The Supplement Overpayment Report

What the catalog shows

• The median price spread is 6.8x. Within a single supplement category, comparing the cheapest fully-disclosed, decent-evidence product to the single most expensive product, both at the clinically effective dose. Every one of the 169 categories shows at least a 2x spread, 68% show 5x or more, and 33% show 10x or more. The widest spread in the catalog is roughly 117x.
• The budget pick matched or beat the priciest product in 62% of categories (105 of 169) on our overall execution score, which grades dosing, third-party purity verification, value, and label transparency. In the other 38% the priciest product scored higher, so this is a majority pattern, not a rule.
• The proprietary-blend premium is universal in our catalog. 42 of 42 blend products with a computable cost per effective dose cost more than the cheapest fully-disclosed product in their category, across the 22 categories where the comparison exists. A further 21 blend products do not disclose enough dose information to compute the cost at all.
• Paying the most does not reliably buy independent testing. In 39% of categories (66 of 169), the most expensive product carries no third-party testing certification we could verify. Meanwhile the cheapest fully-disclosed, decent-evidence pick is third-party tested in 53% of categories.

The honest reading

Two things are true at once, and we would rather you hear both from us. First, our overall execution score includes a value pillar that by construction rewards a low cost per effective dose, which flatters cheap products in the headline comparison above. So we also ran the same comparison on the three pillars that have nothing to do with price: dosing and form, purity verification, and transparency. On those alone, the cheapest disclosed pick matched or beat the priciest product in 31% of categories. The most expensive product in a category really does tend to be a well-made product.

Second, and this is the finding we consider the report's core: that tendency is far too weak to price-shop by. The median within-category correlation between cost per effective dose and the non-price quality pillars is 0.31 (computed across 168 categories with five or more priceable products). A correlation that size means price explains only a small fraction of the quality differences between products. In our view, the label and the certification database predict what you are getting; the price tag mostly predicts what you will pay. Where a premium product earns its premium, our scores say so, product by product.

Method and data snapshot

Computed from the 1,560 scored products and 176 supplement categories in the Supplement Scored catalog, data last reviewed August 2026. Excluded from the analysis: 4 categories on a per-serving cost model (multi-ingredient blend powders have no finished-product clinical dose), 3 categories with fewer than three priceable products or no fully-disclosed baseline, and any product whose cost per clinically effective dose is not computable from its label. That leaves 1,473 products across 169 analyzed categories.

Per category, we compare the cheapest fully-disclosed (no proprietary blend) product with an evidence grade of C- or better against the single most expensive product in the same category, both on cost per clinically effective dose - the cost of taking the amount the research actually used, not the price per bottle. "Matched or beat" means the budget pick's execution score was greater than or equal to the priciest product's. Execution scores are our methodology-driven opinion under a published, deterministic rubric; they are reconstructible from public label, certification, and price data using our methodology, and the underlying per-product scores are published as machine-readable JSON. Figures on this page are recomputed from the live catalog on every site build, and this is a within-catalog analysis using our own rubric as the quality signal, not an independent clinical audit.

Every analyzed category, by price spread

Costs are per day at the clinically effective dose. "Budget pick held up" means the cheapest fully-disclosed, decent-evidence product scored at or above the category's most expensive product on our execution rubric. No brands are named here; each category links to its scorecard, where every product and score is public.

FAQ

Do expensive supplements work better than cheap ones?

Not reliably, in our data. Across 169 supplement categories, the cheapest fully-disclosed, decent-evidence product matched or beat the most expensive product on our overall execution score in 62% of categories. The most expensive product did hold an edge on the non-price quality pillars in most categories, but the median within-category correlation between price and those pillars was only 0.31, weak enough that price alone is a poor screening tool. In our view the label, dose, and third-party testing status predict far more than the price tag.

Do proprietary blends cost more?

In our catalog, yes, without exception: 42 of the 42 proprietary-blend products with a computable cost per effective dose (across 22 categories) cost more than the cheapest fully-disclosed product in their category. Another 21 blend products hide the dose so completely that a cost per effective dose cannot even be computed.

How do I avoid overpaying for a supplement?

Compare cost per clinically effective dose, not price per bottle. Check that the label discloses every ingredient amount (no proprietary blends), that the dose matches what the research actually used, and whether an independent lab (USP, NSF, ConsumerLab, BSCG, Informed Sport) has verified the product. Every scorecard on this site runs that math for you.

How were these numbers computed?

Every figure is computed from Supplement Scored's live product catalog (1,473 priceable products across 169 supplement categories, data last reviewed August 2026) using cost per clinically effective dose, proprietary-blend status, third-party testing status, and our published 0-100 execution rubric. Figures are recomputed from the catalog every time the site builds, so this page stays in step with the scorecards. The full methodology is public, and every underlying score is reconstructible from label, certification, and price data.