Skip to content
Peptide Evidence Registry

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.

VK3019

An investigational dual amylin and calcitonin receptor agonist that entered a first-in-human Phase 1 safety study in June 2026.

L1Theory onlyIn clinical trials
Full profile

VK2735

An investigational GLP-1/GIP dual agonist in Phase 3 as an injection, with an oral form behind it.

L3Early human studiesIn clinical trials
Full profile

How far human research has progressed

VK3019

Phase 1 initiated 24 June 2026 (safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics); no efficacy established

VK2735

Phase 3 fully enrolled (subcutaneous); oral Phase 3 not yet started

Claim-specific benefit evidence

A human exposure study or trial registration does not establish that the claimed benefit occurs.

VK3019

L1Theory only

Weight loss and comparative tolerability: no qualifying molecule-specific human outcome data.

VK2735

Not separately assessed; see the full profile.

Human research context

VK3019

First-in-human Phase 1 initiated; trial registration is not a result.

VK2735

Phase 3 fully enrolled (subcutaneous); oral Phase 3 not yet started

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.

VK3019

Strength of the human efficacy evidence8 of 100 evidence strength

VK2735

Strength of the human efficacy evidence40 of 100 evidence strength

Preclinical (animal / lab) evidence strength

Higher = more animal, tissue or cell research. Preclinical results are a starting point, not proof of a human benefit.

VK3019

Strength of the animal and lab evidence40 of 100 evidence strength

VK2735

Strength of the animal and lab evidence62 of 100 evidence strength

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.

VK3019

Strength of the human safety evidence8 of 100 evidence strength

VK2735

Strength of the human safety evidence22 of 100 evidence strength

Regulatory status (legal position, not proof it works)

VK3019

Check jurisdiction-specific details in the profile.

Not approved anywhere. A Phase 1 study evaluates safety, tolerability and how the drug behaves in the body; it is not designed to establish that it works.

VK2735

Check jurisdiction-specific details in the profile.

Not approved anywhere, in any formulation. The subcutaneous VANQUISH 1 and VANQUISH 2 Phase 3 trials were reported as fully enrolled by July 2026, and initiation of an oral Phase 3 programme was expected in the fourth quarter of 2026.

Common claims

VK3019

  • · Non-incretin weight loss
  • · Better tolerated than GLP-1 medicines

VK2735

  • · Large weight loss
  • · An oral option matching injectable results

How settled our evidence rating is

VK3019

Very low confidence in ratingL1Theory only

VK2735

Low confidence in ratingL3Early human studies

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.

VK3019

Not established. No human data exist in either direction.

VK2735

No demonstrated human cancer signal. Class-level incretin precautions apply and remain under trial surveillance.

What this adds up to, in plain English

VK3019

This sits in theory and anecdote. Popular claims about it should be treated with very low confidence.

VK2735

Preliminary human observations exist, but they may not establish a treatment-attributable benefit.

A comparison is not a recommendation

Neither column here is an endorsement, and the compound with the higher numbers is not the “better” or “safer” one — it is simply the one with more or better-quality research behind it. Two compounds can both be poorly evidenced, and better-evidenced says nothing about whether either is a sensible idea for a specific person. That is a conversation for a qualified clinician.