Confidence: 63%
Decision summary
Not a strong option overall. The product is materially held back by weaker formulation coherence.
Best for
Buyers comparing price and availability and okay with a middle-of-the-pack option.
Consider another option if
You want one of the best-absorbed options in this category.
Score breakdown
Tap a module to see what it measures. A 0 can reflect missing disclosure, not just a negative result.
Dosage quality
7.0/10Generally solid dosing
Checks whether labeled ingredient amounts fall within clinically studied ranges (not just regulatory minimums). Low/0 can reflect under-dosing or missing amounts (e.g., proprietary blends).
Explore next
Dose 7/10 · Bioavailability 1.4/10 · Coherence 0/10
Ingredient form quality suggests suboptimal ingredient forms.
This is a multi-ingredient product. The score reflects formulation quality, not efficacy for a specific health goal.
Calcium: dose within clinically studied range (evidence A). The main limitation is that critical safety flag limits final score.
Strengths
Weaknesses
Final verdict
Not a strong option overall. The product is materially held back by weaker formulation coherence.
A closer look at the main ingredients, how they influence the score, and the supporting evidence when available. Tap any ingredient to expand.
ℹ Dose is within established clinical ranges, but lacks direct studies
Adequate, but not a key strength: Dose is directionally useful, but not a standout strength.
Clinical dosing guidance
Based on established dosing ranges used in clinical practice.
ℹ Clinically effective dose, but evidence is limited
Supports the formula, but not a major driver: Dose is directionally useful, but not a standout strength.
Scientific evidence
Hodges et al. review on pantothenic acid physiology and human deficiency implications
Advances in Nutrition • 2020
✔ Clinically effective dose with strong supporting evidence
Supports the formula, but not a major driver: Dose is directionally useful, but not a standout strength. The declared form supports strong absorption.
Scientific evidence
Martineau et al. meta-analysis vitamin D supplementation and respiratory infections
BMJ • 2017
PMID: 26864360.0
Bischoff-Ferrari et al. meta-analysis vitamin D fracture prevention
BMJ • 2009
PMID: 20198382.0
✔ Clinically effective dose with strong supporting evidence
Adequate, but not a key strength: Dose is directionally useful, but not a standout strength. The declared form is acceptable, but not among the best-absorbed options.
Scientific evidence
Hemila & Chalker Cochrane review vitamin C and common cold duration
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews • 2013
PMID: 23440782.0
Padayatty et al. RCT on vitamin C antioxidant capacity in healthy adults
Journal of the American College of Nutrition • 2001
PMID: 11684527.0
✔ Clinically effective dose with moderate supporting evidence
Strong contributor: Dose is strong and within effective ranges. The declared form is acceptable, but not among the best-absorbed options.
Scientific evidence
Clarke et al. meta-analysis B vitamins and cognitive decline
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition • 2007
PMID: 22243457.0
Shipton & Thachil review of vitamin B12 deficiency and fatigue
Postgraduate Medical Journal • 2015
PMID: 20648714.0
✔ Clinically effective dose with strong supporting evidence
Supports the formula, but not a major driver: Dose is directionally useful, but not a standout strength. The declared form is acceptable, but not among the best-absorbed options.
Scientific evidence
Wald et al. meta-analysis of folic acid and cardiovascular risk
BMJ • 2002
PMID: 15364185.0
Daly et al. RCT on folate supplementation and homocysteine reduction
New England Journal of Medicine • 1996
PMID: 9521168.0
Important label or formulation details that may affect how this product should be interpreted.
Safety-related concerns may affect suitability
This product may deserve extra caution depending on context.
Formula design looks less coherent than stronger alternatives
The formulation appears less focused than better-built options.
Vitamin A dose looks below clinically effective levels
Declared amount falls below ranges used in human trials.
Read our methodology overview to understand how SuppScoreLab combines multiple scientific dimensions into one practical score.
View methodology →This evaluation is based on the product label and declared Supplement Facts available at review time. It does not verify laboratory-tested composition, purity, or batch-level quality. This content is educational and not medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare professional for personal health decisions. Affiliate disclosure: SuppScoreLab may earn a commission from qualifying Amazon links.
See the best Vitamin D3 supplements ranked with the same methodology, or keep exploring the database.
