Skip to content
Recovery & Performance PeptidesRecovery research and practical context
Source comparison

Ipamorelin for Muscle Growth: Type Comparison

Ipamorelin Selective GHS-R1a agonist 2.5–3.5× baseline None 3× daily Cleanest profile for pure anabolic response. No hormonal interference GHRP-2 Non-selective ghrelin mimetic 3.0–4.5× baseline Moderate (30–40% increase) 2–3× daily Higher GH output but cortiso

This comparison does not assign a generated winner or score.

  • Ipamorelin
  • Selective GHS-R1a agonist
  • 2.5–3.5× baseline
  • None
  • 3× daily
  • Cleanest profile for pure anabolic response. No hormonal interference
  • GHRP-2
  • Non-selective ghrelin mimetic
  • 3.0–4.5× baseline
  • Moderate (30–40% increase)
  • 2–3× daily
  • Higher GH output but cortisol spike limits net anabolic effect
  • GHRP-6
  • Non-selective ghrelin mimetic + appetite stimulation
  • 3.5–5.0× baseline
  • Moderate to high
  • Strongest GH response but appetite surge and cortisol make it impractical for recomposition
  • Hexarelin
  • GHS-R1a + CD36 receptor agonist
  • 5.0–7.0× baseline
  • High
  • 1–2× daily maximum
  • Highest GH pulse but rapid desensitization and cardiac receptor concerns limit duration
  • CJC-1295 + Ipamorelin
  • GHRH analog + GHS-R1a agonist
  • 4.5–6.5× baseline
  • 1–2× daily
  • Synergistic stack. Amplifies ipamorelin's pulse without side effects
  • Ipamorelin occupies a unique position: it produces a moderate but clean GH pulse with no metabolic interference. For researchers prioritizing muscle protein synthesis without appetite disruption or stress hormone elevation, it outperforms older peptides despite producing a lower absolute GH spike. When stacked with CJC-1295, it matches the GH output of GHRP-6 while maintaining a side-effect profile closer to baseline.
More references

Related material