The news: Hims & Hers introduced a compounded semaglutide pill on Thursday at $49 per month, prompting Novo Nordisk, the drug’s FDA-approved manufacturer, to call the move illegal and pledge legal and regulatory action.

Catch up quick: Hims began selling compounded versions of semaglutide—sold by Novo Nordisk as Wegovy—in 2024, when the FDA allowed compounding because of shortages. After the FDA declared the shortage over in February 2025, Hims continued selling compounded semaglutide under an FDA allowance for personalized dosages.

Why it matters: Novo recently launched its Wegovy pill and saw quick uptake, but Hims’ move to market a compounded alternative at a significantly lower price puts immediate pricing and competitive pressure on the drugmaker.

• Novo’s Wegovy pill drew more than 170,000 patients in its first four weeks, and analysts project more than $1 billion in first-year sales.
• However, Hims’ compounded pill costs $49 for the first month then rises to $99 per month—significantly undercutting Novo’s $149 to $199 to $299 price tags (depending on dosage).
• A majority of US consumers say they could afford $100 or less per month for a GLP-1 weight loss drug, including 25% who could only pay $50 or less, per Health Management Academy’s survey in November.

Novo’s stock fell 7.9%, while Hims’ stock initially rose as much as 14% before dropping 1.4%, per Bloomberg. Eli Lilly, which is preparing its own weight loss pill for launch by midyear, also saw its stock drop by 7.1% by around noon ET.

Implications for drugmakers and telehealth companies: Hims’ move to sell a compounded version of a newly approved drug that is not under an FDA-declared shortage raises broader questions for drugmakers and highlights how brand-name medicines could be challenged if similar approaches gain traction.

For telehealth companies, the risk of regulatory scrutiny has led some players, including Ro and Weight Watchers, to move away from GLP-1 compounding in favor of direct-to-consumer partnerships with Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. The differing approaches reflect how companies are weighing lower-cost access through compounding against the regulatory certainty of manufacturer-sanctioned models.