Ours reads 35 g/100g fulvic acid by titration, and we print the method beside the number. A shilajit fulvic acid percentage without its method is half a fact. So a label promising 60 or 80 per cent should make you suspicious rather than impressed, and genuine raw resin usually lands between 15 and 35 per cent, depending on which assay was run.
No label explains this bit. Fulvic acid is a fraction rather than a single compound, a family of organic acids that a lab pulls out by playing with acid and alkali solubility, then weighs or titrates. What counts as fulvic acid depends on how you went looking for it. Different methods don’t draw that boundary in the same place.
Awkward, for an industry that decided to compete on this one number. Fulvic acid is the closest thing shilajit has to a purity score, so every seller wants a bigger one than the jar sitting next to theirs on the shelf. And nobody competes on the method.
Purified raw resin, the sticky stuff you scrape out with the back of a teaspoon, generally measures from the mid teens to the mid thirties on standard assays. Ours came back at 35 g/100g by titration, analysed by Qarshi Research International between 28 November and 8 December 2025, at a lab accredited to ISO/IEC 17025 and an ILAC member. It’s all on our lab results page.
So when a jar of resin claims 70 or 80 per cent, one of three things is going on.
That extract distinction runs through the research too. Most of the shilajit trials people quote at you used a standardised extract, PrimaVie, rather than raw resin. The 2016 Andrologia trial ran on 75 healthy men aged 45 to 55 taking 500 mg a day for 90 days (PubMed). The 2019 JISSN trial ran on 63 active men for eight weeks and reported strength retained under fatigue (PubMed). Small samples, some of the work manufacturer-funded, a thin evidence base overall. Then a 2026 open-label pilot in Cureus put 25 healthy young men on resin for 28 days and reported strength and fatigue improvements with testosterone unchanged. Different material, different result. A big fulvic percentage printed on a resin jar doesn’t inherit anybody’s trial data. Ours doesn’t either.
Titration and ISO 19822 won’t give you the same fulvic acid percentage on identical material. ISO 19822 was written for fertilisers and soil conditioners, largely because humic and fulvic numbers in that trade had drifted into being whatever the seller fancied, and it counts less of the material than older methods did. Some colour-based methods read higher again, depending on the standard used to calibrate them. Send one jar to two accredited labs running different methods and you’ll get two numbers back, both of them correct.
Nothing fraudulent about that. It’s chemistry, and it’s the reason our figure has the word titration printed next to it. But it does mean two labels aren’t comparable unless both name a method, and hardly any of them do. Comparing an unnamed 80 per cent against our named 35 per cent is like comparing a distance in kilometres against a distance in units the other person won’t tell you.
Our position, and you’re free to disagree: a big number with no method is worth less than a small number with one. A brand publishing 18 per cent by ISO 19822, with the lab named, has told you far more than a brand shouting 80 with nothing behind it.
Independent testing in the United States measured fulvic acid per serving across a group of shilajit products and found everything from under 7 mg to more than 2 200 mg. Same category, same promises on the front of the box. A spread of more than three hundred times in what the customer actually swallowed. Percentages matter even less on capsules and gummies, where dose per capsule and whatever else sits in the blend do most of the work. That’s one reason we only sell resin, and we’ve set out the format comparison separately.
Heavy metals sit in the same blind spot. A 2025 analysis in BMC Chemistry of six commercial shilajit products found thallium in five of them (PubMed). A fulvic acid percentage tells you nothing about what else is in the jar, which is why we’d read the heavy metals panel first, every time. Ours covers lead, arsenic, mercury and cadmium by AOAC 999.10/11. Not thallium. A panel is only worth what it lists, ours included.
| What the label says | What it usually means | What to ask |
|---|---|---|
| “80% fulvic acid”, no method named | An extract, an unnamed assay, or a copied spec sheet | Which method, and is this resin or extract? |
| “Rich in fulvic and humic acids”, no number | Nothing was measured | Is there a certificate at all? |
| “35 g/100g, titration, batch 250915” | Someone measured a specific jar | Does that batch match the batch on my jar? |
That last question is the one people skip. It’s also the one that decides everything while you’re standing in front of a shelf, because a 2023 test result stapled to a jar bought in 2026 is a photograph of a different product. We go through the rest of the checks in our guide on how to spot fake shilajit, and the short version is that the method behind a number does more work than the number itself.
Not on its own. Nobody has compared two fulvic acid percentages head to head in people, so no one can tell you 40 per cent outperforms 25 per cent. What a number does tell you, when the method sits beside it, is that a real lab looked at a real jar.
Roughly 15 to 35 per cent, and the exact figure depends on the assay. Anything well above that on a resin label usually describes a standardised extract, or a method the seller hasn’t named.
It’s the same arithmetic, 35 grams in every 100 grams, written the way the lab weighed it. Analysts like the unit because it says what was measured against what, instead of leaving you to guess.
No. Nothing you can do on a kitchen counter measures it, whatever the lighter-and-gold-flake videos suggest. You can watch resin dissolve in warm water, and ours reads 97.2 g/100g solubility by gravimetric method, but solubility is a different thing from fulvic content.
No. Safety comes off the heavy metals panel, and ours shows lead, arsenic, mercury and cadmium all not detected by AOAC 999.10/11.
Find the fulvic number on whatever jar you own, or the one you’re about to buy. If a method and a lab sit next to it, pull up the paperwork and check it describes the jar in your hand. If the number floats on its own with nothing behind it, treat it as marketing copy and go looking for the heavy metals results instead, assuming any exist.
Ours takes one click: 35 g/100g fulvic acid by titration, four heavy metals not detected by AOAC 999.10/11, the whole lab report on one page. If you still want the jar after reading it, the 40 g at R999 comes to R25 a gram and lasts about 100 days at a pea-sized dose, with free delivery in 1 to 3 working days.
A complementary product, not a medicine. Pregnant or breastfeeding women, and anyone on chronic medication, should speak to a health professional first.
We publish the full laboratory report for the batch shipping now, with the method named beside every result. Read it in full.
See the certificate
PurePharm