<p>The demand for advanced analytical tools and innovative combinations of established techniques in the field of extraterrestrial research is steadily increasing, particularly within the context of the Artemis mission and the potential establishment of a Moon base. To test new analytical tools or assess the suitability of well-established methods for potential extraterrestrial applications, appropriate sample materials are essential. Given the potential for analog samples to be utilized in destructive analysis, it is advisable to assess their suitability prior to implementation. Analog samples are well-suited to ensure the optimal setup of analytical tools and equipment for analyzing actual extraterrestrial samples, thereby minimizing the waste of extraterrestrial materials. Furthermore, an optimal calibration of the setup, in combination with the expertise of highly skilled academic staff, reduces errors in analysis and enables the accurate evaluation of samples. The absence of suitable analog samples would make this task significantly more challenging. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive comparative analysis of Moon analog samples LHS-1, LMS-1, and EAC-1&#xa0;A and compared them with literature data obtained from the Apollo missions. To assess their chemical composition, we utilized Mössbauer spectroscopy and powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD). Our objective was to determine the suitability of these analog samples in replicating the chemical characteristics of lunar material. Our findings indicate that the samples align well with lunar material concerning major components such as olivine, pyroxene and glass. However, when analyzing the minor components, discrepancies ocurred. Instead of pure ilmenite, we detected Fe(III) in the form of pseudorutile in the ilmenite base material, which shouldn´t be included in authentic analog samples.</p>