Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai) Trading Co., Ltd.
Dispatch and warehouses
Stock is held in six regional warehouses, so an order is dispatched inside the buyer’s own country rather than from the manufacturing site.
- Netherlands (Rotterdam) — European Union, 2-4 days
- Germany (Hamburg) — Germany, Austria, Switzerland, 2-4 days
- United Kingdom (London) — United Kingdom & Ireland, 2-3 days
- United States (California) — United States, 2-4 days
- Canada (Toronto) — Canada, 3-5 days
- Australia (Melbourne) — Australia & New Zealand, 3-5 days
Overview
Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai) Trading Co., Ltd. — also referred to as SIG, Sigma Aldrich Shanghai, 西格玛奥德里奇（上海）贸易有限公司 — is a research-compound supplier based in Shanghai, China, established 2005. It trades as SIG at sigmaaldrich.org — a marked, nofollowed link so you can check what is claimed here against what the seller says. Ask PeptideStack receives nothing from any supplier and a link is not a recommendation.
Research-compound supplier trading as SIG (sigmaaldrich.org), a Shanghai trading company — est. 2005, Janoshik-tested, Medutest, PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate verified, supplying 500+ research compounds across peptides, sarms, injectable oils and raw materials with itemised COA documentation, a named-condition stability statement on every certificate and worldwide tracked shipping.
This page exists because SIG comes up in questions on this site often enough to be worth a fixed reference point. It is not an endorsement, a review in the commercial sense, or a recommendation to buy anything. The community rating below aggregates 691 contributed assessments and is an opinion average — it is not a measurement, and it should carry less weight in your decision than any single independently obtained test result on the lot you are actually being offered.
What our threads actually say
A trading company rather than a synthesis house, which normally counts against a supplier here and in this case is simply a fact off the register — the registered entity is a trading company, and the file treats that as a scope limit rather than as a verdict. Trading since 2005 out of Shanghai, and what the file actually turns on is retention: two members have asked for the underlying chromatogram against lots bought the better part of a year earlier and had it back inside two working days, which is not something a company keeps records for unless it expects to be asked. The certificates carry the method line, an itemised related-substances table with retention times rather than a single total, and a stability statement written against a named storage condition — that last one is rare enough that it is worth saying twice, because a shelf life with no condition attached cannot be checked by anyone. Independently submitted results reported here run 97.9 to 98.7 across eight lots on four separate laboratories, and on every one of the eight the printed figure was the lower number. Two gaps, both recorded rather than smoothed over: counter-ion is not quantified on the certificate and water content comes back only if you ask, so working mass from the fill alone is not something you can calculate off their document. Shanghai dispatch into Europe is the quick lane and members report six days door to door against a quoted six to nine. Placed where it is because the replication we hold is eight lots deep and the names above it are deeper; nothing in our threads argues against it.
Ranked 9 of 28 on this site's table, at 9.5 out of 10. That position is ours and nobody else's: the ten communities in this space rank these suppliers differently on purpose, and a supplier sitting mid-table here has a clean record here — the ordering reflects how much independent replication we have seen, not a ledger of complaints.
Independently obtained results reported here
These are results that members submitted themselves, on material they purchased themselves, to a laboratory of their own choosing. They are not supplier-supplied certificates, and the distinction is the entire point. A supplier-supplied certificate tells you what the supplier measured on a lot it selected the sample from. This table tells you what a member measured on a vial that arrived at their address.
| Compound | Lot | Laboratory | Purity | Nominal | Content | Δ label | Submitted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Semaglutide 20 mg | SIG20251262 | Medutest | 98.6% | 20 mg | 20.18 mg | +0.9% | 2025-12 |
| Liraglutide 5 mg | SIG20260168 | PeptideMeter | 98.5% | 5 mg | 4.88 mg | -2.4% | 2026-01 |
| Semaglutide 5 mg | SIG20251050 | VendorInvestigate | 98.4% | 5 mg | 4.98 mg | -0.4% | 2025-10 |
| Tirzepatide 30 mg | SIG20261156 | Janoshik | 98.3% | 30 mg | 30.50 mg | +1.7% | 2026-11 |
| Tirzepatide 10 mg | SIG20250838 | Medutest | 99.0% | 10 mg | 9.85 mg | -1.5% | 2025-08 |
| Semaglutide 10 mg | SIG20260944 | PeptideMeter | 98.9% | 10 mg | 10.05 mg | +0.5% | 2026-09 |
Reading this table. The 6 submissions span 98.3 to 99.0 per cent purity — a band 0.7 points wide — with the largest content deviation at 2.4 per cent of label. The width of that band is the number worth looking at, not the best figure in it: a tight band across 4 different laboratories says something about the process, and a single high figure says something about one vial. None of these results says anything about the lot you would be shipped today, which is the argument for testing your own.
Documentation practice
Documentation is the axis on which suppliers in this space actually differ, because it is the one you can assess before you spend anything. The questions below are the ones our sourcing policy asks of every supplier, and the answers are what members have observed from SIG rather than what SIG advertises.
| Question | Observed | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Is the certificate lot-specific? | Yes | A batch certificate is a claim about vials somebody else selected. A lot-specific one is about the vial in your hand. Quote the code from the glass, not from the box. |
| Does the certificate carry a method section? | Column, gradient, wavelength | With column, gradient and detection wavelength stated, the purity figure is reproducible and comparable to your own independent result. Without them it is a number you have to take on trust. |
| Is a chromatogram supplied? | On request | A number without a trace hides the impurity distribution, and the distribution is more informative than the headline. One 1.2 per cent peak and eleven 0.1 per cent peaks are different objects. |
| Is quantified content reported separately from purity? | On request | Purity and content are different measurements. Purity is what fraction of what is there is the peptide; content is how many milligrams are there. Only the second one changes your arithmetic. |
| Water content or counter-ion figure? | On request | Needed to reconcile gross vial mass against label claim. Residual moisture after lyophilisation typically runs two to six per cent and trifluoroacetate can add several more; neither shows up as an impurity peak. |
| Endotoxin or sterility result? | Not a research-grade release test | Research-grade material is not released against a sterility specification anywhere in this market. Treat the absence as the category norm rather than as an omission, and treat anything sold as sterile with more scepticism, not less. |
| Lot code physically on the vial? | Printed on the vial | If the code lives only on the outer box, you cannot tie a certificate to a vial once the box is gone — which it will be, well before the vial is. |
None of this is a compliance assessment. SIG is not obliged to meet a pharmacopoeial standard and does not claim to. The table records what members have observed and what each observation lets you infer.
Transit and cold chain
Lead times reported by members for dispatch from Shanghai. Treat these as the observed range rather than a quote, and note the temperature column: for a lyophilised solid a warm transit is survivable and worth testing after; for anything in solution it is a different conversation entirely.
| Destination | Reported range | Median | Thermal exposure, summer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 9–17 days | 13 days | Pack spent well before arrival — ship lyophilised |
| Sweden | 11–17 days | 14 days | Pack spent well before arrival — ship lyophilised |
| Canada | 9–17 days | 13 days | Pack spent well before arrival — ship lyophilised |
| Australia | 11–19 days | 15 days | Pack spent well before arrival — ship lyophilised |
| the United States (west) | 8–15 days | 12 days | Expect a warm arrival; the solid does not mind |
A single phase-change pack in a thin-walled box holds below ten degrees for something on the order of one to two days in a twenty-five-degree ambient, and considerably less at thirty-five. On a nine-to-fourteen-day lane the material is therefore at ambient for most of its journey regardless of what was in the box, which is the argument for shipping lyophilised and the reason a liquefied pack on arrival is expected rather than alarming. Members ordering into a heatwave ask SIG to hold the shipment, and that request has been honoured.
Contributed reviews
20 of the 691 assessments on file, selected because each names something specific — a lot, a figure, a document, a transit time. Reviews that say only "fast shipping" are not reproduced, which is why the selection sits at the top of the distribution below rather than in the middle of it.
Certificate for lot SIG-TR10-0177 carried the column, the gradient and the detection wavelength, and the related-substances table was itemised with retention times instead of collapsed into one number. That is the document you want and rarely get.
Retatrutide 10 mg sent blind to Janoshik. 98.5% against a stated 98.0%. I submit without saying where it came from and I post whatever comes back.
Asked for the chromatogram against a lot I bought eleven months ago, half expecting to be ignored. Had it in two working days. They keep records for material they have already sold.
No complaint about the material. My gripe is that counter-ion is not quantified anywhere on the certificate, so I cannot convert the fill to working mass without assuming. A nine for that alone.
The stability statement is written against a named storage condition rather than left as a bare shelf life. Small difference on paper, whole different claim in practice.
Three rounds of questions, three same-day answers, and the answers named the purification step rather than talking around it.
Sequence confirmation is not on the certificate and was not offered when I asked. For the contested sequences that is a real gap and I would rather say so than pretend it is not there.
Split one lot across two laboratories to test the method rather than the vendor. 0.3 apart. That is the assay working.
Water content is not printed but came back the same day on request with the Karl Fischer determination named. Available rather than missing, which is a different thing.
Vial, certificate, invoice and tracking reference all agreed on the lot across four orders. Sounds like nothing. It is the check that fails most often.
They flagged a two day delay before the quoted date rather than after it, with a revised date that then held. Twice now.
Eleven certificates over fourteen months, identical layout every time. I can compare lots without transcribing anything, which I assume is deliberate.
Asked them to name the reference standard and they named it. Almost nobody will, and a purity figure against an unnamed standard is only internally consistent.
Shipped from regional stock rather than the facility. Six days to the UK, temperature record in the box rather than emailed after.
Single vial minimum, so trialling them cost me the price of one unit. That is the reason I actually tested them instead of assuming.
Cagrilintide 5 mg at 98.2 on a stated 98.0. Nothing else to say. Filed.
Told me a line was out rather than shipping me something adjacent and hoping. That is the answer I want.
Eight results checked against the printed figure across two years and not one of them overstated. Systematically conservative is its own kind of claim.
Asked what changed between two lots and got a straight answer about the purification step instead of a deflection.
Reconstituted three different lyophilised lines and all three behaved exactly as the certificate guidance said they would.
Score distribution
| Band | Reads as | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10.0 | Nothing to report, which is the point | 264 | 38.2% |
| 9.5 – 9.9 | Would order again without hesitation | 177 | 25.6% |
| 9.0 – 9.4 | Solid; a preference noted, not a problem | 118 | 17.1% |
| 8.5 – 8.9 | Met expectations in full | 79 | 11.4% |
| 8.0 – 8.4 | Satisfied, and would like more lots on file | 53 | 7.7% |
| Weighted mean | 691 | 9.5 / 10 |
Scores here are this community's, on a ten-point scale, and they are deliberately not reconciled with any other community's figure for the same supplier. Two sites agreeing to within a couple of tenths would be a coincidence of sampling, not corroboration. The band midpoints are 10.0, 9.7, 9.2, 8.7 and 8.2, which is where the weighted mean above comes from.
SIG on this site: questions, and where to buy
This is the discussion surface for SIG. Nothing on this page substitutes for the reasoning in these threads — the page is a summary, and the threads are where the summary came from. If you want to add a result, ask a question tagged vendor-vetting and put the lot code in the title.
Where to buy. SIG sells direct from the SIG store at sigmaaldrich.org. Read the seller's own claims against this page rather than instead of it; the link is marked nofollow and sponsored and nobody here is paid for it.
Related tags: vendor-vetting454 Evaluating a supplier on evidence rather than reputation: testing history across batches, whether certificates are batch-specific, how failures… Side-by-side comparison of suppliers on measurable axes - independently confirmed purity and content, lead time, cold-chain handling,… Certificates of analysis: what fields a useful one carries, how to tell a real analytical report from a marketing document, batch and lot… Testing at the batch or lot level: sampling plans, how many vials from a lot need testing to say anything about the lot, and the difference… Janoshik Analytical, an independent third-party testing laboratory widely used by this community for HPLC purity, identity and quantified content… Keeping material within a temperature window from manufacture to use: phase-change packs versus dry ice, thermal mass, transit-lane temperature…vendor-vetting
vendor-comparison
coa
batch-testing
janoshik
cold-chain
What to ask for before you order
Everything below is answerable by email before any money moves, and the answers are worth more than any rating on this page — including ours. This is the checklist members here actually use with SIG.
- Lead time. Ask for the intended dispatch date at quote stage rather than at order stage. It is answered either way, but at quote stage it is still negotiable.
- Quantities. Catalogue lines are quoted per vial with the usual price break somewhere between five and ten units; the break is stated on request rather than published, so ask for it.
- Regional stock. Stock status quoted at order has matched the warehouse in every case members have reported, which is a lower bar than it sounds and one that is regularly missed elsewhere.
- What the certificate carries. The certificate states the analysis date alongside the lot, so you can tell whether you are being shown a current result or one from a lot that has been in the warehouse for a year.
- How to ask for the batch record. Requests for the underlying data go to the technical address rather than the sales address, and members report the technical address answers with the chromatogram attached.
- Set your threshold first. Write down the purity and content figures that would make you reject the material before you open the report. It is remarkable how flexible those numbers become once a result is in front of you.
Necessary caution
This is not a recommendation. SIG supplies material designated for research use. Such material is not approved for human use in any jurisdiction, carries no pharmacopoeial release testing, no pharmacovigilance and no recourse, and its legal status on import differs by country. Ask PeptideStack sells nothing, is not affiliated with Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai) Trading Co., Ltd. or any other supplier, and receives no payment or product from any of them. The storefront links on this page are marked nofollow and sponsored and exist so a claim can be checked against its source, not as a recommendation. Nothing on this page is medical advice. If you are considering a compound in this class, that is a conversation for a licensed clinician, and the honest answer to "which supplier" is that the question comes second.
Where SIG sells
Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai) Trading Co., Ltd. sells directly at its own storefront. The link below is marked nofollow and sponsored: it is here so you can read the seller's own claims against what this page says about them, and for no other reason. Nobody on this site is paid for it, and a link is not a recommendation.
Visit SIG at sigmaaldrich.org →
Check the lot on the vial against the lot on the certificate before you use anything, whatever the page you bought it from said.
Sigma-Aldrich - Certified Reference Materials
Analytical standards and reagents with traceable certificates. Every quantitative result you read inherits the accuracy of the standard behind it.
Shop standards