Good point! I’ve attempted to expand on this a bit, and list the advantages that each vaccine currently seems to have over the other:
For RaDVaC:
Extensive Documentation, Whitepaper and reasoning about its development available
Manufacturing does not require a sterile environment
Simpler administration
Has a small community, might be easier to exchange questions and results
Regularly updated (possibly double-edged—seems very useful to keep up with any variant capable of immune escape, but may (?) make it more difficult to estimate efficacy across vaccine generations)
Designed to prevent immune escape, may still work when commercial vaccines become less effective (uses 9 − 13 peptides instead of just targeting the spike protein like other vaccines)
Cheaper ingredients, because the peptides required are shorter
For Dr. Stöcker’s Vaccine:
Test results released so far show very good efficacy and safety (for n=64)
Known-good dosing regimen available
Efficacy can be verified using commercial blood antibody tests
Requires only one peptide (which might be orderable as-is, without custom synthesis) and two passive ingredients
One way to achieve sterility might be to use a self-made glovebox (example tutorial). For extra safety, you could also add an intake fan with a HEPA filter to get a positive-pressure sterile environment, which would still be sterile in case of a small enough leak. Or build a positive-pressure hood—more upfront work, but working in it seems easier.
Personally, the good results and self-verification capability (using antibody tests) would make me prefer Dr. Stöcker’s vaccine despite the extra hassle, as long as we knew what kind of Arg319-Phe541 peptide we need for it.
Edit 1: Added / edited the last two points in the RaDVaC list, thanks to feedback by ChristianKl.
There is another Covid-19 peptide vaccine developed by a Dr. Winfried Stöcker. He injected it into ≥64 volunteers, and the results he published look promising. They show both a good level of IgA, IgG and IgM antibodies and ≥ 94% neutralization for the vast majority of the test subjects. According to him (last paragraph of his blog post), none of the test subjects have reported any relevant adverse symptoms.
He describes the manufacturing in his blog (see translation below):
I’ve attempted a translation and added some of my own understanding in [square brackets]. Though I’m a German native speaker, I have zero domain knowledge in this field, so please correct me if anything is wrong:
If (!) these instructions are exhaustive, it might be easier, though possibly more expensive to produce than RaDVaC. Googling Arg319-Phe541 suggests that 100 μg (6 doses) / 1000 μg (66 doses) of this RBD can be bought for 310 € (52 € per dose) / 1130 € (18 € per dose), though there may be cheaper offers. I have no clue if the Arg319-Phe541 RBD I found here (230-01102-1000-RB listed on biocat.com and raybiotech.com) would be of the right kind to use in a vaccine.
If you have the relevant domain knowledge to evaluate how complete these instructions are or what other risks and benefits compared to RaDVaC this vaccine may have, I’d really appreciate a comment. Likewise (and especially) if you know where to buy the kind of Arg319-Phe541 RBD used for this vaccine.
If you speak German or are comfortable with DeepL: the current edition (06/21) of the German magazine “Der Spiegel” has some more background on its development on pages 44 − 46: PDF (available for free due to misprints).
Edit 1: Detailed serological results (in English) were posted by Dr. Stöcker in May 2020 when he tested the vaccine on himself first.