CBD content of flowers: 72 products, from 6.7 to 14.4%
The 72 CBD flowers in the Phytogrammes catalogue, read on 16 September 2026, state a CBD content between 6.73% and 14.39%. Their median is 10.82%, and not one product page reaches 15%. Nothing in this dataset matches the "30%" flowers advertised online.
Key takeaways
- 72 flower pages give 72 usable CBD values, each linked to a batch number.
- The median is 10.82% and the mean 10.15%; the middle half of the pages lies between 7.67 and 11.87%.
- Counted as total CBD, with CBDA converted, the median goes up to 11.58% and the maximum to 15.41%.
- 36 product names include a percentage, and not one of them agrees with the value on its product page.
- The values are taken from the product reference data. The laboratory's PDF certificate has not yet been attached to the pages.
Where these figures come from
Buying guides readily quote ranges of 5 to 30% CBD and rarely give a source. This dataset starts from the 72 products in the CBD flowers category, queried on 16 September 2026 through the catalogue's public API, and shows every intermediate figure.
Every product page shows a cannabinoid profile (CBD, CBDA, CBG, CBN, THC and THCA, as a percentage by mass) together with a batch number and a date between 1 and 27 June 2026. The page labels the profile HPLC, for high-performance liquid chromatography. These values, however, are entered from the product reference data, and on the day of the reading none of the 72 pages had the laboratory's PDF certificate attached. Treat them as reference values; they are not signed laboratory results.
The whole dataset is read with three rules:
- Only the CBD line enters the count. CBDA, the acidic form of CBD, is kept apart, and its conversion is explained further down.
- Resins and oils are left out, because their levels do not compare with those of a dried flower, as the article on flower versus resin explains.
- The figures apply to these batches on this date. They give neither a market average nor a trend over time.
The distribution of the 72 values
Plotted, the values make two clusters: a tight one between 6 and 8%, another between 10 and 12%, and a dip between them. There is no bell curve. The dip reflects the make-up of the catalogue, which combines two families of batches.
| CBD band | Pages | Share of the dataset |
|---|---|---|
| 6 to 8% | 23 | 31.9% |
| 8 to 10% | 8 | 11.1% |
| 10 to 12% | 25 | 34.7% |
| 12 to 14% | 13 | 18.1% |
| 14 to 16% | 3 | 4.2% |
| 16% and above | 0 | 0% |
Lower bounds are included and upper bounds excluded. You can recalculate the summary statistics from the 72 values:
| Marker | Value | Calculation |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum | 6.73% | Triple Cheese, batch PG-26-116F |
| First quartile | 7.67% | a quarter of the pages below |
| Median | 10.82% | mean of the 36th and 37th sorted values, 10.81 and 10.82 |
| Mean | 10.15% | sum of the 72 values, 730.49, divided by 72 |
| Third quartile | 11.87% | three quarters of the pages below |
| Maximum | 14.39% | Gelonade, batch PG-26-9D06 |
The lower cluster drags the mean 0.67 point below the median, which makes the median the more reliable marker here. Taken alone, a mean merges two separate populations into a single figure that fits neither of them.
CBD alone or total CBD: the 0.877 factor
CBD is present in a flower in two forms. The plant produces CBDA, cannabidiolic acid, and heat converts it into CBD by removing a carboxyl group. The acidic form is described in the CBDA article.
Since liquid chromatography does not heat the sample, it measures the two forms separately. A 2025 review in Molecules notes that laboratories prefer liquid chromatography to gas chromatography for hemp testing: gas chromatography heats the sample and decarboxylates the acidic forms during the analysis.
CBDA is converted with a mass ratio to estimate how much CBD will be available after heating. CBD (C₂₁H₃₀O₂) weighs about 314.5 g/mol and CBDA (C₂₂H₃₀O₄) about 358.5 g/mol, which gives a ratio of 0.877 and the formula total CBD = CBD + 0.877 × CBDA.
Applied to the Gelonade: 14.39 + 0.877 × 1.02 = 15.28%. Over the whole dataset, total CBD lifts the median to 11.58% and the maximum to 15.41%. All the levels go up, and the two clusters are still there. Do not set one seller's total CBD against another seller's CBD alone, since the apparent gap would come from the convention and tell you nothing about the flower.
The percentage in a flower's name says nothing
In the catalogue database, 36 product names carried over from the original catalogue still include a percentage, such as "CBD 9%". Set against the value on the batch's page, every one of them is wrong: 18 overstate it and 18 understate it.
The gaps range from 9.63 points under the page value to 36.62 points over it. Three examples make the point:
| Name in the database | Value stated on the page | Gap |
|---|---|---|
| Moonrock CBD 45% | 8.38% | 36.62 points too high |
| Gelonade CBD 9% | 14.39% | 5.39 points too low |
| Orange Bud CBD 4% | 13.63% | 9.63 points too low |
The site removes these percentages from the titles it displays, so the Moonrock page shows no "45%" and its page title uses 8.4%. The general rule holds everywhere: a percentage printed in a trade name is no measurement, and only a value tied to a batch number counts.
Why no flower comes close to 30%
Searches for "30% CBD flower" are common, but batches that match are far rarer. The figures point to two reasons.
The first reason is botanical. As a 2023 review in Horticulture Research describes, cannabinoids are made and stored in glandular trichomes, tiny resin glands found mostly on the bracts of female flowers. A dried flower also includes bracts, small leaves and stems. To go well beyond 20%, the resin has to be isolated, and the product then becomes a hash or an extract.
The second reason is regulatory. The French order of 30 December 2021 restricts the sector to Cannabis sativa L. varieties listed in the official catalogues whose delta-9-THC content "is not greater than 0.30%", and applies the same cap to extracts and the products containing them. Breeders of listed varieties work to that threshold and do not chase record CBD. On the 72 pages, the Δ⁹-THC line runs from 0.12 to 0.29%. Our article on the legal THC limit covers the threshold and its history.
Checking a value before you buy
A stated value binds the seller only when it is tied to something you can verify. Look at four points before you compare two flowers:
- A batch number is shown on the page and matches the product you receive.
- The page says which convention it uses, CBD alone or total CBD.
- You can tell what the source document is: a laboratory certificate with the lab's name and a date, or only a reference value supplied by the seller.
- The laboratory holds accreditation for the method used, which takes a few minutes to check online.
Each line of a CoA is explained in our guide to reading a certificate of analysis, and the article on a laboratory's scope of accreditation shows how to verify it. Measurement methods are described on the CBD laboratory page. If you want to pick a flower by its measured values, read also how to choose a strong flower.
Frequently asked questions
Across the 72 flowers in this dataset, the mean is 10.15% and the median 10.82%. Because the series splits into two groups, the median is the more reliable of the two. The values describe one catalogue on one date and do not stand for the market.
Not in this dataset: none of the 72 pages reaches 15%, and the highest states 14.39%. Counted as total CBD, the top value goes up to 15.41%. The very high figures quoted elsewhere usually refer to resins or extracts, or are numbers given with no batch or certificate.
Both are in use. CBD alone gives the neutral form found in the batch. Total CBD adds CBDA multiplied by 0.877 to estimate what heating will make available. Whichever you read, compare two figures only when they follow the same convention.
Not necessarily. In this catalogue the profiles on display come from the product reference data, and the laboratory's PDF certificate has not been attached yet. You can verify a value once the batch certificate, dated and signed by a named laboratory, is available to consult.
Written by the Phytogrammes team
Each journal article draws on cited primary sources: ANSM, EFSA, EUR-Lex and peer-reviewed publications. Product profiles are distinguished from documented laboratory results. Our approach.
Article published on . CBD is not a medicine.