All reviews
Home / Reviews / Vital Health Global
Nutritional supplements · Hybrid unilevel-and-binary MLM with kit entry

Vital Health Global

A four-year-old supplement MLM with a real product line, real federal court appearances and almost no verifiable public record - no income disclosure, no distributor count, no audited figure, and a written policy forbidding affiliates from disclosing what they earn.

Reviewed July 31, 2026 Founded Company-stated founding 22 February 2022 · no incorporation date from any primary state registry could be retrieved Confidence: Medium
D-GRADE
3.4/10
Weighted composite

UNVERIFIABLE, NOT PROVEN BAD

The grade is driven by opacity rather than by proven misconduct: there is no income disclosure of any kind, the policies forbid affiliates from disclosing their own income, and no customer-versus-affiliate volume split, distributor count or audited figure exists anywhere in the public record.

The question you came with

Can you actually make money with Vital Health Global?

NO No - not on the numbers this company publishes

No, and it is worth being precise about why, because this is not a file full of proven misconduct. It is a file with almost nothing in it. No income disclosure statement has ever been published - not a thin one, not a stale one, none, across four years of operation. A targeted search of the company's own domain returns the policies, the terms and the privacy pages and nothing else. No median, no average, no rank table, no percentile band and no zero-earner rate exists for any year the company has been trading.

Then Section 7.13 of the Policies and Procedures, which prohibits affiliates from making income projections, income claims or income testimonials, or from disclosing their own income from the company. Read that beside an operator that publishes nothing and the position is worse than silence. It is a contractual bar on the only evidence a prospect could otherwise assemble for themselves. The company will not say what participants earn, and the participants are not permitted to say either.

What can be costed is the outlay, from the company's own confirmed prices. A Basic Welcome Pack at $170 plus a $29.99 annual membership added automatically at checkout, and then 50 PV a month to stay commission-eligible: roughly $560 to $920 across twelve months at the Basic tier, and roughly $1,020 to $1,380 at the Pro tier. The largest single identifiable payout in the plan is a 45% First Order Bonus on the business volume of a new member's Welcome Pack, paid weekly, and larger when the recruit buys a larger pack.

The other side deserves stating properly. No US court or regulator has made any finding about this company at all - no FTC action, no SEC action, no FDA warning letter, no state attorney general proceeding, no self-regulatory case, no pyramid finding anywhere. Two federal lawsuits both ended in voluntary dismissal with prejudice with no judgment against anybody. Section 9.7 carries a written 70% rule requiring affiliates to certify they have used, sold or consumed 70% of prior purchases before reordering, and three-tier pricing is published on the product pages so a buyer can see the cost before joining anything.

What it costs to be in
$170

Basic Welcome Pack, plus a $29.99 annual membership added automatically at checkout; packs run to $1,240, and 50 PV a month is required to stay commission-eligible

What would have to change
  • Publish one income disclosure. Four years of trading with no median, no average and no rank distribution leaves nobody outside the company able to compute anything at all.
  • Delete Section 7.13, or narrow it to unsubstantiated claims. A rule barring affiliates from disclosing their own income turns a temporary information gap into a permanent one and makes it enforceable.
  • Publish the customer-versus-affiliate volume split. That is the figure showing whether this plan is paid for by people who are not in it, and it exists nowhere in the public record.
  • Pay less on the entry pack. A 45% First Order Bonus on a new member's Welcome Pack, scaling with the size of the pack that member bought, is the biggest payout event in the plan and it is tied to somebody joining.

That call is computed, not chosen - the rule reads three of the nine published dimension scores and is printed on the methodology page. It describes this company's plan and the figures it publishes about the people already in it. It is not a prediction about you, and nothing on this site is advice.

0
Income disclosure statements published, ever
and §7.13 of the policies bars affiliates from disclosing their own income
45%
First Order Bonus on a new member’s Welcome Pack
paid on the business volume of the entry purchase, weekly
$200–$1,380
Realistic first-year cost
Basic pack with no ongoing volume, up to a Pro pack with autoship maintained
4
SKUs named in a foreign regulator’s health alert
INVIMA Colombia, Alert 277-2025 - the alert names no corporate entity

Legal status

LEGAL - no US court and no US regulator has made any finding about this company. No FTC action, no SEC action, no FDA warning letter, no state attorney general proceeding, no consent order, no assurance of voluntary compliance, no DSSRC or NAD case and no pyramid finding of any kind could be located under either name. The file contains three items and each needs its own label. First, a cross-recruitment complaint filed against the co-founder and later CEO and against the entity in the US District Court for the District of Idaho (4:24-cv-00437, filed 20 September 2024) by his former employer - allegations only, voluntarily dismissed with prejudice on 29 September 2025 on confidential terms, nothing proven in either direction. Second, a patent-infringement complaint against the entity in the US District Court for the District of Wyoming (1:24-cv-00189, filed 23 September 2024) - settled with dismissal with prejudice on 20 March 2025, again confidential, again nothing proven. Third, a foreign regulator’s public health alert: Colombia’s INVIMA Alerta Sanitaria No. 277-2025, published 18 September 2025, naming four Vital Health-branded SKUs as marketed without sanitary registration and carrying unauthorised pharmacological claims. That alert is a consumer warning and a directive to regional health authorities, not a court finding, not a recall order and not a fine - and, critically, it names no corporate entity at all.

Confidence: Medium

Primary sources fetched directly where possible. Everything we could not verify is listed at the bottom of this page by name.

What this actually is

Follow the money

A supplement direct-selling company founded, by its own account, on 22 February 2022, marketed in the United States and Canada under the entity name Vital Health International LLC, with manufacturing and the bulk of its claimed staff in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico, a US contact address in Nogales, Arizona and a registered address in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Affiliates buy a Welcome Pack from $170 to $1,240, pay a $29.99 annual membership, and earn through a hybrid structure combining a retail margin, a 45% First Order Bonus on a new member’s entry pack, a binary paying 10% to 20% on the weaker leg, a multi-generation unilevel, a matching bonus, rank advancement cash from $500, a vehicle allowance and a loyalty credit on consecutive autoship orders.

The governing finding of this report is that thinness is the finding, not a gap in the research - and the distinction between what is proven bad and what is merely unverifiable has to be held firmly, because almost everything that pulls this grade down belongs in the second category. So take the good first, and it is real. The products are genuine consumables that ship, with legible ingredient panels rather than proprietary-blend obfuscation, correct dietary-supplement disclaimers on every product page, and public three-tier pricing that answers a specific criticism an earlier watchdog review made when no prices were shown at all. A federal trademark application for the VH INTERNATIONAL wordmark was filed on 27 October 2025 under the LLC’s own name by a named, well-known direct-selling law firm and reached Notice of Allowance on 9 June 2026 - a professionally advised entity doing an ordinary thing properly. The policies contain a real "70 Percent Rule" self-certification against inventory loading. And the entity demonstrably exists: its name appears verbatim in its own Terms of Service and in two federal docket captions in two districts, and it was served and appeared in both.

Now the opacity, which is what the grade measures. No income disclosure statement of any kind has ever been published. No distributor or affiliate headcount exists in the public record. No customer-versus-affiliate volume split - the decisive Koscot number - has ever been disclosed. No audited financial statement, tax filing or independently verified revenue figure could be found for any year: the $1.4 million, $4.2 million, $41.5 million and projected $100 million figures all trace to the company itself or to a direct-selling news site that republishes company submissions. No primary state-registry filing number, incorporation date or registered agent could be retrieved, because the Wyoming portal is CAPTCHA-gated against automated search, the Arizona interface would not return results, and OpenCorporates returned 403 errors - which is a tooling limitation on this research, not proof that no filing exists, and the report says so rather than asserting the entity is unregistered. And no single authoritative compensation-plan document could be obtained; the mechanics above are reconstructed from two partially conflicting secondary sources and are flagged as such.

What makes the opacity structural rather than incidental is Section 7.13 of the company’s own Policies and Procedures, which prohibits affiliates from making income projections, income claims or income testimonials, or from disclosing their Vital Health income. The company publishes no earnings data and the field is contractually barred from supplying any. A prospect therefore cannot obtain, from any source, a single figure describing what participants at this company actually earn. That is not a research failure; it is the company’s written position, and it is the most consequential term in the agreement.

And one item of provenance the reader is owed. The momentum ranking that placed this company inside a top-100 list - a stated momentum rank of #11 - is itself sourced to an affiliate-facing direct-selling chart whose rankings and company profiles are compiled from company and distributor submissions rather than from verified financial statements. The same source supplies the $41 million and $90 million revenue estimates and the 54% payout estimate. It is the origin of the company’s visibility, and it is not an independent one.

The only payout figure that exists anywhere

The company has never published a commission-payout ratio, a rank distribution, an income disclosure or a distributor count. The single figure below comes from an affiliate-facing direct-selling news site that also publishes this company’s revenue estimates; no methodology is stated on the page. It is a third-party estimate of unstated method, not a company figure and not audited - shown here because a reader is better served by seeing exactly how thin the evidence is than by seeing nothing.

54% 46%
Estimated share of revenue paid out as commission - third-party estimate, unstated method (54%)Remainder - cost of goods, operations, margin; no company breakdown published (46%)
ProductPricePays
Basic Welcome Pack
The cheapest entry route. The $29.99 annual membership is added on top, so $170 is not the full first-purchase cost.
$170
one-time
45% of BV to the sponsor
Builder Welcome Pack
The middle tier. Because the First Order Bonus is a percentage of the pack’s business volume, the sponsor is paid more when the recruit buys a larger pack.
$320
one-time
45% of BV to the sponsor
Pro / Premium Welcome Pack
500 GV and 300 BV, 36 items across roughly 19 SKUs. The product page confirms a $29.99 annual membership is automatically added at checkout.
$630
one-time
45% of BV to the sponsor
Elite Welcome Pack
The largest entry pack offered. No published data exists on what share of new affiliates buy at this tier or what they subsequently earn.
$1,240
one-time
45% of BV to the sponsor
Annual membership
Automatically added to a Welcome Pack purchase and recurring yearly. Small in isolation; it is the item that makes the relationship a subscription rather than a purchase.
$29.99
annual
50 PV monthly autoship
Mandatory to remain commission-eligible; a single missed month resets rank qualification. The company publishes no PV-to-dollar conversion table, so the exact monthly cost could not be pinned to a figure - the band is this report’s estimate from the cheapest observed SKU pricing and is flagged as such.
~$30–$60/mo (estimated)
recurring
10%–30% loyalty credit
V-ITADOL
Active ingredients listed as glucosamine, sarsaparilla and MSM. One of the four SKUs named in the Colombian regulator’s September 2025 public health alert - an alert that names no corporate entity.
$55 customer / $27.50 member
per unit
retail margin
V-DAILY
Multivitamin and mineral formula with a greens and mushroom blend and a probiotic. No product-specific clinical trial for this formulation could be located.
$100 customer / $50 member
per unit
retail margin
Background check

Who runs it, and what they ran before

DT
Dr Tony Rodriguez
Co-founder and product formulator; described by an independent watchdog review as CEO at the time of that review

Presented by the company as holding a doctorate in natural medicine and a naturopathic physician license, with formulation work dating to 1995. The institution granting the doctorate and the jurisdiction issuing the license could not be identified from any source, and many US states do not license naturopathic practitioners at all - so the credential is recorded as claimed rather than verified. No regulatory action, fraud judgment or criminal proceeding against him could be located anywhere. Having a named, publicly identified formulator rather than an anonymous white-label supply chain is a genuine point in the company’s favor.

AR
Alex Reynoso (Jose Alejandro Reynoso)
Co-founder; announced as CEO in March 2024; named defendant in the Idaho federal complaint

A large Idaho-based wellness direct seller - his former employer - filed suit in Idaho state court on 21 August 2024, removed to federal court on 20 September 2024 as 4:24-cv-00437, naming him, his wife, two companies he owns and Vital Health International LLC. The complaint alleged breach of non-solicitation and confidentiality obligations, recruitment of the former employer’s distributors and customers into this company and a second competing venture, and misuse of trade secrets. It described him as a former top-1% marketing executive there who had earned over $5.2 million in commissions. Every one of those statements is an allegation in a filed complaint. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed with prejudice on 29 September 2025; the settlement terms are confidential and nothing was proven in either direction. What the record does establish, uncontroversially, is that he built his following and his income inside an older, larger company before co-founding this one - which is ordinary in this industry and is context rather than a charge.

JA
Jorge A. Reyes
Chief Executive Officer, announced 23 May 2025

Announced for North American expansion and described as having over 28 years in training, business development and sales leadership with a deep understanding of direct selling. No specific prior employer, no named prior venture and no track record of outcomes could be located for him anywhere - the announcement is adjective-heavy and fact-light, and no independent source fills the gap. That is not an allegation; it is an absence, and it is recorded as one.

Gn
Governance note
Two other co-founders, and a chief-executive title that has moved twice

Alberto Barreda and Gustavo Barreda are named as co-founders on the company’s own story page. No independently attributable prior business or direct-selling history could be found for either individual specifically; common-name collisions dominate every search. Separately, the chief-executive title appears to have moved from Rodriguez to Reynoso in March 2024 and to Reyes in May 2025 - twice in roughly three years at a company barely four years old - with no company-published, reconciled leadership timeline. Different secondary sources reflect different snapshots rather than one stable fact. Rapid turnover at the top of a young company is a coherence risk worth tracking; it is not, on this record, evidence of wrongdoing by anyone.

Registered address

Cheyenne, Wyoming (registered address) · operations, manufacturing and staff described in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico · US contact address in Nogales, Arizona
Three addresses, none of them a confirmed staffed corporate office in the United States. The Terms of Service give a Cheyenne, Wyoming registered address on a street known for commercial registered-agent and virtual-office services. The contact page and the federal trademark filing give 177 East Baffert Drive, Nogales, Arizona - a border-logistics address for which no independent business listing corroborating a physical office could be found. The company’s own account places manufacturing, logistics and the bulk of its claimed 400-plus staff in Hermosillo, Sonora. All revenue figures in circulation - $1.4 million for 2022, $4.2 million for 2023, $41.5 million for 2024 and a projected $100 million for 2025 - originate with the company itself or with an affiliate-facing direct-selling news site that republishes company submissions. No audited statement, tax filing or third-party verified revenue figure exists in the record. The company also states it is debt-free with no outside investors and owns its own manufacturing; that is self-reported and unaudited, and if true it removes one common failure mode in this sector, so it is recorded fairly.

Compensation plan

What has to be true for you to get paid

To coverYou need
Enter at the cheapest tier and hold for a year $170 + $29.99
Basic Welcome Pack plus the automatically added annual membership; no ongoing volume maintained, so no commission eligibility
Stay commission-eligible for twelve months ~$560-920 all-in
Basic pack, membership and 50 PV a month at an estimated $30-60; the company publishes no PV-to-dollar table, so the band is an estimate
Cover a year of Basic-tier participation from First Order Bonuses alone a sustained enrollment rate, roughly 2-4 new pack buyers and then more
at 45% of the business volume of a Welcome Pack, and the autoship cost recurs every month whether the recruiting works or not
Cover a Pro-tier year from retail margin alone a continuing book of non-participant customers
against ~$1,020-1,380 of first-year cost, on the published Customer-to-Preferred-Member spread; what share of participants achieve this cannot be stated because nothing is published

Read this twice

Every number above is assembled by this report from the company’s own confirmed storefront prices, because the company publishes no total-cost-of-participation figure and no earnings figure of any kind. That is the point worth sitting with. On the cost side the record is good: $170, $320, $630 and $1,240 Welcome Packs; a $29.99 annual membership the Premium pack page confirms is added automatically; a mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship; a 90% refund on a 30-day product return; and a full refund less a 10% restocking fee on resignation inventory returned within twelve months. On the income side the record is empty. There is no income disclosure statement, there never has been, no distributor headcount has ever been published, no customer-versus-affiliate volume split exists, and Section 7.13 of the policies forbids affiliates from disclosing their own income. The only payout-adjacent figure anywhere is a 54% commission-payout estimate from an affiliate-facing news site with no stated methodology - a third-party estimate, not a company figure, and not audited. Applied evenly it would still leave a median participant short of first-year costs, but MLM payouts are never distributed evenly, so applying it evenly is not a calculation anyone should rely on. Two honest caveats belong here in the company’s favor. The 50 PV requirement can in principle be met by genuine customer orders rather than self-purchase, and someone with a real customer base is not spending that money at all. And the retail structure is real: the published gap between the Customer and Preferred Member prices is a genuine working margin, and the Influencer tier is lower still. The reason this section cannot go further is not that the answer is bad. It is that the answer does not exist in any document available to a prospect, and the company’s own policies ensure it will not be supplied by anyone in the field either.

Run your own numbers

Drag the sliders. Nothing here is stored or sent.

-
Cumulative net, after costs
Retained preferred customers -
Commission that month -
Total commissions earned -
Total you paid in -
Net -

Every input here is an estimate and the reason is the finding. The company publishes no compensation-plan document that could be retrieved, no PV-to-dollar conversion, no payout percentage and no income disclosure of any kind, and its own policies prohibit affiliates from disclosing their own income - so there is no company figure anywhere against which to calibrate this. The retail rate is described in secondary sources as reaching 45% on customer orders without the rate structure being disclosed, so $20 on a roughly $100 order is a deliberately conservative reading of an undisclosed band. Cost is the midpoint of the $360-to-$1,380 first-year range the research file could establish, spread monthly, covering the monthly autoship required to stay eligible. The 45% First Order Bonus paid on a new recruit’s welcome pack is excluded on purpose: it is the largest single number in the plan and it is paid for an enrollment, not for a sale, so including it would model recruiting rather than selling. Treat every figure on this slider as an upper-bound sketch of a plan whose real arithmetic is not public. Your own subscription cost of $72/mo is included.

Your money

What it costs to replace this yourself

Vital Health’s own published customer and preferred-member prices against ordinary pharmacy, supermarket and mainstream shelf supplement equivalents for comparable commodity formulations. Comparators are given as bands: these are category price points rather than a live price pull on a specific SKU on a specific date, and the report flags that rather than presenting them as precise. The structural point does not depend on the exact figure - glucosamine, MSM and multivitamin-plus-greens are commodity categories with well-established low price points at any pharmacy counter.

What they sell youWhat you'd use insteadYour cost
V-ITADOL - $55 customer (glucosamine, sarsaparilla, MSM)Mainstream shelf or own-brand glucosamine with MSM, comparable month’s supply~$10-20
V-ITADOL - $27.50 preferred memberThe same pharmacy or supermarket product, bought without a membership~$10-20
V-DAILY - $100 customer (multivitamin, greens blend, probiotic)Mainstream multivitamin plus a supermarket-brand greens powder~$15-35
V-DAILY - $50 preferred memberThe same two items at ordinary retail, no tier required~$15-35
Annual membership - $29.99No membership, no tier, no renewal$0
Mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship - ~$360-720/yrBuying a supplement when you want one and stopping when you do not$0-240
Basic Welcome Pack entry - $170No entry purchase of any kind$0
10% retained on a 30-day product returnOrdinary retail returns policy at a pharmacy or supermarket$0
Total as sold
~$560-920 in year one on the Basic tier with autoship maintained
Total, built yourself
~$120-420 of comparable commodity supplements

Price-to-value

Roughly a three-to-five-times multiple on the joint-support product at the customer price and a two-to-six-times multiple on the multivitamin, narrowing but not closing at the preferred-member tier. That premium is structurally typical of this sector: the markup funds a multi-tier commission structure, not a demonstrated formulation advantage, and no product-specific clinical trial exists for any Vital Health formulation. The honest counterweight is that these are real products which arrive, with legible ingredient panels and public prices, and a person who simply likes them can buy them at the customer tier without a pack, a membership, an autoship or a downline. That is the version of this relationship with the least downside in it.

Odds of profit

Three operators, five horizons

Probability of cumulative net profit

Hover any point for median, top decile and bottom quartile.

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%3 mo6 mo1 yr3 yr5 yr 0% 13% 14%
Customer at the Preferred Member tier - buys a Basic pack for the discount, never recruits, lets commission eligibility lapseCasual affiliate - Basic or Builder pack, holds 50 PV a month, sells to friends and family, occasional enrollmentsFull-time builder - Pro or Elite pack, recruiting and training a downline, chasing rank and binary volume

Customer at the Preferred Member tier

buys a Basic pack for the discount, never recruits, lets commission eligibility lapse

HorizonP(profit)Median
3 mo 0% −$200
6 mo 0% −$200
1 yr 0% −$200
3 yr 0% −$260
5 yr 0% −$320

Casual affiliate

Basic or Builder pack, holds 50 PV a month, sells to friends and family, occasional enrollments

HorizonP(profit)Median
3 mo 6% −$310
6 mo 9% −$470
1 yr 12% −$780
3 yr 13% −$1,900
5 yr 13% −$3,000

Full-time builder

Pro or Elite pack, recruiting and training a downline, chasing rank and binary volume

HorizonP(profit)Median
3 mo 4% −$1,000
6 mo 7% −$1,900
1 yr 10% −$3,400
3 yr 13% −$8,000
5 yr 14% −$12,000

Methodology note. These are modeled outcome ranges, not claims, and on this company the modeling carries more weight than usual because there is nothing to anchor it to. ANCHORED to the company’s own confirmed prices: the $170, $320, $630 and $1,240 Welcome Packs, the $29.99 automatically added annual membership, the mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship, the 45% First Order Bonus on a new member’s pack, the 10% to 20% binary on the weaker leg, the 10% to 30% loyalty credit on consecutive autoship orders, the $500 rank advancement bonus at Platinum, the vehicle allowance to $500 a month at Gold, the 90% product refund inside 30 days and the 10% restocking fee on resignation inventory. MODELED by us, because the company publishes none of it: every income figure in these tables, the share of each cohort in cumulative profit, the dollar cost of maintaining 50 PV (estimated at $30 to $60 a month from the cheapest observed SKU pricing, since no PV-to-dollar table is published), and the cohort definitions themselves. There is no income disclosure statement to calibrate against - none has ever been published - no distributor headcount, no rank distribution and no customer-versus-affiliate volume split, and Section 7.13 of the policies bars affiliates from disclosing their own income, so no field-sourced check is available either. The profit shares shown are drawn from what published disclosures across this sector generally show for comparable plans with mandatory monthly volume, not from anything specific to this company. Read them as the shape of the risk rather than as a measurement of it. One calibration note in the company’s favor: the 50 PV requirement can be satisfied by genuine customer orders, and a participant with a real book of non-participant customers sits materially better than any median here.

Go-to-market

Where you are actually allowed to promote this

Platform policy reads, not verifications. Check every one before you spend a dollar - enforcement changes faster than the written policy does.

Channel
Status
Notes
Income claims by affiliates
PROHIBITED OUTRIGHT - INCLUDING YOUR OWN EARNINGS
Section 7.13 of the Policies and Procedures bars affiliates from making income projections, income claims or income testimonials, or from disclosing their Vital Health income. Combined with the fact that the company has never published an income disclosure statement, the effect is that no earnings figure for this company is obtainable from any source at all. As a compliance clause it prevents overclaiming, which is real; as a transparency matter it removes the last available evidence a prospect could use.
Disease and health claims in the field
DISCLAIMED ON PAGE, DOCUMENTED IN THE FIELD
Every official product page carries the standard dietary-supplement disclaimer, correctly worded. An independent watchdog review nonetheless documents widespread affiliate marketing on social media and in Zoom presentations using testimonial claims about cancer, diabetes, arthritis, lupus, autism and paralysis. A Colombian government regulator independently found unauthorised pharmacological claims attached to four named branded SKUs. No documented instance of the company enforcing its own claims policy against an affiliate could be found.
The mandatory monthly autoship
REQUIRED - ONE MISSED MONTH RESETS RANK
A minimum 50 PV personal order every month is required to maintain continuity and stay commission-eligible, and skipping a single month resets rank qualification. This is the mechanic that most reliably converts sales volume into self-consumption volume across this industry, because the affiliate’s own recurring purchase becomes the path of least resistance to staying eligible.
Autoship payment failures
ENTIRELY THE AFFILIATE’S RISK
Under Section 10.6 the company is not obliged to notify an affiliate before a scheduled autoship charge fails for insufficient funds. The burden of ensuring funds are available sits wholly with the affiliate, and the consequence of a failure is the rank reset above. Not unusual in this category, and worth knowing before the first charge.
The reseller framing in promotional material
EXTREME PROFIT REPRESENTATION
An affiliate buying 200 PV a month can take a further $200 of product at an 80% discount. The company’s own promotional material, as read by an independent watchdog, frames this as capable of generating "up to a 1000% profit when reselling." That is a representation about resale economics rather than about demonstrated consumer demand, and it is the sort of figure a prospect will remember long after the disclaimers.
Retail selling at published prices
PERMITTED, AND THE PRICES ARE NOW PUBLIC
Three-tier pricing - Customer, Preferred Member and Influencer - is displayed on individual product pages, so a prospective buyer can see what a product costs before joining anything. An earlier independent review criticized the absence of retail pricing specifically; that gap appears to have been at least partly closed since. The Customer-to-Preferred-Member spread is a genuine working margin.
Inventory loading
ADDRESSED BY A 70% SELF-CERTIFICATION RULE
Section 9.7 requires affiliates to certify before placing an order that they have used, sold or consumed at least 70% of products previously purchased. This is a real and named anti-pyramiding gesture of exactly the kind federal guidance describes as necessary. It is self-reported with no audit mechanism described in the policy, which is why it is necessary rather than sufficient.
Independent third-party review coverage
NONE FOUND - AT ALL
No non-affiliate, non-trade-press review of this company could be located anywhere. No Better Business Bureau profile under either name or the Arizona address, no mainstream business or financial press coverage, no Direct Selling Association membership, and no consumer-protection agency file. The entire independent universe is one MLM-critical watchdog site and a genre of recruitment-adjacent "legit or scam" videos. For a company claiming $41.5 million in revenue and 75,000 customers, that absence is itself informative.
Self-regulatory oversight
NO CASE HAS EVER BEEN BROUGHT
No DSSRC decision, no NAD case, no ASA ruling and no FTC or SEC action naming this company or any founder could be located. That is a genuine clean sheet on the enforcement record and it is stated as such. It should be read carefully, though: companies of this claimed size and claim pattern are frequently referred to self-regulatory bodies by rivals, and no filing is not the same as a clean bill of health - it may mean only that nobody has filed one.
The evidence

Red flags and green flags

Red flags

15
1No income disclosure statement has ever been published
A targeted search of the company’s own domain returns the policies, the terms and the privacy pages, and nothing else. There is no median, no mean, no percentile table, no rank distribution and no zero-earner rate for any year of the company’s existence.
2The policies forbid affiliates from disclosing their own income
Section 7.13 prohibits income projections, income claims, income testimonials and disclosure of an affiliate’s Vital Health income. Set against a company that publishes nothing, this is a contractual bar on the only remaining evidence a prospect could gather. It is worse than silence because it is enforceable.
3No customer-versus-affiliate volume split exists anywhere
This is the decisive Koscot number - the one figure that would show whether the plan is paid for by sales to people who are not participants. The company has never published it, and the "75,000 customers" headcount claim does not resolve it, because headcount is not volume.
4A 45% First Order Bonus on a new recruit’s entry pack
Paid weekly on the business volume of a new Preferred Customer’s Welcome Pack, and therefore larger when the recruit buys a larger pack. It is the single biggest identifiable payout event in the plan and it is tied to an entry purchase rather than to a reorder.
5A mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship, with a rank reset for one missed month
Required to stay commission-eligible. The dollar cost could not be pinned down because no PV-to-dollar table is published, but the structure is the one that most reliably turns sales volume into self-consumption volume.
6A foreign regulator’s public health alert naming four SKUs
Colombia’s INVIMA published Alerta Sanitaria No. 277-2025 on 18 September 2025 naming V-ITADOL, V-ASCULAX, V-GLUTATION and V-ITALAY as sold without sanitary registration and carrying unauthorised pharmacological claims, flagging cardiovascular, renal, hepatic and dermatological risk. Label it precisely: a public consumer alert and a directive to regional authorities, not a court finding, not a recall order, not a fine - and it names no corporate entity, so the link to this company is a brand-and-SKU match rather than a documented entity match.
7Disease-cure claims documented in field-level marketing
An independent watchdog documents affiliate testimonials addressing cancer, diabetes, arthritis, lupus, autism and paralysis, despite correct disclaimers on the official product pages. The Colombian regulator’s finding of unauthorised pharmacological claims corroborates the same pattern from a second country and a different method.
8No primary state-registry record could be retrieved
No filing number, no incorporation date from a registry, no registered agent of record and no officer filing. The Wyoming portal is CAPTCHA-gated against automated search, the Arizona interface would not return results, and OpenCorporates returned 403 errors. This is a tooling limitation, not proof of non-registration - but for a company claiming $41.5 million in revenue and 400-plus staff, the gap is a finding rather than a footnote.
9Every revenue and growth figure originates with the company or an affiliate-facing chart
$1.4 million, $4.2 million, $41.5 million and a projected $100 million all trace to the company’s own story page or to a direct-selling news site that republishes company and distributor submissions. No audited statement, no tax filing and no third-party verified figure exists for any year.
10The momentum ranking that made this company visible is itself affiliate-sourced
The stated momentum rank of #11 that placed this company inside a top-100 list comes from the same affiliate-facing chart that supplies its revenue estimates and its 54% payout estimate. Its rankings are compiled from company and distributor submissions rather than verified financial statements. It is the origin of the company’s visibility, and it is not independent.
11Zero independent, non-affiliate reviews of the company could be found
No Better Business Bureau profile under either name or the Arizona address, no mainstream business or financial press coverage, no Direct Selling Association membership, no consumer-agency file. The entire independent universe is one MLM-critical watchdog site and a genre of recruitment-adjacent videos. Published here as a finding in its own right.
12A 10% clawback on returns and on the affiliate inventory buyback
A product return inside 30 days nets a 90% refund less shipping; resignation inventory returned within twelve months is refunded less a 10% restocking fee plus shipping. On a $630 Pro pack the restocking deduction alone is roughly $63 before postage.
13The chief-executive title has changed twice in roughly three years
Rodriguez to Reynoso in March 2024 to Reyes in May 2025, at a company barely four years old, with no company-published reconciled leadership timeline and different secondary sources reflecting different snapshots. A coherence risk to track; not evidence of wrongdoing by anyone.
14No single authoritative compensation-plan document could be obtained
The plan mechanics in this report are reconstructed from two partially conflicting secondary sources that disagree on terminology, on the unilevel generation count, on the exact fast-start bands and on whether the binary cap is company-wide or rank-specific. Where they agree, confidence is higher; where they diverge, both are shown rather than one silently chosen.
15The registered address is a virtual-office corridor and no US office could be confirmed
The Cheyenne, Wyoming registered address sits on a street associated with several commercial registered-agent and virtual-office providers, and the Nogales, Arizona contact address returned no independent business listing corroborating a physical office. Both are lawful and ordinary arrangements; neither confirms a staffed US presence.

Green flags

10
1No US court or regulator has made any finding about this company
No FTC action, no SEC action, no FDA warning letter, no state attorney general proceeding, no consent order, no assurance of voluntary compliance, no DSSRC or NAD case, no pyramid finding. That is a genuine clean enforcement sheet and it belongs at the top of this list, not buried in it.
2Both federal lawsuits ended without any finding in either direction
The Idaho cross-recruitment matter was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice on 29 September 2025; the Wyoming patent matter settled with dismissal with prejudice on 20 March 2025. Neither produced a judgment, an injunction, a consent decree or an admission by anybody. Confidential terms mean nothing was established - including nothing against the company.
3The entity demonstrably exists and was served in two federal courts
Vital Health International LLC appears verbatim in the company’s own Terms of Service and verbatim in two federal docket captions in two different districts. Whatever cannot be retrieved from a state registry, a real and serviceable legal entity plainly exists and appeared before two federal courts.
4A federal trademark application filed by specialist counsel
The VH INTERNATIONAL wordmark, Serial No. 99463611, filed 27 October 2025 in Class 5 under the LLC’s own name, reaching Notice of Allowance on 9 June 2026 with a Statement of Use due 9 December 2026. Filed through a recognized direct-selling law practice. Not yet a registered mark, but a professionally advised entity doing an ordinary thing properly.
5A named anti-inventory-loading rule in the written policies
Section 9.7 requires affiliates to certify before ordering that they have used, sold or consumed at least 70% of prior purchases. Self-certified and unaudited, so necessary rather than sufficient - but it is written down, it is specific, and plenty of operators in this category do not have it.
6Public three-tier pricing on product pages
Customer, Preferred Member and Influencer prices are displayed on individual product pages, so a buyer can evaluate cost before joining anything. An earlier watchdog review criticized the absence of retail pricing specifically, and that gap appears to have been at least partly closed since - which is responsiveness to legitimate criticism.
7Real products with legible ingredient panels and correct disclaimers
The formulations checked directly list their actives plainly - glucosamine, sarsaparilla and MSM for the joint product - rather than hiding behind proprietary-blend obfuscation, and every product page carries the standard dietary-supplement disclaimer, correctly worded. These are consumables that ship and that some customers reorder.
8A named, publicly identified product formulator
Rather than an anonymous white-label supply chain, the company names a specific individual as responsible for formulation, with a stated background dating to 1995. The credential itself could not be verified, but naming the person accountable for what goes in the bottle is better practice than not naming one.
9A return window and an affiliate buyback both exist and are stated
90% on a product return inside 30 days; a full refund less a 10% restocking fee on resignation inventory returned within twelve months. The clawbacks are real and are counted against the company elsewhere in this report - but the mechanisms exist and the windows are written down rather than left to discretion.
10No outside investor extraction and vertically integrated manufacturing
The company states it is debt-free, has no private-equity or outside investor and owns its own manufacturing, logistics and sourcing. Self-reported and unaudited, so it carries the weight of a company statement and no more - but if true it removes one of the most common failure modes in this sector, and it would be unfair not to record it.
What would move this grade

We would like to be wrong about this

Upward

  • Publication of a genuine income disclosure statement with medians rather than averages, a zero-earner rate, a distributor headcount and a customer-versus-affiliate volume split - and the removal of the Section 7.13 clause forbidding affiliates from disclosing their own income. That single combination is worth more than every other change on this list put together, because it converts an unverifiable file into a checkable one.
  • A retrievable primary state-registry record - filing number, state of organization, incorporation date and registered agent of record - together with an audited or at least CPA-compiled revenue figure replacing the company-stated and affiliate-chart estimates now in circulation.
  • A documented company response to the Colombian regulator’s alert: registration obtained for the four named SKUs or the products withdrawn from that market, plus evidence of enforcement action by the company against affiliates making disease-cure claims, which would show the claims policy reaches marketing and not only inventory.

Downward

  • Any US enforcement action - an FTC or state attorney general proceeding, an FDA warning letter, an SEC matter or a self-regulatory referral - or any adverse finding in a court in any jurisdiction, none of which exists today.
  • A further regulator in another country issuing an alert on the same products or the same claim pattern, or evidence that the four SKUs named in the Colombian alert continue to be marketed there without registration.
  • A tightening of the compensation plan toward entry purchases - a larger first-order bonus, a higher mandatory monthly volume, or the introduction of pack-linked qualification - or any sign of commission payment delays, which would be the first observable evidence of the sustainability question this report cannot currently answer.
The better trade

Grade is D−. The number measures opacity, not proven misconduct - and holding that distinction is the most useful thing this page can do for a reader.

Start with what is genuinely established, because it is more than the grade suggests. No US court and no US regulator has made any finding about this company: no FTC action, no SEC action, no FDA warning letter, no state attorney general proceeding, no consent order, no self-regulatory case and no pyramid finding of any kind. Two federal lawsuits were filed against the entity in 2024 and both ended without any finding in either direction - one voluntarily dismissed with prejudice in September 2025, one settled with dismissal with prejudice in March 2025, both on confidential terms. The entity itself demonstrably exists: its name appears verbatim in its own Terms of Service and verbatim in two federal docket captions in two districts, and it was served and appeared in both. There is a federal trademark application filed by specialist counsel under that name. The products are real consumables with legible ingredient panels, correct disclaimers and public three-tier pricing, and the policies contain a specific, named anti-inventory-loading rule. A reader who arrives expecting this report to establish fraud will not find it here, because the record does not contain it.

What the record contains instead is an almost complete absence of the evidence a prospective participant would need. There is no income disclosure statement and there never has been. There is no distributor headcount. There is no customer-versus-affiliate volume split - the decisive Koscot number, and it is simply not published. There is no audited financial statement, so the $1.4 million, $4.2 million, $41.5 million and projected $100 million revenue figures all trace back to the company itself or to an affiliate-facing chart that republishes company submissions, and that same chart is the source of the momentum ranking that made this company visible at all. No primary state-registry filing number, incorporation date or registered agent could be retrieved, because the Wyoming portal is CAPTCHA-gated, the Arizona interface would not return automated queries and OpenCorporates returned 403 errors - a tooling limitation, stated as one, not a claim that the entity is unregistered. No single authoritative compensation-plan document could be obtained; the mechanics here are reconstructed from two partially conflicting secondary sources. And no independent, non-affiliate review of this company exists anywhere: no Better Business Bureau profile, no business press, no trade association membership. For a company claiming $41.5 million in revenue and 75,000 customers, that last absence is itself the finding.

The two things that turn absence into structure are worth stating on their own. First, Section 7.13 of the policies forbids affiliates from disclosing their own Vital Health income. The company publishes nothing and the field is contractually barred from supplying anything, so the opacity is not a stage the company is passing through - it is a written position. Second, the plan pays 45% of the business volume of a new recruit’s Welcome Pack, weekly, on top of a mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship that resets rank if missed once, alongside a reseller arrangement the company’s own promotional material frames as capable of generating up to a 1000% profit on resale. That is a front-loaded, entry-purchase-weighted structure with no published volume split to test it against. Add the one hard external datum - a Colombian regulator’s public health alert naming four branded SKUs for unregistered sale and unauthorised pharmacological claims, an alert that names no corporate entity - and the honest summary is this: a real company selling real products, about which almost nothing a prospect needs to know can be checked, and whose own contract ensures it stays that way.

1

Buy the products at the customer tier if you want them, and stop there

Three-tier pricing is published, so you can see what a bottle costs without joining anything. If the joint formula or the multivitamin suits you, buy it as a customer. That version of the relationship has no pack, no $29.99 membership, no 50 PV monthly autoship, no rank to lose and no clause telling you what you may not say about your own finances. Compare the price to a pharmacy or supermarket equivalent first - glucosamine with MSM typically runs $10 to $20 a month on an ordinary shelf.

2

Ask for the two documents that would settle this, in writing, before you pay anything

An income disclosure statement showing medians rather than averages, and the split between volume purchased by non-participant customers and volume purchased by affiliates. Neither exists today. If your sponsor cannot produce them - and under Section 7.13 they are not permitted to tell you what they personally earn either - then you are being asked to buy a business whose economics nobody is allowed to describe to you. That is the whole decision, and it can be made in one question.

3

Price the mandatory side before the optional side

The pack is the number people focus on and it is the smaller one. Work out the twelve-month total: pack at $170, $320, $630 or $1,240, plus $29.99 membership, plus a 50 PV autoship every month whose dollar cost the company does not publish and which this report estimates at $30 to $60. That is roughly $560 to $1,380 for a first year of commission eligibility, recurring whether or not any recruiting works, with 10% retained on anything you send back.

4

If you want to sell supplements, sell them without the structure

The commodity supplement categories these products sit in - joint support, multivitamins, greens blends - are large, well-understood and entirely open. A person who can genuinely sell them can source, brand or affiliate into them without an entry pack, a monthly volume requirement, a rank that resets, a clawback on returns or a policy forbidding them from discussing their own earnings. Every constraint listed in this report is a constraint the plan adds, not one the category requires.

This is not a report about a company proven to have done something wrong; it is a report about a company where almost nothing a prospect needs to know can be established at all - and whose own policies forbid the field from filling the gap.
Scorecard

Nine dimensions, weighted

Comp structure & KoscotDoes the plan pay for recruitment or for sales to real customers?
20%
2.5
The First Order Bonus pays 45% of the business volume of a new Preferred Customer’s Welcome Pack - a large percentage of a new recruit’s initial kit purchase, paid weekly, and the single largest identifiable payout event in the plan. It is stacked on top of a mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship that must be maintained to stay commission-eligible, with a single missed month resetting rank qualification. On top of that sits a Reseller Bonus under which an affiliate buying 200 PV a month can take a further $200 of product at an 80% discount, which the company’s own promotional material - as read by an independent watchdog - frames as capable of generating "up to a 1000% profit when reselling." That is a framing about resale and recruitment economics, not about consumer demand. Credit where it is due: a retail bonus paying the difference between wholesale and retail exists, the published three-tier pricing gives a genuine margin between the Customer and Preferred Member prices, and a binary paying 10% to 20% on the weaker leg is an ordinary structure rather than an abusive one. The decisive point is what is missing. No customer-versus-affiliate volume or revenue split is published anywhere - that is the Koscot number, the one figure that would settle whether this plan pays for sales to real end customers or for participants buying their own way in, and it does not exist in the public record. The 2.5 reflects a front-loaded entry-purchase bonus and a mandatory autoship on one side, and unresolvable opacity about the split on the other. It does not reflect a finding that the plan is a pyramid; no such finding has been made by anyone.
Securities exposureAny passive return on capital? Howey, staking, tokens, withdrawal friction.
15%
8.0
No investment contract, no promised passive return, no token, no staking, no equity offering, no revenue-share instrument and no securities regulator involvement of any kind could be located under either entity name or any founder name. Participants buy product and resell it. What they carry is ordinary inventory and business-expense risk - a $170 to $1,240 kit, a $29.99 annual membership, a recurring autoship, and a 10% clawback on returns and on the affiliate inventory buyback - and that is commercial risk, not securities exposure. Two things need saying plainly because they are the most common way this dimension gets misread. First, the fact that the payout mathematics is opaque does not by itself create a securities problem: opacity about how commissions are calculated is a disclosure failing, not the sale of an investment. Second, a weak compensation plan is not a securities problem either. This score is high because nobody here is being asked to hand over capital against a promised return, and that remains true no matter how badly the rest of the file reads. The two points shaved off reflect only that no primary compensation-plan document could be obtained, so the possibility of an undisclosed passive-return component cannot be excluded with total confidence - not any positive evidence that one exists.
Ownership & track recordWho runs it, what did they run before, and what happened to it.
15%
3.0
Stage-labeling carries this entire dimension. The co-founder who served as chief executive from March 2024 is a named defendant in a federal cross-recruitment complaint brought by his former employer, a large Idaho-based wellness direct seller, in the District of Idaho (4:24-cv-00437). Those are allegations in a filed complaint. The matter was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice on 29 September 2025 on confidential terms, and nothing was proven in either direction. A second federal matter - a patent-infringement complaint brought by a ketone-supplement direct seller in the District of Wyoming (1:24-cv-00189) over a beta-hydroxybutyrate product - settled with dismissal with prejudice on 20 March 2025, also confidentially, also with nothing proven. Neither ended in a judgment, an injunction, a consent decree or an admission. Then the verifiable structural facts, which are what the number actually rests on. The entity name Vital Health International LLC appears verbatim in the company’s own Terms of Service and verbatim in two federal docket captions in two different districts, so a real, serviceable legal entity plainly exists and was brought before two federal courts. But no primary state-registry filing number, no incorporation date from a registry, no registered agent of record and no officer filing could be retrieved: the Wyoming portal is CAPTCHA-gated against automated lookup, the Arizona interface would not return results to automated queries, and OpenCorporates returned 403 errors. The registered address is a Cheyenne virtual-office and registered-agent corridor. The chief-executive title has changed twice in roughly three years. That combination - a real entity, unretrievable filings, and adverse but entirely unproven allegations - is what the 3 represents. It is a score for opacity, not for proven misconduct.
Product reality & demandWould a rational buyer purchase this if no income offer existed?
12%
3.5
The formulations are commodity-grade and the pricing is not. V-ITADOL lists its entire active-ingredient panel as glucosamine, sarsaparilla and MSM - a standard joint-support combination sold in thousands of ordinary pharmacy and supermarket products - at $55 to a customer and $27.50 to a preferred member. V-DAILY, a multivitamin with a greens and mushroom blend and a probiotic, is $100 to a customer and $50 to a member. No product-specific clinical trial could be located for any Vital Health formulation, and none would be expected: these are proprietary-branded combinations of generic, widely studied ingredients rather than novel compounds. The Colombian regulator’s public health alert must be covered here and must be labeled with care. INVIMA published Alerta Sanitaria No. 277-2025 on 18 September 2025 naming V-ITADOL, V-ASCULAX, V-GLUTATION and V-ITALAY as marketed in Colombia without sanitary registration and as carrying unauthorised pharmacological claims, flagging risks including raised blood pressure, palpitations, skin reactions, oedema and potential renal, hepatic and cardiovascular harm, and directing regional health authorities to inspect and seize stock. That is a foreign regulator’s public alert about unregistered sale and unauthorised claims. It is not a court finding, not a recall order and not a fine. And it names the brand and the four products but names no corporate entity at all - so the link to this company is a brand-and-SKU match, not a documented entity match, and the report says so in terms. What is genuinely to the company’s credit: these are real, shippable consumables with legible ingredient panels rather than vague proprietary blends, every product page carries the standard dietary-supplement disclaimer, three-tier pricing is now displayed publicly where an earlier watchdog review found none, and some customers do reorder.
Participant economicsReal cost in, realistic money out, and whether they publish the numbers.
10%
1.5
There is no income disclosure statement. Not a thin one, not an out-of-date one - none has ever been published, and a targeted search of the company’s own domain returns only the policies, the terms and the privacy pages. That alone would put this dimension near the floor. What takes it lower is that the company’s own Policies and Procedures, at Section 7.13, affirmatively prohibit affiliates from making "income projections, income claims, income testimonials, or disclose their VITAL HEALTH income." Read that against the absence of a company disclosure and the position is worse than silence: it is a contractual bar on the only evidence a prospect could otherwise gather. The company will not say what participants earn, and the participants are not permitted to say either. Section 7.14 adds that financial success requires commitment, effort and sales skill, which, with no earnings data of any kind published, gives a prospect nothing to calibrate against. Against that vacuum sits a first-year cost this report assembles from the company’s own confirmed prices: roughly $200 for a Basic pack and membership with no ongoing volume maintained, roughly $560 to $920 for a Basic pack with the mandatory 50 PV autoship held for twelve months, and roughly $1,020 to $1,380 for a Pro pack on the same basis. Break-even at the casual tier requires either sustained personal retail selling or a continuing stream of new enrollments generating 45% First Order Bonuses - a recruiting rate, sustained month after month, because the autoship cost recurs whether or not the recruiting works. What share of participants clear that bar cannot be stated, because the company publishes nothing that would allow anyone to calculate it.
Price-to-valueWhat the same capability costs on the open market.
8%
2.0
V-ITADOL is glucosamine, sarsaparilla and MSM at $55 for a customer and $27.50 at the preferred-member tier. A comparable month of a mainstream shelf glucosamine-and-MSM product - the kind sold under names like Nature Made or Osteo Bi-Flex, or the supermarket and pharmacy own-brand equivalents that sit beside them - typically runs $10 to $20. That is roughly a three-to-five-times multiple at the customer price and still above the commodity floor at the member price. V-DAILY is $100 to a customer and $50 to a member for a multivitamin with a greens blend and a probiotic; a mainstream multivitamin such as Centrum or One A Day plus a separate supermarket-brand greens powder covers comparable ground for roughly $15 to $35 combined, a two-to-six-times multiple depending on tier. These comparator bands are category pricing rather than a live price pull on a named SKU on a named date, and the report flags that rather than dressing it up. The structural point does not depend on the exact figure: glucosamine, MSM and multivitamin-plus-greens are commodity categories with well-established low price points, and the markup here funds a multi-tier commission structure rather than any demonstrated formulation advantage. No product-specific trial exists that would justify the gap. The two points awarded reflect that these are real consumables that are actually delivered, and that the published Customer-to-Preferred-Member spread is a genuine margin an active seller can work with.
Payout sustainabilityCan the company fund the plan out of margin, or only out of inflow?
8%
2.5
There is no company payout disclosure of any kind - no commission-pool percentage, no rank distribution, no headcount, no median, no mean, nothing. The only payout figure available anywhere in the record is a third-party estimate of 54% annual commission payout, published on an affiliate-facing direct-selling news site alongside a monthly revenue estimate of $4.05 million, with no methodology stated on the page. That is not a company figure and it is not audited; it should be read as an outside estimate of unstated method and nothing more. The honest conclusion is that the sustainability question cannot be answered from the public record. What can be said is structural rather than empirical: a plan that pays 45% of business volume on a new recruit’s entry pack, front-loaded and paid weekly, while publishing no split between customer volume and affiliate volume, is the configuration that most often fails, because the largest single payout event is tied to enrollments rather than to reorders by people who are not participants. That is a statement about the shape of the plan and about what has happened elsewhere in this category. It is not a finding about this company: no payout failure, no missed commission run, no liquidity event and no insolvency has been observed or reported here, and it would be wrong to imply otherwise.
Marketing conductIncome claims, regulator run-ins, hype, deadline stacking.
7%
2.0
Two independent sources, from two countries and by two different methods, document the same gap between compliant company-level copy and non-compliant field-level marketing. An independent watchdog review characterises widespread affiliate marketing on social media and in Zoom presentations using testimonial claims addressing cancer, diabetes, arthritis, lupus, autism and paralysis in the form "I took this and my condition was cured." Colombia’s INVIMA, a government regulator, independently found unauthorised pharmacological claims attached to four named Vital Health-branded SKUs. Neither source is a US enforcement action and neither is a court finding, but the corroboration between them is what makes the pattern serious rather than anecdotal. This sits alongside standard, correctly worded dietary-supplement disclaimers on the official product pages - the company-level copy is not the problem, the field-level copy is, and no documented instance of the company enforcing its claims policy against an affiliate could be found. Add the reseller framing in the company’s own promotional material, described as capable of generating up to a 1000% profit on resale, which is an extreme profit representation to put in front of a prospective participant. And add the structural point that underlies all of it: with no published income disclosure, there is no anchor against which any earnings statement made by anybody in this organization could be checked, by a prospect or by the company itself.
Operator terms & exitWho owns the customer, what you forfeit, how hard it is to leave.
5%
3.0
The written terms are ordinary in form and asymmetric in effect. A product return inside the 30-day window nets a 90% refund - the company retains 10% - less shipping. An affiliate resigning within twelve months may return unsold inventory, again for a full refund less a 10% restocking fee and shipping. So there is a clawback on the way in and on the way out, and on a $630 Pro pack the restocking deduction alone is roughly $63 before postage. The autoship terms place the entire failure risk on the affiliate: under Section 10.6 the company is not obliged to notify an affiliate before a scheduled autoship charge fails for insufficient funds, and a single missed month resets rank qualification. And Section 7.13 is the gag clause - affiliates may not disclose their own Vital Health income, which is the term that makes every other opacity in this file permanent rather than temporary. Genuine credit is owed on two counts. A return mechanism and an affiliate inventory buyback both exist and are written down, which is more than several operators in this category offer; and the windows are stated plainly, 30 days for product and twelve months for resignation inventory, rather than left to discretion. Section 9.7 also carries a "70 Percent Rule" requiring affiliates to certify they have used, sold or consumed 70% of prior purchases before reordering - a real anti-inventory-loading gesture, though self-certified with no audit mechanism described.
Weighted composite
3.37
D-

Dimension profile

Further from center is better. Hover any point.

Comp structure& Koscot 2.5 Securitiesexposure 8.0 Ownership &track record 3.0 Product reality& demand 3.5 Participanteconomics 1.5 Price-to-value 2.0 Payoutsustainability 2.5 Marketingconduct 2.0 Operator terms& exit 3.0

Hard caps that bind here

Ceiling at D - non-binding the combination of a foreign regulator’s public health alert naming four branded SKUs for unregistered sale and unauthorised pharmacological claims, and the complete absence of any published participant-outcome data - no income disclosure, no distributor count, no volume split, and a policy clause forbidding affiliates from disclosing their own income. Those two factors are carried by the 7% mktg weight and the 10% partecon weight, which together under-represent a case where a prospect cannot obtain a single earnings figure from any source and where a national regulator has published a consumer warning about the products. The ceiling adds nothing here: the weighted arithmetic already lands at D− at 3.37 on the nine numbers alone, so this entry describes a limit rather than a cause. It would only bite on a file that otherwise scored into the C band. Now, at length, what this ceiling does NOT rest on, because on this report that distinction is the whole point. It does not rest on any US enforcement action, because there is none - no FTC action, no SEC action, no FDA warning letter, no state attorney general proceeding, no consent order and no self-regulatory case has ever been brought against this company. It does not rest on the Colombian alert being an entity finding, because that alert names the brand and the four products and names no corporate entity at all; the link to this company is a brand-and-SKU match, not a documented entity match. It does not rest on the two federal lawsuits, because both ended without any finding in either direction - one voluntarily dismissed with prejudice, one settled with dismissal with prejudice, both on confidential terms, neither producing a judgment, an injunction or an admission. It does not rest on doubt that the company exists: the entity name appears verbatim in its own Terms of Service and in two federal docket captions in two districts, and it was served and appeared in both. And it does not rest on any finding of fraud, because nothing in this record establishes fraud by anybody. An unverifiable company is not a proven-bad company, and the grade here is a measure of what could not be established, not a verdict on what was.

The lowest binding cap wins, regardless of the weighted arithmetic.

Sources consulted

What we read

Every source below links to the document itself. Tier 1 is a primary record - the company’s own plan, policy or disclosure, a court filing, a regulator’s decision or an SEC filing. Tier 2 is a self-regulatory or secondary regulator record, tier 3 reporting or academic work, tier 4 an open-market price comparison. Where a document can be moved or withdrawn, an archived copy is linked beside it. If a link is dead when you try it, that is a correction we want.

  1. Vital Health Global Terms of Service - "Vital Health International LLC ... a Wyoming-incorporated company", 3325 Capitol Avenue, Suite 413A, Cheyenne, WY 82001, Wyoming governing law
    Policies & proceduresTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy

    Vital Health Global Terms of Service - legal entity name "Vital Health International LLC," state of formation Wyoming, registered address 3325 Capitol Avenue, Suite 413A, Cheyenne, WY 82001, Wyoming governing law. The anchor document for the entity identity used throughout this report

  2. Vital Health International LLC Terms of Use (legacy vitalhealthint.com copy) - same Wyoming incorporation and exclusive Wyoming jurisdiction language
    Policies & proceduresTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  3. Vital Health Global contact-information page - registered contact "Vital Health International, LLC, 177 East Baffert Drive, Nogales, AZ 85621"
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLC · 2026archived copy
  4. Vital Health Policies and Procedures - §7.13 Income Claims, §7.14 Compensation Plan and Opportunity Claims, §9.7 "70 Percent Rule", §9.8 Retail Customer Rule
    Policies & proceduresTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy

    Vital Health Global Policies and Procedures - §7.13 prohibiting affiliate income projections, claims, testimonials and disclosure of Vital Health income; §7.14 disclaimer language; §9.7 the "70 Percent Rule" consumption self-certification; §10.6 no obligation to notify before a failed autoship charge; 30-day 90% product refund and twelve-month resignation buyback less a 10% restocking fee

    Not established by this document: The published refund policy states a 30-day return less a 10% restocking fee and a 60-day resignation buyback less a 20% restocking fee. The report's description of a "30-day 90% product refund and twelve-month resignation buyback less a 10% restocking fee" does not match the policy text now served at that URL; §10.6 (no obligation to notify before a failed autoship charge) could not be independently confirmed from the retrievable copy.

  5. Vital Health Global Refund Policy - 30-day return less shipping and a 10% restocking fee; resignation buyback within 60 days less a 20% restocking fee; chargeback clawback
    Policies & proceduresTier 1Vital Health International LLC · 2026archived copy
  6. Vital Health Global "Welcome Packs" collection - the four entry packs (company storefront)
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy

    Vital Health Global storefront, 2026 - Welcome Packs collection at $170, $320, $630 and $1,240; Premium Welcome Pack page confirming the $29.99 annual membership is added automatically (500 GV / 300 BV, 36 items across roughly 19 SKUs); V-ITADOL product page ($55 / $27.50 / $6.00, actives listed as glucosamine, sarsaparilla and MSM); V-DAILY product page ($100 / $50 / $11.00); standard dietary-supplement disclaimer on each

    Not established by this document: The second pack now lists at $330.00 (Essential Welcome Pack), not the $320 in the report's prose; the storefront prices retrieved in 2026 are $170 / $330 / $630 / $1,240.

  7. Premium Welcome Pack (Global) product page - $630.00, 500 GV / 300 BV, itemised SKU list, membership added at checkout
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  8. Basic Welcome Pack (Global) product page - $170.00, 120 GV / 75 BV
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  9. Elite Welcome Pack (Global) product page - $1,240.00 (from $3,369.00), 1000 GV / 600 BV
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  10. V-ITADOL product page - $55.00 retail (company product page)
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  11. V-DAILY product page - $100.00 retail (company product page)
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  12. Vital Health Global "Become an Affiliate" page - the $29.99 annual membership added to the cart alongside the chosen Welcome Pack, and the 50 PV autoship requirement for weekly pay and the Loyalty Bonus
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  13. INVIMA Alerta Sanitaria No. 277-2025, Bogotá 18 September 2025 - V-ITADOL, V-ASCULAX, V-GLUTATION y V-ITALAY de marca VITAL HEALTH declared "FRAUDULENTOS" under Decreto 677 de 1995 (PDF)
    RegulatorTier 1Instituto Nacional de Vigilancia de Medicamentos y Alimentos (INVIMA), Dirección de Medicamentos y Productos Biológicos, Colombia · 2025-09-18archived copy

    INVIMA (Colombia), Alerta Sanitaria No. 277-2025, published 18 September 2025 - V-ITADOL, V-ASCULAX, V-GLUTATION and V-ITALAY of the VITAL HEALTH brand named as marketed without sanitary registration and as "fraudulent products" under Decree 677 of 1995, with unauthorised pharmacological claims under Decree 3249 of 2006; risks flagged including raised blood pressure, palpitations, skin reactions, oedema and potential renal, hepatic and cardiovascular harm; directive to territorial health authorities to inspect and seize. No corporate entity, importer or distributor is named in the alert

  14. INVIMA library entry for Alerta Sanitaria No. 277-2025 (landing page)
    RegulatorTier 1Instituto Nacional de Vigilancia de Medicamentos y Alimentos (INVIMA), Colombia · 2025-09-18archived copy
  15. Melaleuca, Inc. v. Reynoso et al., No. 4:24-cv-00437 (D. Idaho) - full docket: removed from Bonneville County CV10-24-04589 on 20 September 2024, defendants include Vital Health International LLC, terminated 30 September 2025
    Court recordTier 1PacerMonitor (US District Court for the District of Idaho docket) · 2024-09-20archived copy

    US District Court for the District of Idaho, Case No. 4:24-cv-00437 - cross-recruitment complaint filed 21 August 2024 in Idaho state court and removed to federal court 20 September 2024, naming Jose Alejandro Reynoso, Karla Giovana Durazo Acuna, Rhino Team Holdings Inc., Elmazguapo NV Inc., Vital Health International LLC and Does 1-25; voluntarily dismissed with prejudice 29 September 2025, case closed 30 September 2025, settlement terms confidential

  16. Axcess Global Sciences LLC and Pruvit Ventures Inc v. Vital Health International LLC, No. 1:24-cv-00189 (D. Wyo.) - patent-infringement docket, filed 23 September 2024
    Court recordTier 1Justia Dockets (US District Court for the District of Wyoming) · 2024-09-23archived copy

    US District Court for the District of Wyoming, Case No. 1:24-cv-00189 - patent-infringement complaint filed 23 September 2024 against Vital Health International LLC concerning a beta-hydroxybutyrate product; settled with notice of dismissal with prejudice filed 20 March 2025, settlement terms confidential

  17. BehindMLM, "Pruvit sues Vital Health for patent infringement", 15 October 2024, updated 8 April 2025 - quotes the notice of dismissal with prejudice filed 20 March 2025 and the confidential settlement
    ReportingTier 3BehindMLM · 2024-10-15archived copy
  18. USPTO TSDR status record - VH INTERNATIONAL, Serial No. 99463611, Class 5 dietary supplements, filed 27 October 2025
    Trademark recordTier 1United States Patent and Trademark Office · 2025-10-27archived copy

    USPTO trademark record - VH INTERNATIONAL wordmark, Serial No. 99463611, filed 27 October 2025, Class 5 (dietary supplements), Notice of Allowance issued 9 June 2026, Statement of Use due 9 December 2026; owner address 177 East Baffert Drive, Nogales, AZ 85621; filed through a specialist direct-selling law practice. A federal filing exists; the registration is not yet complete

    Not established by this document: The TSDR status view is constructed from the serial number given in the prose and was not fetched; the Notice of Allowance date (9 June 2026) and Statement of Use deadline (9 December 2026) are therefore unconfirmed by a retrieved document.

  19. BehindMLM, "Vital Health Review: Illegal medical claims + autoship", 15 May 2025 - the mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship and continuity reset, the Loyalty Bonus rates, the binary and unilevel tables and the documented field-level disease claims
    ReportingTier 3BehindMLM · 2025-05-15archived copy

    BehindMLM review of Vital Health - independent MLM-critical watchdog coverage; the source for the mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship and rank reset, the loyalty bonus at 20% for months 2-8 rising to 30% from month 9, fast-start bands of $45-$270, a one-time $50 builder bonus, the 10%-20% binary on the weaker leg, the unilevel rate table, the car bonus to $300 or $500 at Gold, the reseller arrangement described as capable of "up to a 1000% profit when reselling," and the documented pattern of field-level disease claims addressing cancer, diabetes, arthritis, lupus, autism and paralysis. A watchdog site is journalism and commentary, not a regulator, and is labeled as such throughout

  20. Business For Home directory profile - Vital Health Global company page, revenue estimates and commission-payout estimate (compiled from company and distributor submissions, not audited)
    Open-market comparisonTier 4Business For Home BV · 2024-10-14archived copy

    Affiliate-facing direct-selling news site company page and 23 May 2025 CEO announcement - the source of the momentum rank of #11 that placed this company inside a top-100 list, the ~$41 million and ~$90 million revenue estimates, the "Est. Commission Payout: 54% annually" and "$4.05 million monthly revenue" estimates, and a "Top Earners Rank: 66 (5 on file)" list carrying no dollar figures. This site compiles rankings and profiles from company and distributor submissions rather than verified financial statements

  21. "Vital Health Global Appoints Jorge A. Reyes as CEO for North American Expansion", 23 May 2025 - the "over 75,000 customers across three countries" figure, published as a company press release
    ReportingTier 3Business For Home BV (company-supplied press release) · 2025-05-23archived copy
  22. Vital Health Global "Our Story" page - founding 22 February 2022, the $1.4m / $4.2m / $41.5m / $100m sales sequence, "400+ Employees" (all company-stated and unaudited)
    Company documentTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy

    Vital Health Global "Our Story" page - company-stated founding 22 February 2022 by four named individuals, revenue of $1.4 million (2022), $4.2 million (2023) and $41.5 million (2024) with $100 million projected for 2025, "over 75,000 customers across three countries," "400+ employees," debt-free and vertically integrated. All company-stated and unaudited; an affiliate-facing breakdown of the nine named ways to earn supplied the 45% First Order Bonus, the 13-generation unilevel, the $25,000 weekly binary cap, the $500 Platinum rank bonus and the $500 Gold vehicle allowance

  23. Vital Health "Global Rewards Plan" (PDF, company-issued) - rank table, Dual Team Bonus on the weaker leg, Gold Auto Bonus and rank cash bonuses
    Compensation planTier 1Vital Health International LLCarchived copy
  24. Vital Health "Plan de Recompensas USA Feb 2025" (distributor-hosted copy of the rewards plan PDF) - the $29.99 annual membership, 50 PV active requirement, weekly/monthly payout cycles, GV/BV/CV/PV definitions and the 70/30–60/40 leg rule
    Compensation planTier 1Vital Health International LLC (copy hosted by a distributor site) · 2025-02archived copy
Unable to verify

What we could not get

  • Any primary state-registry record for Vital Health International LLC - filing or entity number, state of organization confirmed by a registry rather than by the company’s own terms, incorporation date, registered agent of record, or any officer filing. The Wyoming Secretary of State portal returned a CAPTCHA gate rather than entity data on every attempt, the Arizona Corporation Commission interface would not execute an automated query, and OpenCorporates returned 403 errors. This is a tooling limitation on this research and is published as one - it is not a finding that the entity is unregistered, and the entity’s appearance as a served defendant in two federal districts is strong practical evidence a real filing exists
  • Any audited financial statement, tax filing or CPA-compiled revenue figure for any year of operation. Every revenue and growth figure in circulation is company-stated or republished from company submissions by an affiliate-facing chart
  • Total distributor or affiliate headcount, at any point in the company’s history - the figure that would allow the "75,000 customers" claim and the revenue claims to be sanity-checked against a payout-per-participant calculation. It has never been published
  • A single authoritative compensation-plan document. The mechanics in this report are reconstructed from two partially conflicting secondary sources that disagree on terminology, on the unilevel generation count, on the exact fast-start dollar bands and on whether the $25,000 weekly binary cap is company-wide or rank-specific. Where they agree, confidence is higher; where they diverge, both are shown
  • The PV-to-dollar conversion. The company publishes no PV table on its public pages, so the dollar cost of the mandatory 50 PV monthly autoship could not be pinned to a figure. The $30-$60 band used throughout this report is this report’s own estimate from the cheapest observed SKU pricing and should be read as an estimate
  • The settlement terms of both federal suits - the Idaho cross-recruitment matter and the Wyoming patent matter. Both are confidential. No dollar amount, no admission or denial, and no obligation to reformulate a product or change a marketing practice can be confirmed either way in either case
  • Zero independent, non-affiliate reviews of this company could be found anywhere, and that is published here as a finding rather than as a research gap. No Better Business Bureau profile under either name or the Arizona address, no mainstream business or financial press coverage, no Direct Selling Association or Mexican direct-selling association membership, no consumer-protection-agency file, and no trade-press feature. The entire independent universe is one MLM-critical watchdog site and a genre of recruitment-adjacent "legit or scam" videos. The BBB absence is search-based - that site’s search interface could not be crawled directly - so it is an absence of findable record rather than a certainty of non-existence
  • Verification of several specific claims and credentials: COFEPRIS and FDA facility or product registration numbers for any Vital Health SKU; the institution granting the product formulator’s doctorate and the jurisdiction issuing his naturopathic license; the CEO’s specific prior employers beyond a general "28 years" description; prior venture history for two of the four named co-founders; whether the Nogales, Arizona address is a staffed office; and any company response, reformulation or registration remediation following the Colombian alert

Not advice

This is independent analysis for decision-making, not legal, financial or investment advice. Allegations reported by third parties should be verified against primary court and regulatory records before any decision.

Who writes this

Researched by Claude. Reviewed by an editor.

Every report is researched and written by Claude, Anthropic’s AI assistant, from the company’s own plan documents, policies, terms and regulatory file - then reviewed before publication by Rob Fore, who checks the sources and the stage-label on every allegation.

  • Nine weighted dimensions, published with their weights
  • The editor checks the evidence and cannot change the number - the build rejects any page whose grade does not reconcile to its own arithmetic
  • Every affiliate position we hold is disclosed on the report it touches
  • No company has paid for a grade, and no report carries an affiliate link
Read the About page

Looking at something else?

Enter any company name or website. If a report exists it opens instantly; if not, we start one.

Try:
Common questions

Vital Health Global - frequently asked

QIs Vital Health Global a scam or a pyramid scheme?
No court and no regulator anywhere has made any such finding, and this report is careful about the difference between proven bad and unverifiable. There is no FTC action, no SEC action, no FDA warning letter, no state attorney general proceeding, no consent order, no self-regulatory case and no pyramid finding of any kind in the United States. Two federal lawsuits were filed against the entity in 2024 - a cross-recruitment complaint in Idaho and a patent complaint in Wyoming - and both ended without any finding in either direction, one dismissed with prejudice and one settled with prejudice, both on confidential terms. The entity plainly exists: its name appears verbatim in its own Terms of Service and in two federal docket captions. What justifies the D- grade is not proof of wrongdoing but the near-total absence of the evidence a prospect needs. There is no income disclosure, no distributor count, no audited financial statement and no customer-versus-affiliate volume split - the decisive test of whether a plan pays for real retail sales. Nobody can answer that question here, including anyone recommending the opportunity.
QHow much do Vital Health Global affiliates earn?
Nobody outside the company knows, and the company has arranged matters so that nobody inside it may say. No income disclosure statement has ever been published - a targeted search of the company’s own domain returns only the policies, the terms and the privacy pages. Section 7.13 of the Policies and Procedures separately prohibits affiliates from making income projections, income claims or income testimonials, or from disclosing their Vital Health income at all. So the company publishes nothing and the field is contractually barred from supplying anything. The only payout-adjacent figure in existence anywhere is an estimated 54% annual commission payout published by an affiliate-facing direct-selling news site with no stated methodology - a third-party estimate, not a company figure, and not audited. A recognition list of five named top earners exists on the same site with no dollar figures attached, which is a recognition list and not an income disclosure. Treat any earnings figure you are shown as unsourced until an income disclosure statement with medians exists.
QHow much does it cost to join Vital Health Global?
Welcome Packs are priced at $170 for the Basic tier, $320 for the Builder, $630 for the Pro or Premium and $1,240 for the Elite, and a $29.99 annual membership is added automatically at checkout - the Premium pack page states this in terms, so the headline pack price is not the full first purchase. Beyond entry, remaining commission-eligible requires a minimum 50 PV personal order every month, and missing a single month resets rank qualification. The company publishes no PV-to-dollar conversion table, so the exact monthly cost cannot be stated; this report estimates $30 to $60 a month from the cheapest observed product pricing and flags that estimate as its own. Assembled, a realistic first year runs about $200 if you take the Basic pack and let eligibility lapse, roughly $560 to $920 on the Basic tier with the autoship maintained, and roughly $1,020 to $1,380 on the Pro tier. A product return inside 30 days refunds 90%, and resignation inventory returned within twelve months is refunded less a 10% restocking fee.
QWhat did the Colombian regulator actually say about Vital Health products?
Stage-labeling matters here more than anywhere else on this page. Colombia’s INVIMA, the national medicines and food regulator, published Alerta Sanitaria No. 277-2025 on 18 September 2025 naming four products of the VITAL HEALTH brand - V-ITADOL, V-ASCULAX, V-GLUTATION and V-ITALAY - as being marketed in Colombia without sanitary registration and as carrying unauthorised pharmacological claims, classifying them as fraudulent products under Colombian decree. It flagged risks including elevated blood pressure and palpitations, skin reactions, fluid retention, and potential kidney, liver and cardiovascular harm, and directed regional health authorities to inspect and seize stock. That is a public consumer alert and an administrative directive by a foreign regulator. It is not a court finding, not a confirmed recall order and not a fine. And it is important that the alert names the brand and the four products but names no corporate entity, importer or distributor at all - so the link to this specific company is a brand-and-SKU match, not a documented entity match. This report treats it as strong circumstantial evidence and says plainly that it is not the same evidentiary standard as the two federal dockets, where the exact corporate name appears.
QWhy is so little known about this company?
Because almost nothing about it has been independently examined, and the report publishes that as a finding rather than treating it as a gap. No Better Business Bureau profile could be found under either name or the Arizona address. No mainstream business or financial press has covered it. It holds no Direct Selling Association membership, US or Mexican. No self-regulatory body has ever heard a case about it. The entire independent literature consists of one MLM-critical watchdog site and a genre of recruitment-adjacent video reviews. Its visibility comes almost entirely from an affiliate-facing direct-selling chart that compiles rankings and revenue estimates from company and distributor submissions rather than verified accounts - including the momentum rank that put it inside a top-100 list in the first place. On top of that, no primary state-registry filing could be retrieved: the Wyoming portal is CAPTCHA-gated against automated search and OpenCorporates returned errors, which is a limitation of this research rather than evidence of non-registration. For a company claiming $41.5 million in 2024 revenue and 75,000 customers, that combined silence is informative in itself.
Who wrote this report

Author, editor and publisher

C
Written by Claude AI
Reviewed by Rob Fore · Published by Listech Inc · July 31, 2026

This report was researched and written by Claude, Anthropic’s AI assistant, working from primary documents - Vital Health Global’s own compensation plan, its policies and procedures, its terms of service, its income disclosure statement where one exists, and its regulatory and self-regulatory file. It was scored against nine weighted dimensions that are published in full, with their weights, on the methodology page.

Before publication it was reviewed by Rob Fore, who checks every source link, every figure against the document it came from, and every allegation against its stage-label - an investigation is not a finding, a warning letter is not an enforcement action, and a filed claim is not a verdict.

The editor does not set the grade. The published score is the weighted composite of the nine dimension scores, and the build refuses to emit a page where the two disagree by more than 0.06. A grade moves when the evidence moves it and not otherwise.

Rob Fore has marketed online since 1996, wrote Online MLM Marketing (2014), and is CEO of Listech Inc, the Nevada corporation that publishes this site. He holds affiliate positions in companies graded here - including LiveGood, which this site grades D, SendOutCards, which it grades C−, and the Home Business Academy, which it grades B−. Those positions are disclosed on the reports they touch, and changed nothing on this page.

About the author and our conflicts  ·  Contact the editor  ·  Corrections: corrections@opportunitygrade.com

Stay with it

Tell me if this grade changes

Vital Health Global is graded D- as of July 31, 2026. Grades move when the evidence moves - a new income disclosure, a regulatory action, a rewritten compensation plan. Leave your address and you will get one email if this one does.

One email when the grade moves, and nothing else. We will never use your address to promote an income opportunity of any kind, we do not sell, rent or share the list, and it is stored on our own infrastructure rather than with any company graded here. Unsubscribe removes everything.

Right of reply

Corrections

Every factual claim on this page is sourced, and the ones we could not stand up are named in the unable to verify list above. If something here is wrong, we want to know, and we would rather hear it from Vital Health Global than from a reader.

Write to corrections@opportunitygrade.com. Point at the specific sentence and send the document that contradicts it - a plan document, a filing, an income disclosure, a policy page. We will check it against the primary source, correct the page if it is wrong, and say in the report that it was corrected and when. A grade moves if the evidence moves it.

This address reaches a person, not a form. We do not require a takedown demand, an NDA or a lawyer to accept a correction, and we do not remove a report because a company disputes its conclusion - only because the underlying facts turn out to be wrong.

Other published reports

Every report is written to stand alone. Graded on the same nine weighted dimensions and the same six legal tests. Twelve of 107, spread across the grade bands.

See all 107 published reports →