| Pattern of FTC settlements or major recalls | 0-30 |
Sources: FDA enforcement reports, FTC press releases, BBB profiles.
Criterion 6: Community Sentiment (weight 5%)
Real user experiences from communities focused on supplements and men's health. Specifically Reddit (r/Testosterone, r/TRT, r/PeterAttia, r/Supplements, r/Nootropics, r/Biohackers).
How we collect sentiment
We use the official Reddit API to:
- Search for product brand and name across target subreddits
- Pull the top 100 mentions over the past 90 days
- Classify each mention as positive, neutral, or negative
- Aggregate the sentiment score
Scoring scale
Sentiment Score = (positive_mentions / total_mentions) × 100
What we ignore
- Amazon reviews (high fake review rate per Fakespot 2024 reports)
- Brand-controlled review sites
- Affiliate marketer review videos
- Sponsored Reddit posts (when identifiable)
Why this is only 5% weight: community sentiment is noisy and easily manipulated. It's a signal, not the truth. We weight it small but include it because patterns matter (e.g., 80%+ negative mentions over 100+ posts is a real signal).
Criterion 7: Price Per Effective Dose (weight 5%)
Also called CPED (Cost Per Effective Day). This is one of DosedWise's signature metrics.
How CPED is calculated
CPED = bottle_price_USD / (total_active_mg_in_bottle / clinical_effective_dose_per_day)
Example:
- Bottle: $30
- 60 capsules × 200mg Tongkat Ali = 12,000mg total
- Clinical effective dose: 400mg/day
- Days of effective dosing per bottle: 12,000 / 400 = 30 days
- CPED: $30 / 30 days = $1.00 per effective day
CPED scoring scale (testosterone supplements)
| CPED | Score |
|---|---|
| Below $0.50 per effective day | 100 |
| $0.50 - $1.00 | 85 |
| $1.00 - $1.50 | 65 |
| $1.50 - $2.50 | 40 |
| $2.50 - $4.00 | 20 |
| Above $4.00 | 0 |
CPED reveals when a $25 bottle is actually more expensive per effective day than a $40 bottle.
The Proprietary Blend Unlocker
Proprietary blends hide individual ingredient amounts behind a total weight (e.g., "Performance Blend: 1500mg" with 8 ingredients). The brand doesn't tell you how much of each ingredient is in there.
How we estimate
We use three signals:
-
FDA labeling rule: ingredients in a blend must be listed in descending order by weight. The first ingredient is the most abundant; the last is the least.
-
Known clinical references: each ingredient has a known clinical dose range. We check whether the total blend weight could plausibly include all listed ingredients at clinical doses.
-
Logical mass distribution: we model multiple plausible distributions and report the most likely one along with confidence level.
Output format
For each ingredient in a proprietary blend, we report:
- Estimated dose (mg)
- Confidence level (high / medium / speculative)
- Comparison to clinical effective dose (% match)
Example output:
"Performance Blend: 1500mg (proprietary)
- Tongkat Ali: estimated 400mg (high confidence), matches clinical
- Fenugreek: estimated 350mg (medium confidence), close to Furosap clinical
- Boron: estimated 6mg (high confidence), matches clinical
- Tribulus: estimated 300mg (medium confidence), clinical evidence weak
- Other ingredients: ~444mg distributed (speculative)"
The dose efficacy score for blends is capped at 60% confidence to reflect the estimation uncertainty.
What we don't score on
We deliberately exclude these factors from the EDE Score:
- Marketing claims: ignored entirely. Brands' own claims about "boosting testosterone" or "cellular vitality" don't influence scoring.
- Influencer endorsements: ignored. Huberman recommending an ingredient doesn't change the dose math.
- Brand price tier: a $80 product can score lower than a $20 product if the math says so.
- Aesthetics: bottle design, marketing photos, customer service quality are not in scope.
- Subjective testimonials: individual user stories are not used as evidence for dose efficacy.
What changes a score
Scores are updated when:
- Product reformulation (brand changes ingredients or doses)
- New clinical evidence emerges for an ingredient (changes effective dose)
- Manufacturer faces recall, warning letter, or major lawsuit
- Bioavailability research updates (rare but happens)
- Reddit sentiment shifts dramatically over a 90-day window
We aim to re-audit each scored product every 6 months minimum. Reformulation triggers immediate re-score.
What does NOT change a score
- Affiliate commission rates: we score the same regardless of whether iHerb pays 5% or 25%
- Brand requests, complaints, or threats: we don't change scores in response to brand pressure
- Sponsorship offers: we don't accept paid scoring
- DosedWise team's personal experience with the product: anecdote isn't data
Conflicts of interest
DosedWise earns affiliate commissions when readers purchase supplements through links on this site. Commission rates vary by retailer:
- iHerb: typically 5-10%
- Thorne: up to 25%
- Momentous: 15-25%
- Performance Lab: 30%
- TestoGen: up to 40%
- Amazon Associates: 1-4%
These rates do not influence scoring. A SKIP-rated product still gets affiliate links if it's relevant to a comparison. A high-commission product still gets a SKIP if the math says so.
We disclose this conflict openly because pretending it doesn't exist would be the actual conflict.
Limitations and uncertainty
We're transparent about what we don't know:
- Individual variation: clinical doses are population averages. Your body may respond differently.
- Stacking effects: most clinical studies test single ingredients. Real-world stacks have synergies and interferences we can't fully predict.
- Long-term effects: most studies are 8-12 weeks. Long-term safety data is often limited.
- Quality variation within batches: even tested products can vary batch to batch.
- New ingredients: emerging compounds (Fadogia, Shilajit, novel peptides) often have insufficient human data. We mark these as "weak evidence" and don't pretend otherwise.
Compliance
DosedWise content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare provider before starting any supplement, especially if you have a medical condition or take prescription medications.
These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
Methodology version history
- Version 1.0 (April 27, 2026): Initial methodology published.
Major methodology changes will be documented here. Score recalculations following methodology updates will be transparent.
Questions
Email hello@dosedwise.com with questions about scoring, methodology, or specific product audits.
If you find a calculation error in any score on this site, report it. We'll verify and correct within 7 days.