$23 billion in second-quarter revenue, a 48% year-over-year gain reported by Eli Lilly (NYSE: LLY), anchors the company's case as the GLP-1 market's commercial leader. The math reconciles: tirzepatide generated $14.8 billion across its two approved brands, with Mounjaro (diabetes) at $9.9 billion, up 91% YoY, and Zepbound (weight management) at $4.9 billion, up 46% YoY. Viking Therapeutics (NASDAQ: VKTX), the most prominently cited challenger, has no approved products and no revenue.
Tirzepatide's approved reach and what comes next
Tirzepatide, a dual GLP-1 and GIP hormone agonist, holds approvals for type 2 diabetes, weight loss, and obstructive sleep apnea. Those three indications put Eli Lilly in commercial markets today, not on a clinical timeline. The company also markets Foundayo, an oral GLP-1 described as attracting mostly new patients; revenue is not yet material by Eli Lilly's own standards. The next major regulatory target is retatrutide, a phase 3 candidate in diabetes and weight loss for which Eli Lilly plans to file an approval application in the first quarter of 2027 (projected).
VK2735: the data the warehouses are still waiting on
Viking's lead asset, VK2735, is a dual GLP-1/GIP agonist. Phase 2 subcutaneous results showed mean weight loss of up to 14.7% in 13 weeks, with no plateau observed. Tirzepatide's phase 3 benchmark sits at 20.2% average weight loss over 72 weeks. The difference in trial duration makes cross-study comparison unreliable, full stop. An oral VK2735 formulation completed phase 2 with encouraging efficacy data, though high rates of discontinuation tied to side effects were flagged. Phase 3 for the subcutaneous version is underway; the oral formulation is expected to enter late-stage trials by year-end (projected).
Risk asymmetry between the two names
Viking's shares carry binary exposure to phase 3 readouts. Strong data could push the stock sharply higher. A disappointment produces the opposite. Eli Lilly holds a deep portfolio across multiple approved areas beyond GLP-1 and, by comparison, carries limited downside risk. The choice between the two names comes down to $23 billion in quarterly revenue on one side and phase 3 trial outcomes not yet available on the other.