The concept of quality criteria is a fundamental aspect addressed by crediting standards in carbon farming globally. However, significant variations exist in how these criteria are addressed and the accuracy of the methods employed. Consequently, this divergence results in carbon credits of varying performance within the Voluntary Carbon Market. This comparative analysis of quality criteria proposed in 11 existing MRV methodologies applied including private certification standards (Verra, Gold Standard, Plan Vivo, and MoorFutures), public standards (Label Bas-Carbone, UK Woodland Carbon Code and UK Peatland Code), and independent international bodies (GHG Protocol and the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Market). We highlight the divergence between actual standards and propositions under the Carbon Removal Certification Framework, particularly in five quality criteria: additionality, permanence, leakage, baseline and double counting. By examining these variations, this review sheds light on the challenges and opportunities for enhancing the consistency and robustness of carbon offsetting practices in agricultural contexts. While for a deeper analysis, evaluation of the limitations in existing methodologies, forward-thinking solutions, recommended practices for forthcoming strategies, and expert analyses are included in MARVIC Deliverable 1.2 Draft Rules and Guiding Principles for the MRV Framework. Please note that this report has not yet been approved by the European Commission and is still under review.