Side-by-side research comparison of MOTS-c and SS-31 across our PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and EuropePMC corpus. No direct head-to-head trials in our corpus — this comparison synthesizes indirect evidence across 32 MOTS-c studies and 39 SS-31 studies.
| MOTS-c | SS-31 | |
|---|---|---|
| Drug class | mitochondrial peptide | mitochondrial peptide |
| Studies in corpus | 32 | 39 |
| Highest evidence tier | cohort | case series |
| Evidence tier mix | review · 3 other · 9 cohort · 1 preclinical animal · 6 | other · 9 review · 5 preclinical animal · 6 in vitro · 4 case series · 1 |
| Studies with explicit sample size | 0 | 0 |
| Head-to-head studies in corpus | 0 — indirect comparison only | |
Beyond the literature: here's what third-party Certificate-of-Analysis records (Janoshik, BCC, Auxlabs) say about real MOTS-c and SS-31 batches we've tested. Aggregate, public data — cross-reference against the studies below.
We tested 4424 MOTS-c batches across 1338 manufacturers, 99.47% avg purity.
We tested 2019 SS-31 batches across 725 manufacturers, 99.78% avg purity.
We hold deeper lab coverage on MOTS-c (4424 batches tested). SS-31 edges ahead on average measured purity (99.47% vs 99.78%) — a narrow gap; weigh it against failed-batch and underdose counts above.
Looking for vendor-level purity, endotoxin, and HPLC data on MOTS-c or SS-31? TitrateLab tracks Certificate-of-Analysis records from the major peptide labs (Janoshik, BCC, Auxlabs) alongside the research above. Cross-reference vendor batches against the studies on this page.