Comparison Centre
Two compounds, the same questions, no cherry-picking
Marketing compares compounds on whichever measure flatters them. This compares them on the same fields every time — including the awkward ones like how much human safety data exists. Every score here rates the evidence, not the compound: a higher number means stronger or more mature research, not that something is safer or works better.
Sharing keeps the two compounds you picked.
How to read these scores
Every number here rates the evidence, not the compound. They are editorial 0-100 strength ratings, not percentages, and not a rating out of five stars.
- Human efficacy evidence strength — Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
- Preclinical evidence strength — Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.
- Human safety evidence strength — Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number. A score of 80 does not mean “80% safe”.
- Evidence level (L0-L5) — the strongest type of study behind the compound, from anecdote (L0) to large replicated human trials (L5). It is a description of the study evidence, not a quality, safety or recommendation rating.
- Confidence — how likely we think it is that this rating changes as new research lands. Low confidence means the picture is unsettled, not that the compound is bad.
None of these ratings is medical advice, a safety guarantee, or a recommendation to use anything. How we grade evidence.
PEG-MGF
A muscle-repair peptide with a compelling mechanism story and no robust human outcome evidence.
AOD-9604
A growth-hormone fragment marketed for fat loss whose own obesity trials failed to establish a benefit.
How far human research has progressed
PEG-MGF
No robust human trial evidence identified in our curated recordAOD-9604
Reached Phase 2b in obesity; development discontinued without an established benefitHuman efficacy evidence strength
Higher = more and better-quality human evidence. It does not mean the effect is bigger or that the compound works for you.
PEG-MGF
AOD-9604
Preclinical (animal / lab) evidence strength
Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.
PEG-MGF
AOD-9604
Human safety evidence strength
Higher = more mature, better-documented human safety data. It does not mean the compound is safer than one with a lower number.
PEG-MGF
AOD-9604
Regulatory status (legal position, not proof it works)
PEG-MGF
Not an approved medicine anywhere. Sold as a research chemical, widely discussed in performance and bodybuilding communities, and prohibited in sport. A 2026 peer-reviewed review documents it among substances being self-administered outside medical supervision.AOD-9604
Not an approved medicine for weight loss or anything else in any major region. FDA compounding material notes limited safety information. It is sold widely as a research chemical and heavily discussed in fat-loss communities. It is also prohibited in sport.Common claims
PEG-MGF
- · Activates muscle stem cells for faster growth
- · Speeds recovery from training and injury
- · Localised muscle growth where injected
AOD-9604
- · Targeted fat loss without growth hormone side effects
- · Works because it is 'the fat-loss part of HGH'
- · Cartilage and joint repair
How settled our evidence rating is
PEG-MGF
AOD-9604
Cancer-related questions raised by the biology
These are theoretical or monitored questions raised by how a compound works. They are not evidence that it causes cancer.
PEG-MGF
IGF-1 pathway signalling is mechanistically linked to cell proliferation, so a theoretical concern exists. No human data establish or exclude a risk for this peptide.AOD-9604
No established human cancer signal specific to this fragment. Growth-hormone-axis concerns discussed for full growth hormone do not transfer automatically to a fragment with no established receptor activity.What this adds up to, in plain English
PEG-MGF
The interesting work is in animals and lab studies. Treating it as an established human treatment is not supported by evidence.AOD-9604
The interesting work is in animals and lab studies. Treating it as an established human treatment is not supported by evidence.A comparison is not a recommendation