GHK-Cu vs AHK-Cu
Two copper-binding tripeptides studied in different tissues.
The short answer: GHK-Cu is studied mainly in skin remodelling; AHK-Cu mainly in hair follicles.
Side by side
| Property | GHK-Cu | AHK-Cu |
|---|---|---|
| Research category | Cosmetic Research | Cosmetic Research |
| Presentation | 50mg vial | 100mg vial |
| Dosage options | 50mg | 100mg |
| Approved medicine using it | None — investigational | None — investigational |
| Availability | In stock | In stock |
| Batch COA | Supplied with order | Supplied with order |
| From | €46.90 | €54.90 |
How they differ
Both are copper peptide complexes and both derive their activity from the copper ion they carry, which participates in the enzymatic processes of tissue remodelling.
The research literature separates them by tissue. GHK-Cu is overwhelmingly studied in dermal contexts — collagen synthesis, extracellular matrix remodelling, wound repair. AHK-Cu appears far more in follicular research, particularly around dermal papilla cells.
Handling is essentially identical: both are lyophilised and both are sensitive to the same storage conditions.
At the bench
Handling is essentially identical: both are lyophilised copper complexes with the same storage sensitivities. The copper ion is part of the active complex, which is why they are supplied as the complex rather than as the bare peptide.
What this comparison does not settle
The split by tissue reflects where each has been studied, not a demonstrated boundary. The absence of follicular data for GHK-Cu is not evidence of an absence of effect.
Common questions
What is the difference between GHK-Cu and AHK-Cu?
GHK-Cu is studied mainly in skin remodelling; AHK-Cu mainly in hair follicles. Two copper-binding tripeptides studied in different tissues.
Is GHK-Cu or AHK-Cu better?
Neither, and the question does not have a general answer. They are compared here on mechanism rather than merit. The split by tissue reflects where each has been studied, not a demonstrated boundary. The absence of follicular data for GHK-Cu is not evidence of an absence of effect.
Which of the two has more published data?
Neither has an approved formulation — both are investigational, and the published work on each is correspondingly narrower.
For research use only. Not for human consumption, diagnostic, therapeutic or veterinary use. Brand names are trademarks of their respective owners and are referenced only to identify the active compound — no affiliation or equivalence is claimed.