A comparison site for a category that badly needs one

Two collagen powders sit next to each other. One is £18, one is £62. One gives you 30 servings, the other 20. One puts 10g of collagen in a serving and prints the number; the other says “collagen complex” and does not. Working out which is better value takes a calculator and about four minutes, and almost nobody does it — which is exactly what the pricing depends on.

Candour exists to do that arithmetic in public. We normalise everything to cost per serving, print the ingredient amounts side by side, show which retailer is currently cheapest and how far the price has moved, and say plainly when the amount is not disclosed at all.

What we are not

We are not a shop. We do not have an own-brand range waiting at the bottom of the results, because we do not have one at all. We are not a medical service — nothing here is a diagnosis, a suitability assessment or a recommendation to take anything. And we are not a review site pretending its affiliate links do not exist.

The line we hold

Supplements sit in an awkward place. Some of them are well studied and useful for specific people in specific circumstances. Many are sold with language carefully engineered to imply far more than the evidence supports. We try to describe what is on the label and what it costs, use careful wording about what things are commonly used for, and send you to a pharmacist or dietitian the moment a question becomes about you rather than about a product.

That last part matters. A comparison site can tell you which of two products has more magnesium per serving. It cannot tell you whether you should be taking magnesium. Those are different questions and we try never to blur them.