Peptide Comparison Hub · Free

Every Peptide Comparison, In One Place

Browse the complete head-to-head index, see how each pair ranks on human evidence, and open the full deep-dive before you buy, follow a protocol, or trust a vendor.

Quick-Reference Comparison Table

Each row cites the same evidence documented in our individual research summaries and peptide guides. Use this table to set accurate expectations before spending money on protocols, supplements, or vendor stacks.

Peptide Primary use cases Evidence strength (human) Evidence strength (animal / preclinical) FDA status WADA status Risk profile
Semaglutide / Tirzepatide (GLP-1) Weight loss, glycemic control Strong — large RCTs (STEP, SURMOUNT) Supportive Approved (Wegovy, Zepbound) Not prohibited (masking-rule considerations) GI effects, pancreatitis, thyroid C-cell warning
BPC-157 Tissue repair, gut healing None — zero RCTs as of 2026 Extensive (rodent) Not approved; excluded from 503A compounding Prohibited (S0) Unknown long-term; no human safety data
TB-500 (Thymosin β-4) Wound healing, tissue repair, cardioprotection None Moderate Orphan drug (corneal / ophthalmic); otherwise not approved Prohibited (S0) Limited human safety; prohibited in sport
GHK-Cu Skin rejuvenation, wound healing Moderate for topical (Finkley 2007, Margolina / Pickart) Supportive Cosmetic / GRAS topical; injectable unproven Not listed Topical well-tolerated; injectable speculative
Retatrutide Weight loss (investigational) Phase II complete, Phase III ongoing Not the relevant tier Investigational only Not yet listed Limited long-term data; hype outpaces evidence
CJC-1295 / Ipamorelin (GHS) Growth hormone secretion Limited Mechanistic Not approved Prohibited (S2) Off-label; dosing unvalidated
Sermorelin (GHRF) Adult GH-pulse amplification, anti-aging (off-label) Limited Mechanistic Withdrawn from US market 2008; no adult longevity indication Prohibited (S2) Off-label; pediatric diagnostic only
Selank / Semax Cognitive, anxiolytic Limited (mostly Russian literature) Moderate Not approved Not listed Regulatory gray-market only

Evidence tiers and regulatory status summarized from PeptideDecoded research summaries (BPC-157, TB-500, GHK-Cu) and individual guides (GLP-1, BPC-157, GHK-Cu).

How to Read This Table

"Evidence strength" is the most important column. Two peptides can share a use case while having radically different evidence behind that use case. This table distinguishes the four evidence tiers we use across all PeptideDecoded content:

Evidence tiers (top to bottom)

  • Human RCT — randomized controlled trial data in humans; highest tier of clinical proof.
  • Human observational — case reports, registries, or non-randomized studies; useful but lower-tier.
  • Animal / preclinical — rodent or in-vitro data; can suggest mechanism but doesn't predict human outcomes.
  • Mechanistic / anecdote — theoretical rationale or community reports; not clinical evidence.

FDA regulatory tiers (top to bottom)

  • Approved drug — completed NDA pathway (e.g., semaglutide as Wegovy).
  • Compounded (503A / 503B) — pharmacy-produced under specific rules; only some peptides qualify.
  • Cosmetic / GRAS — topical or food-status approvals; doesn't permit systemic claims.
  • Not approved / "research use only" — sold without FDA oversight; buyer assumes risk.

WADA status matters if you compete. Several peptides here are explicitly prohibited at all times (S0 category) — meaning in-competition and out-of-competition use both count as violations. Others aren't listed yet but face ongoing review. Athletes subject to testing should treat unlisted compounds as a gray area, not a green light. See our WADA Peptide List 2026 for the full breakdown.

For deeper context on how to evaluate any peptide claim — peer review, COI checks, red flags, and a 5-question pre-purchase checklist — see How to Verify Peptide Claims and our Editorial Standards.

Head-to-Head Deep Dives

When two peptides overlap on use case, mechanism, or risk, open the dedicated side-by-side page for a verifiable claims table, mechanistic / dosing / risk matrix, and an evidence-tier-grounded verdict.

BPC-157 vs Ipamorelin

Head-to-Head
Human evidence BPC-157: None Ipamorelin: Low

BPC-157's local NO / angiogenic animal evidence versus Ipamorelin's selective GH-secretagogue pharmacodynamics. Neither has human efficacy RCTs for the recovery, body-composition, or anti-aging uses driving online interest.

BPC-157 vs GHK-Cu

Head-to-Head
Human evidence BPC-157: None GHK-Cu: Med (topical)

BPC-157 remains animal-only, while GHK-Cu has moderate human evidence for topical skin endpoints. Injectable GHK-Cu remains unproven, making the delivery route central to the verdict.

BPC-157 vs TB-500

Head-to-Head
Human evidence BPC-157: None TB-500: None

Two healing peptides with overlapping but non-identical preclinical trails: BPC-157's NO / growth-factor signaling versus TB-500's actin-driven cell migration. Both lack human RCTs for musculoskeletal use.

TB-500 vs Ipamorelin

Head-to-Head
Human evidence TB-500: None Ipamorelin: Low

TB-500's systemic wound-healing and cell-migration animal evidence versus Ipamorelin's limited human GH-axis pharmacodynamic anchor. Neither has human efficacy RCTs for the marketed recovery, body-composition, or anti-aging uses.

TB-500 vs GHK-Cu

Head-to-Head
Human evidence TB-500: None GHK-Cu: Med (topical)

TB-500's systemic tissue-repair mechanism is supported by animal evidence only; GHK-Cu has topical human RCT support for skin endpoints, while injectable use remains unproven.

Ipamorelin vs GHK-Cu

Head-to-Head
Human evidence Ipamorelin: Low GHK-Cu: Med (topical)

GH-axis secretagogue versus copper tripeptide: GHK-Cu's moderate human evidence is route-specific to topical skin endpoints, while Ipamorelin has no human efficacy RCTs for body composition or anti-aging.

Sermorelin vs Ipamorelin

Head-to-Head
Human evidence Sermorelin: Low Ipamorelin: Low

Both GH-axis peptides have controlled human pharmacodynamic evidence for GH release, but neither has a human efficacy RCT for the body-composition, recovery, sleep, or anti-aging outcomes driving online interest.

CJC-1295 vs Ipamorelin

Head-to-Head
Human evidence CJC-1295: Low Ipamorelin: Low

Long-acting GHRH analog versus selective ghrelin-receptor agonist: different GH-axis receptors and half-life profiles, but zero human efficacy RCTs for adult anti-aging, body-composition, or sleep claims.

Sermorelin vs CJC-1295

Head-to-Head
Human evidence Sermorelin: Low CJC-1295: Low

Two GHRH-receptor analogs with different half-life profiles. Human evidence is limited to pharmacodynamic or diagnostic-stimulation findings, not efficacy RCTs for adult anti-aging or body-composition claims.

BPC-157 vs Sermorelin

Head-to-Head
Human evidence BPC-157: None Sermorelin: Low

BPC-157's local wound-healing and NO-pathway animal evidence contrasts with Sermorelin's narrow human GH-pulse pharmacodynamic trail. Neither has efficacy data for the adult anti-aging outcomes driving the stack framing.

Find Your Fit

Three honest starting points based on where you are in the evaluation process. None of them requires sharing an email or trusting a vendor.

I want a clinical-weight-loss peptide

You're interested in FDA-approved GLP-1 receptor agonists (semaglutide, tirzepatide) — the only peptide class with strong human RCT evidence for weight loss and glycemic control.

See GLP-1 Decoded → $37 — full evidence + decision framework

I want to evaluate evidence before buying

You're skeptical of marketing claims and want a structured way to read studies, identify red flags, and assess any peptide before spending money or trusting a vendor.

Get the Decoder Kit → $27 — 8-module research literacy kit

I want the full peptide library

You want detailed, evidence-grounded breakdowns for BPC-157, TB-500, GHK-Cu, GLP-1, Ipamorelin, Sermorelin, and CJC-1295 in one bundle — including mechanism, human evidence gaps, vendor red flags, and sourcing questions.

Get the Full Library → $67 — all seven guide PDFs Add the Weekly Digest →
Educational Only — Not Medical Advice

This comparison table is a research summary, not medical advice. PeptideDecoded does not sell peptides, recommend vendors, provide dosing protocols, or make claims about safety or efficacy for any specific individual.

Work with a qualified physician who can evaluate your full medical history, current medications, and individual risk factors before making any decision about peptides — whether FDA-approved, compounded, or sold as research chemicals.