Choose any two compounds below to see them side by side. Each comparison page lines up the level of evidence behind each one, the registered clinical trials, and where each stands with regulators, so the differences are easy to see in one place.
This is a side-by-side of what is documented, not a ranking. Different compounds are studied for different things, in different people, at different amounts. A row that looks stronger for one compound does not make it the better choice for anyone.
| MOTS-c | SS-31 | |
|---|---|---|
| Highest evidence tier on the page | E3 Early human evidence Small, open-label, uncontrolled, case series, or a registered trial with no published results. | E1 Approved-label evidence FDA or EMA approved labelling for a specific indication. |
| Regulatory status | Not approved for human use | Not stated |
| Research area | Longevity and mitochondrial | Longevity and mitochondrial |
| Regulator-approved dose on file | No approved dose | Yes, approved labelling exists |
| Molecular formula | Not reliably established | C32H49N9O5 (free base) |
| Molar mass | Not reliably established | ≈639.8 g/mol (free base) |
| CAS number | Not reliably established | 736992-21-5 (free base); 72244098-12-0 (hydrochloride) |
| Registered trials on this site | 1 in the tracker | None linked yet |
| Furthest registered phase | Phase 2 | Not stated |
| Trials currently active | 1 | Not stated |
| Trial sponsors | Hudson Biotech | Not stated |
| Published trials covered on its page | 1 | 6 |
| Amounts studied in those trials | NCT07505745 (MOTS-MET): Subcutaneous injection, MOTS-c vs. placebo; specific dose and injection schedule not disclosed in the public registry record for 12-week double-blind treatment, 4-week safety follow-up (16 weeks total) As reported on the compound page. Amounts are not comparable between compounds. | TAZPOWER: Elamipretide 40 mg SC once daily versus placebo, crossover, then open-label extension to 168 weeks for 12-week crossover periods; extension to 168 weeks MMPOWER-2: Elamipretide 40 mg SC once daily versus placebo, crossover for 4 weeks per arm plus washout MMPOWER-3: Elamipretide 40 mg SC once daily versus placebo for 24 weeks As reported on the compound page. Amounts are not comparable between compounds. |
| What is not known | Molecular formula, exact molecular weight and CAS/PubChem identifiers for MOTS-c were not confirmed in the sources reviewed for this entry. The exact mechanism of secretion, receptor (if one exists), half-life and tissue distribution of MOTS-c in humans is unknown; every mechanistic pathway described for it... | Whether elamipretide provides a clinical benefit in Barth syndrome beyond the muscle-strength surrogate the accelerated approval rests on. The confirmatory trial required by FDA was recruiting, with a primary completion date years out, at the time of this entry. Whether the compound has any benefit... |
Full pages: MOTS-c and SS-31. See also the clinical trial tracker and how we grade evidence.
Educational reference, not medical advice. Trial data from ClinicalTrials.gov. Everything else is drawn from the compound pages on this site, each of which cites its sources.
Most requested comparisons
These are the pairings readers look for most often. Each opens a full side-by-side page.
Weight management compounds
- Retatrutide vs Tirzepatide
- Semaglutide vs Tirzepatide
- Retatrutide vs Semaglutide
- Retatrutide vs Survodutide
- Cagrilintide vs Semaglutide
- Orforglipron vs Semaglutide
- Mazdutide vs Tirzepatide
- Cagrilintide vs Eloralintide
- LY4086940 vs Retatrutide
- LY4086940 vs Orforglipron
Growth hormone related peptides
- Ipamorelin vs Sermorelin
- Sermorelin vs Tesamorelin
- CJC-1295 (no DAC) vs Ipamorelin
- CJC-1295 with DAC vs Ipamorelin
Repair and recovery
Longevity, mitochondria and brain
How to read a comparison
A side-by-side table can make two compounds look equally proven when they are not. Keep these points in mind as you read.
- Evidence level matters more than the headline. Every compound is placed on the same six-tier scale, from published human clinical trials down to community reports. A compound with large human trials and one with only animal studies are not comparable, even when both appear in the same table.
- Registered trials show what is being tested. A trial listed on ClinicalTrials.gov tells you a question is being studied, not that the answer is known. Check the status and phase. You can browse every tracked study on the clinical trial tracker and see recent registry updates in the trial changes feed.
- Regulatory status is specific to a formulation and a country. Approval of one product does not mean every version of that compound is approved.
- Different populations and doses limit direct comparison. Results from separate trials, run in different people over different periods, cannot be lined up as if they came from a head-to-head study unless a comparison page says a head-to-head study exists.
Frequently asked questions
Which compound is better?
These pages do not rank compounds or tell anyone what to use. They show what the published and registered evidence says about each one so you can see where the evidence is strong and where it is thin.
Why are some comparisons mostly empty on one side?
Many popular peptides have little or no human trial data. When that is the case, the comparison says so plainly rather than filling the gap with community claims.
Can I compare doses here?
Reported amounts are documented on each individual peptide page, with the source and evidence tier for every figure. If you need to work out concentrations, the reconstitution calculator is a math tool only and does not suggest an amount.
Where can I see every compound?
The full peptide library lists every entry,.
PeptideBlog is an educational reference compiled from public sources. It is not medical advice, and nothing here is a recommendation for or against any compound.
