Which supplement works better to increase strength: buffered creatine monohydrate or d-aspartic acid?
Ratings at a Glance
| Supplement | Effectiveness Rating | Confidence Rating |
|---|---|---|
| Buffered Creatine Monohydrate | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
| D-Aspartic Acid | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Effectiveness Rating: Buffered Creatine Monohydrate vs D-Aspartic Acid
The effectiveness rating is a measure of the supplements' ability to increase strength. This rating answers the question of whether or not a supplement does what it claims. The evidence shows buffered creatine monohydrate is better than d-aspartic acid in its ability to increase strength. Buffered Creatine Monohydrate should provide some positive results while d-aspartic acid will not.
Confidence Rating: Buffered Creatine Monohydrate vs D-Aspartic Acid
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.
Both buffered creatine monohydrate and d-aspartic acid have low confidence ratings. This means neither supplement has an adequate amount of research to back up this claim. A low confidence rating questions the validity of the effectiveness rating.


