Which supplement works better to increase muscle mass: creatine monohydrate or zinc magnesium aspartate (zma)?

Ratings at a Glance

Supplement	Effectiveness Rating	Confidence Rating
Creatine Monohydrate
Zinc Magnesium Aspartate (ZMA)

Effectiveness Rating: Creatine Monohydrate vs Zinc Magnesium Aspartate (ZMA)

The effectiveness rating is a measure of the supplements' ability to increase muscle mass. This rating answers the question of whether or not a supplement does what it claims. The evidence backing up creatine monohydrate is great, while the evidence backing up zinc magnesium aspartate (zma) is good. Creatine Monohydrate should be able to increase muscle mass more effectively, however both supplements should provide positive results.

Confidence Rating: Creatine Monohydrate vs Zinc Magnesium Aspartate (ZMA)

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 zinc magnesium aspartate (zma)'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.