Sentinel vs LegitScript
Digital health has changed. Certification should too.
We’re building around the evidence that matters, the way operators work, and the nuance emerging categories need.
Today’s incumbent. The alternative we’re building.
Reviewed September 25, 2026
The application
Applicant-supplied documentation and follow-up requests.
An application that completes itself: public evidence first, approved internal evidence next, focused questions for the gaps.
Peptide businesses
No support for a growing category.
Our first category specific module, with review criteria grounded in the evolving regulatory environment and product quality.
Ongoing Trust
Monitoring is mentioned; anecdotes often report effectiveness falls short.
Automated review or flagging of material business changes or shifts in regulations.
Depth of verification
Operators report gaps in how requirements translate into meaningful assurance.
Criteria developed by leading experts and operators. AI-powered evidence sourcing, backed up by human review.
Meaning of the credential
A badge linked to advertising and payment access.
A quality signal trusted by customers and ecosystem partners.
A clear view of where we stand.
Sentinel’s column describes our expected offering at launch. Platform acceptance is being pursued, and, for now, applicants may still need LegitScript to meet current platform requirements.
Built on operating experience.
Our assessment of applicant burden, depth of review, and monitoring effectiveness comes from founder experience and operator interviews. These are our findings, distinct from the incumbent’s published product descriptions.
Good companies deserve
a stronger signal.
Building a digital-health company or helping the ecosystem support one? We’d like to hear from you.