Skip to content
The Peptide Effect
Comparison

Retatrutide vs Liraglutide

Retatrutide and liraglutide represent two different generations of incretin-based weight loss therapies separated by a massive efficacy gap. Retatrutide is a novel triple agonist targeting GLP-1, GIP, and glucagon receptors simultaneously, producing unprecedented weight loss of up to 24% body weight in Phase 2 trials. Liraglutide (Saxenda/Victoza), a single GLP-1 receptor agonist approved since 2014, achieves a more modest ~8% weight loss. While liraglutide has over a decade of real-world safety data and widespread insurance coverage, retatrutide may redefine the upper limits of pharmacological weight loss once approved.

Side-by-side comparison diagram of Retatrutide and Liraglutide mechanisms of action
Conceptual comparison — not to scale

Head-to-Head Comparison

CriteriaRetatrutideLiraglutide
Primary mechanismTriple agonist — GLP-1 + GIP + glucagon receptor activationSingle GLP-1 receptor agonist
Average weight loss~22–24% body weight at 48 weeks (12 mg dose, Phase 2)~5–8% body weight at 56 weeks
FDA approval statusPhase 3 clinical trials (Eli Lilly); not yet approvedFDA-approved: Victoza (2010, diabetes), Saxenda (2014, obesity)
Injection frequencyOnce weekly (subcutaneous)Once daily (subcutaneous)
Glucagon receptor activationYes — increases energy expenditure and hepatic fat oxidationNo — no glucagon receptor activity
GIP receptor activationYes — enhances insulin sensitivity and may amplify GLP-1 effectsNo — no GIP receptor activity
Effect on liver fat (MASLD)Significant reduction via glucagon-mediated hepatic fat oxidationModest reduction (secondary to weight loss)
GI side effectsNausea, diarrhea, vomiting (similar rates to other incretins with slow titration)Nausea, diarrhea, constipation (well-characterized over 10+ years)
Muscle mass preservationPreliminary data suggests better lean mass preservation (possibly GIP-mediated)Lean mass loss proportional to total weight loss (~25–40% of weight lost)
Cardiovascular dataNo completed cardiovascular outcomes trial yetLEADER trial showed cardiovascular benefit (reduced MACE in T2D)
ConvenienceWeekly injection — high convenienceDaily injection — lower convenience
Approximate monthly costNot commercially available yet (estimated $1,000–$1,500 at launch)$1,300–$1,500/month (Saxenda list price); ~$200–$400 compounded

When to Choose Each

Choose Retatrutide

Maximum weight loss potential, patients with fatty liver disease (MASLD/MASH), those who prefer weekly dosing, patients inadequately responding to current GLP-1 therapies

Choose Liraglutide

Patients needing an approved therapy now, those with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk, patients wanting established long-term safety data, daily dosing preference for flexible dose adjustment

Verdict

Retatrutide represents a generational leap in obesity pharmacotherapy, delivering roughly three times the weight loss of liraglutide through its triple-receptor mechanism. The addition of glucagon receptor agonism drives increased energy expenditure and liver fat reduction that single GLP-1 agonists cannot match. However, liraglutide remains the pragmatic choice today — it is FDA-approved, widely available, has proven cardiovascular benefits from the LEADER trial, and has 10+ years of real-world safety data. For patients who can wait, retatrutide may obsolete liraglutide for weight management upon approval.

References

  1. Retatrutide, a GIP, GLP-1 and glucagon receptor agonist, for people with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, placebo and active-comparator controlled phase 2 trial (2023) — PubMed
  2. Triple-hormone-receptor agonist retatrutide for obesity — a phase 2 trial (2023) — PubMed
  3. A randomized controlled trial of 3.0 mg of liraglutide in weight management (SCALE Obesity) (2015) — PubMed
  4. Liraglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes (LEADER trial) (2016) — PubMed

Frequently Asked Questions

How much more weight loss does retatrutide produce compared to liraglutide?
In clinical trials, retatrutide at the highest dose (12 mg weekly) produced approximately 24% body weight loss at 48 weeks, compared to liraglutide's typical 5–8% at 56 weeks. This means retatrutide delivers roughly 3× the weight loss. For a 250-pound person, that translates to approximately 60 pounds with retatrutide versus 15–20 pounds with liraglutide. The difference is attributed to retatrutide's triple-receptor mechanism adding energy expenditure (glucagon) and enhanced insulin signaling (GIP) on top of GLP-1 appetite suppression.
When will retatrutide be available?
Retatrutide is currently in Phase 3 clinical trials sponsored by Eli Lilly. Based on typical FDA review timelines and the Phase 3 trial completion dates, the earliest potential approval is estimated for late 2026 or 2027. However, timelines can shift based on trial results and regulatory review. Eli Lilly has prioritized tirzepatide (Mounjaro/Zepbound) and may stagger retatrutide's commercial launch strategically.
Why does retatrutide include a glucagon agonist if glucagon raises blood sugar?
This is counterintuitive but intentional. While glucagon does raise blood glucose when acting alone, in retatrutide the simultaneous GLP-1 and GIP agonism more than compensate for glucagon's glycemic effect, maintaining glucose control. Meanwhile, glucagon receptor activation provides unique benefits: it increases hepatic fat oxidation (burning liver fat), raises resting energy expenditure (thermogenesis), and promotes lipolysis. The net effect is dramatically more fat loss without the hyperglycemia you would expect from glucagon alone.
What are the main differences in side effects between retatrutide and liraglutide?
Both medications share the GLP-1-class side effects of nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting, which are most common during dose escalation. Liraglutide has over a decade of post-marketing safety data, providing well-characterized side effect profiles. Retatrutide's Phase 2 data suggests comparable GI side effect rates to other incretins when titrated slowly, but its glucagon component could theoretically introduce additional effects not seen with liraglutide, such as transient blood glucose fluctuations early in treatment. Long-term safety data from Phase 3 trials is still pending. Consult a healthcare provider to discuss individual risk factors.
Is retatrutide more cost-effective than liraglutide given the weight loss difference?
Retatrutide is not yet commercially available, so direct cost comparisons are speculative. Analysts estimate a launch price of $1,000 to $1,500 per month, similar to other branded incretins. Liraglutide (Saxenda) costs approximately $1,300 to $1,500 per month at list price, though compounded versions are available for $200 to $400. On a cost-per-pound-lost basis, retatrutide could potentially offer significantly better value given its roughly threefold greater weight loss, but this will depend on final pricing, insurance coverage, and individual response. Discussing affordability and coverage options with a healthcare provider is advisable.

Explore next