No. It does what nesting ISNA inside IF usually does... look to see a if desired formula would return #NA, and if it would, then return something prettier, and if the desired formula would not return #NA, then do the desired formula. I have never seen one where the formula wasn't exactly the same on both sides of the IF. But I did speak out of turn in that while non-conventional and a little bit lengthy, your formula did return the correct result. Sorry about that. I just thought it was a typo... why would someone test to see if a formula would produce an error, and if it would not, do a different formula?

The barcode doesn't have to be unique and neither of our formulas tests for uniqueness of anything.

The =TRUE is redundant. ISNA(blah blah) is either true or not. You do not need to specify =TRUE in the logical_test argument of an IF function.