Which supplement works better to improve cycling sprint performance: arachidonic acid or creatine monohydrate?

Ratings at a Glance

Supplement	Effectiveness Rating	Confidence Rating
Arachidonic Acid
Creatine Monohydrate

Effectiveness Rating: Arachidonic Acid vs Creatine Monohydrate

The effectiveness rating is a measure of the supplements' ability to improve cycling sprint performance. This rating answers the question of whether or not a supplement does what it claims. The evidence backing up arachidonic acid is great, while the evidence backing up creatine monohydrate is good. Arachidonic Acid should be able to improve cycling sprint performance more effectively, however both supplements should provide positive results.

Confidence Rating: Arachidonic Acid vs Creatine Monohydrate

Another factor to take into account when comparing supplements is the confidence rating. This rating is a measure of how valid each supplement's effectiveness rating is. Remember, the confidence rating is a measure of how much you can trust the effectiveness rating. This rating is based on how many studies are included in the database on a supplement's claims. Ideally, you want a high effectiveness AND confidence rating.

Creatine Monohydrate's confidence rating is higher than arachidonic acid's. This means creatine monohydrate's effectiveness rating from above is more valid. This does not necessarily mean that creatine monohydrate works better, it simply means the evidence (included in this database) backing up creatine monohydrate is more established.