About & Methodology

EquineAuditLab is an independent supplement audit site. We evaluate horse supplements using a fixed, transparent scoring rubric — the same rubric for every product, every time. No subjective overrides. No sponsored adjustments. If the data meets the criterion, the points are awarded automatically.

This page explains our complete scoring system. Every formula, every threshold, every rule is published here so you can verify any score we assign.

Why This Site Exists

The equine supplement market has no equivalent of Consumer Reports. Most review sites publish subjective opinions, undisclosed sponsored content, or AI-generated summaries with no data verification. Horse owners making $50–$150/month purchasing decisions deserve better than “this product has great reviews on Amazon.”

We built EquineAuditLab to fill that gap: a single source where every product is scored across six measurable dimensions, with every number cited and every claim verifiable. Our scoring system is designed around five principles:

• Each dimension measures exactly one thing. Label transparency is separate from ingredient form, which is separate from dosing. No dimension bleeds into another.
• No ingredient is penalized in more than one dimension. Adding an ingredient to a formula never lowers a score.
• No subjective adjustment rules. If the data meets the criterion, the points are awarded. If the formula output feels wrong to us, we flag it publicly but use the formula score.
• Formulas are category-aware. Joint supplements, hoof supplements, and digestive supplements each have defined scored-ingredient lists and therapeutic thresholds specific to that category.
• Any change to this scoring system requires re-scoring every published product. We do not grandfather old scores under old rules.

The Six-Dimension Scoring System

Every supplement is scored out of 100 points, displayed as a score out of 10 (e.g., 68/100 = 6.8). The 100 points are distributed across six dimensions:

The two dimensions most directly tied to what your horse actually absorbs — Ingredient Form and Dosing Adequacy — carry the most weight at 20 points each. The remaining four dimensions are weighted equally at 15 points each.

Dimension 1: Label Transparency (15 points)

Measures: How much information does the product label disclose about its contents?
Does NOT measure: Whether the ingredients are good, well-dosed, or effective — only whether the label tells you what is in the product.

This dimension is scored as the sum of four sub-scores:

A. Active Ingredient Quantification (0–6 points)

B. Source/Origin Disclosure (0–3 points)

Only ingredients where raw material origin is meaningful are scored here. Source-relevant ingredients include glucosamine, chondroitin, collagen, and hyaluronic acid. Source is NOT applicable for MSM, ascorbic acid/vitamin C, biotin, orthosilicic acid, ASU (source defined by name), boswellia (source defined by name), and other synthetic or plant-named compounds.

C. Serving & Inactive Disclosure (0–4 points)

Each of these four items is worth 1 point, awarded independently:

• +1 = Exact grams per scoop stated
• +1 = Number of servings per container stated
• +1 = Full inactive ingredient list with specific names
• +1 = Dosing instructions by horse weight provided

D. Specification Standards (0–2 points)

Dimension 2: Ingredient Form (20 points)

Measures: Is each ingredient in its optimal chemical form for absorption?
Does NOT measure: How many ingredients are present, or how much of each — only whether the manufacturer chose the best available form.

The chemical form of a mineral or compound determines how much the horse actually absorbs. Chelated minerals absorb 2–5× more efficiently than oxide forms. A perfectly dosed product in the wrong form delivers a fraction of its stated benefit.

How We Calculate This Score

1. For each active ingredient present in the product, we look up its form score (0–4 scale) from our Form Lookup Table below.
2. We calculate the average of all form scores.
3. We multiply the average by 5 to get the dimension score (0–20), rounded to the nearest integer.

This method ensures that a product with 3 ingredients in perfect form scores equally to a product with 7 ingredients in perfect form. The number of ingredients does not inflate or deflate this dimension.

Form Lookup Table

Each ingredient is scored on a 0–4 scale. A score of 4 represents the optimal form; lower scores indicate less bioavailable forms. If an ingredient is not listed in this table, it receives a default form score of 3 (“acceptable form”) unless there is clear evidence that the form used is suboptimal.

Glucosamine

Chondroitin Sulfate

MSM

Hyaluronic Acid

ASU (Avocado/Soybean Unsaponifiables)

Boswellia

Collagen

Silica

Vitamin C

Biotin

Zinc

Copper

Manganese

Dimension 3: Dosing Adequacy (20 points)

Measures: Does each dose reach the therapeutic threshold for the stated health benefit?
Does NOT measure: How many ingredients are present — that is Formula Design (Dimension 4).

Each supplement category has a fixed list of four scored ingredients. Only these ingredients are scored in this dimension. Additional ingredients beyond this list contribute to Formula Design instead.

Scored Ingredients by Category

Joint Health

Hoof Health

Digestive Health scored ingredients will be defined when that category launches.

How We Calculate This Score

The primary active ingredient is scored on a 0–8 scale. Each of the three secondary actives is scored on a 0–4 scale. The dimension score is the sum of all four: maximum 8 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 20.

Primary active (0–8 points):

Each secondary active (0–4 points):

Adding ingredients beyond the scored four has zero effect on this dimension — positive or negative. Those additional ingredients are evaluated in Formula Design.

Dimension 4: Formula Design (15 points)

Measures: Is the formula well-constructed? Does it go beyond the basics? Are the ingredients working together?
Does NOT measure: Doses (that is Dimension 3), chemical forms (Dimension 2), or cost (Dimension 6).

This dimension is scored as the sum of three sub-scores:

A. Core Completeness (0–6 points)

Each category defines four core ingredients. For Joint Health, the core four are: glucosamine, chondroitin, MSM, and hyaluronic acid. For Hoof Health: biotin, zinc, copper, and methionine.

B. Supporting Ingredient Breadth (0–5 points)

+1 point for each active ingredient beyond the core four that is present at a quantified dose, up to a maximum of 5. Countable ingredients include ASU, boswellia, collagen, silica, vitamin C, resveratrol, devil’s claw, turmeric, omega-3, yucca, manganese, phenylalanine, or any other active with a stated mg amount.

Important: An ingredient already counted in Dimension 3 as a scored ingredient (e.g., ASU filling the “HA or ASU” slot) is not double-counted here. It counts in Dimension 3 only for breadth purposes.

C. Formula Differentiation (0–4 points)

We define a “baseline” ingredient list for each category — the ingredients you would expect to find in a standard formula. For Joint Health, the baseline is: glucosamine, chondroitin, MSM, HA, vitamin C, collagen, and silica. Any active ingredient not on the baseline list is considered “non-baseline.”

Non-baseline examples include ASU, boswellia, resveratrol, devil’s claw, turmeric, omega-3, yucca, and cetylated fatty acids. “Meaningful dose” means ≥25% of the therapeutic threshold (if one exists) or any quantified amount (if no threshold is defined).

Note on cross-dimension counting: An ingredient scored in Dimension 3’s “HA or ASU” slot may still count toward Dimension 4C (differentiation) because Dimension 3 measures whether the dose is adequate while Dimension 4C measures whether the ingredient is an innovative addition. These are different properties. However, it does not count toward Dimension 4B (breadth) to prevent the same ingredient inflating two quantity-based sub-scores.

Dimension 5: Quality Assurance (15 points)

Measures: Can the label claims be independently verified?
Does NOT measure: The actual quality of the product in the container — only whether third-party documentation exists to confirm it.

This dimension is scored as the sum of four sub-scores:

A. Independent Certification (0–7 points)

B. Certificate of Analysis (0–3 points)

C. Manufacturing Standards (0–3 points)

D. Contamination Testing (0–2 points)

A note on low Quality Assurance scores: A low score on this dimension reflects publicly available documentation, not a judgment of actual product quality. Many reputable brands with excellent products score low here simply because they have not published COAs, obtained third-party certification, or described their QC program publicly. Any brand can improve their Quality Assurance score by making this information available. We welcome brands to contact us at contact@equineauditlab.com with updated documentation.

Dimension 6: Value (15 points)

Measures: Cost efficiency — what does it cost per effective day and per gram of primary active?
Does NOT measure: Ingredient breadth or formula complexity — that is Formula Design (Dimension 4).

This dimension is scored as the sum of three sub-scores. All prices are based on the largest commonly available container at the maintenance dose (not loading dose).

A. Cost Per Effective Day / CPED (0–8 points)

B. Cost Per Gram of Primary Active / CPG (0–5 points)

CPG is calculated as: CPED ÷ (primary active mg per serving ÷ 1,000). The primary active is glucosamine for joint supplements, biotin for hoof supplements, etc.

C. Size Options (0–2 points)

Therapeutic Thresholds Reference

All thresholds are for a 500 kg horse unless noted. These thresholds are used in Dimension 3 (Dosing Adequacy) to determine whether a product delivers a clinically meaningful dose. The “Confidence” column reflects the quality of equine-specific evidence behind each threshold.

Confidence levels:

• High = Multiple equine studies or NRC reference.
• Medium = Limited equine data or extrapolated from dose-response studies.
• Low = Estimated from other species or general nutrition literature. These thresholds may be revised as equine-specific research becomes available.

Our Operational Rules

These rules govern how we apply the scoring system. They exist to protect consistency and fairness across every audit we publish.

1. All scores are derived from the formulas above. No subjective overrides. If the formula output feels wrong to us, we flag the concern in the article but publish the formula score. We only update the scoring system itself if a structural flaw is found — and any change triggers a full re-score of every published product.
2. Any change to this scoring system requires re-scoring all published products. We do not grandfather old scores under old rules. When we update a formula, threshold, or dimension weight, every existing audit is recalculated and republished with a note explaining what changed.
3. Prices must be verified at time of writing. We note the source URL and access date. If a price changes by more than 15% after publication, we re-score the Value dimension.
4. Therapeutic thresholds may be updated when new equine research is published. Any threshold change triggers re-scoring all products that use that threshold.
5. Low Quality Assurance scores include context. When a reputable brand scores low on Dimension 5, we include a paragraph explaining that the score reflects publicly available documentation, not a judgment of actual product quality, and that the brand can improve their score by publishing relevant documentation.
6. Every product gets the same audit — sponsors included. If we ever enter a direct affiliate or sponsorship relationship with a brand, their products still go through the identical scoring process. The relationship is disclosed per FTC guidelines, but the scores are not adjusted.
7. New categories are defined before scoring begins. For any new supplement category (hoof, digestive, etc.), we define the scored ingredient list and core ingredient list before scoring the first product in that category.

Calibration

Our scoring system was calibrated using two widely available joint supplements as anchor products: SmartFlex Ultra Pellets (SmartPak) and Cosequin ASU Pellets (Nutramax). These products were chosen because they represent different formula philosophies — SmartFlex prioritizes high doses of standard ingredients while Cosequin ASU prioritizes patented specifications and innovative actives like ASU and boswellia.

Calibration ensures that the formulas produce scores that reflect real, measurable differences between products. If two products differ meaningfully in ingredient quality, dosing, or transparency, the scores should differ by a proportional amount. If they do not, the formula is adjusted and all products are re-scored.

Badge System

Not every product earns a badge. Badges are formula-driven — no subjective overrides, no exceptions. Each product receives at most one badge, or none. The three badges are mutually exclusive.

Badges are evaluated in a fixed priority order: Recommended first, then Use with Caution, then Budget Pick. This means safety concerns (underdosing) are flagged before savings are highlighted. A product that qualifies for both Budget Pick and Use with Caution will receive the caution badge — reader safety takes priority over reader savings.

Data Sources

Every number in an EquineAuditLab audit report is cited. Our primary data sources are:

• Product labels and spec sheets: Verified against current manufacturer product pages at the time of audit. Access date noted in every article’s source archive.
• NRC Nutrient Requirements of Horses, 6th Edition (2007): The foundational reference for clinical dosing benchmarks for a 500 kg horse.
• PubMed-indexed research: Peer-reviewed studies on equine-specific bioavailability and supplement efficacy. Specific papers are cited in individual audit reports.
• Certifier websites: NSF International, Informed Sport, and other certification bodies — checked directly to verify current certification status.
• Retail pricing: Verified at the time of audit from the manufacturer’s website or major retailers. Source URL and access date recorded.

For every audit report, we produce a source archive PDF documenting the complete data trail: every URL accessed, every data point extracted, every scoring calculation performed. These archives are maintained internally and are available for review upon request.

What We Do Not Do

• We do not accept payment to alter scores.
• We do not change scores retroactively without publishing the reason and updating the article.
• We do not publish product data that is more than 90 days old without reverifying against the current spec sheet.
• We do not publish audit reports without running our review checklist.
• We do not accept sponsored content that bypasses the scoring rubric.

If you are a brand and believe we have made an error in our scoring, please contact us at contact@equineauditlab.com with the specific data you believe is incorrect. If we verify the error, we will re-score the product, update the article, and publish a correction note.

Scoring system version: v2.0 · Last calibrated: July 2025 · Calibration anchors: SmartFlex Ultra, Cosequin ASU