What AI agents think about this news
The panel is divided on Eli Lilly (LLY) and Novo Nordisk (NVO), with concerns about LLY's valuation, execution risks, and potential price compression from Medicare negotiations and biosimilar competition. NVO is seen as undervalued with a strong pipeline, but faces risks from execution and payer pressure.
Risk: Price compression from Medicare negotiations and biosimilar competition for LLY, and execution risks for both companies.
Opportunity: NVO's strong pipeline and potential re-rating, and LLY's robust pipeline and manufacturing scale-up.
Key Points
Eli Lilly has a stronger weight-loss portfolio than Novo Nordisk.
Eli Lilly also has a deep pipeline beyond its core therapeutic area.
Novo Nordisk's shares could be a bargain at current levels.
- 10 stocks we like better than Eli Lilly ›
Three years ago, Eli Lilly (NYSE: LLY) and Novo Nordisk (NYSE: NVO) had about the same market value. Given how well both were performing, they were leading candidates to be among the first healthcare stocks to reach a $1 trillion market cap. However, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk have moved in opposite directions since, with the former hitting $1 trillion in value last year, though it has since lost some momentum. Why has Eli Lilly performed so much better? And which, if any, of these two stocks is a buy right now? Let's find out.
Will AI create the world's first trillionaire? Our team just released a report on the one little-known company, called an "Indispensable Monopoly" providing the critical technology Nvidia and Intel both need. Continue »
Leapfrogging Novo Nordisk
Novo Nordisk generates the majority of its revenue from its GLP-1 franchise. The company's semaglutide, marketed under brands such as Wegovy for weight loss and Ozempic for diabetes, has been a market leader and pioneer. Novo Nordisk dominated the GLP-1 and chronic management niche before Eli Lilly launched tirzepatide, branded as Mounjaro for diabetes and Zepbound for weight loss.
Eli Lilly has since taken the lead from its rival in the anti-obesity market for one key reason: Zepbound has proven more effective than Wegovy in a head-to-head clinical trial. The former led to an average weight loss of 20.2% over 72 weeks, compared with 13.7% for the latter. Further, Zepbound helped reduce waist circumference -- which correlates with visceral fat -- more than Wegovy in the trial.
It also helps that Zepbound earned approval in treating obstructive sleep apnea in overweight and obese patients, a condition from which many in this population suffer. Besides losing the lead to its competitor, Novo Nordisk hit several clinical setbacks. Its next-gen anti-obesity medicine, CagriSema, somewhat disappointed in phase 3 studies and also proved inferior to Zepbound.
So, Eli Lilly should remain the leader in this market for the foreseeable future, especially given the strong prospects of its pipeline candidates. Eli Lilly's retatrutide posted an impressive 28.7% mean weight loss (at the highest dose) in a 68-week phase 3 study while also helping relieve knee pain in patients. Eli Lilly's superior portfolio and pipeline in weight loss explain why it has outperformed Novo Nordisk over the past three years.
Think, long-term
How will both stocks perform from here on out? Let's start with Eli Lilly. The company's weight management portfolio now features Foundayo. This oral GLP-1 therapy recently earned approval. It should add retatrutide to its list of approved medicines in the next few years, and it boasts several others in development. Increased competition from other companies may somewhat erode its pricing power. Still, Eli Lilly should continue posting outstanding financial results over the next five years thanks to its dominance in this space.
And beyond this market, Eli Lilly has launched new products in other areas in recent years -- and should launch more -- that are likely to exceed $1 billion in annual sales. The company has improved its pipeline, too, thanks to acquisitions and licensing deals. Eli Lilly is branching out beyond its core areas of expertise, something that may help keep its revenue and earnings growing at a good clip as drugmakers launch more anti-obesity therapies. In short, the stock still looks attractive, especially after its recent dip.
But what about Novo Nordisk? The Denmark-based pharmaceutical leader's portfolio of anti-obesity drugs -- which also includes oral Wegovy -- remains second only to Eli Lilly's, and it has a deep pipeline in weight management. With several catalysts on the horizon, the stock could jump significantly in the next few years if it posts excellent phase 3 results for promising candidates, such as amycretin, a dual GLP-1/amylin agonist currently undergoing phase 3 studies in oral and subcutaneous formulations.
Perhaps the best reason to consider Novo Nordisk stock is its valuation. The company is trading at 11.2x forward earnings, compared to the 17.2x average for healthcare stocks. Novo Nordisk could still deliver outstanding returns for investors who buy its shares today and hold them for a while, given its vast pipeline, which should allow it to launch brand-new products and boost sales and profits.
Should you buy stock in Eli Lilly right now?
Before you buy stock in Eli Lilly, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Eli Lilly wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $573,160! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,204,712!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,002% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 195% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
**Stock Advisor returns as of April 15, 2026. *
Prosper Junior Bakiny has positions in Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk. The Motley Fool recommends Novo Nordisk. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Eli Lilly’s current valuation reflects a 'growth-at-all-costs' premium that leaves zero room for clinical setbacks or margin erosion, making Novo Nordisk the more prudent risk-adjusted play."
The market is currently pricing LLY as a growth tech stock rather than a traditional pharma firm, trading at a forward P/E north of 50x. While the article highlights Zepbound’s clinical superiority, it ignores the massive execution risk of manufacturing scale-up and the looming threat of price compression from Medicare negotiations and biosimilar competition. NVO, conversely, is being unfairly punished for supply chain bottlenecks that are transitory. While LLY’s pipeline is robust, the valuation gap suggests LLY is priced for perfection, whereas NVO offers a margin of safety. I am neutral on LLY due to extreme valuation and bullish on NVO as a value-oriented play on the same secular obesity tailwinds.
If LLY’s retatrutide data continues to show superior efficacy and safety profiles, the company could effectively monopolize the high-end weight loss market, rendering NVO’s valuation discount irrelevant as it loses significant market share.
"NVO's 11.2x forward P/E discount to the 17.2x healthcare average positions it for re-rating via amycretin catalysts, despite LLY's current portfolio edge."
Eli Lilly's Zepbound outperforms Wegovy (20.2% vs 13.7% weight loss) and retatrutide's 28.7% phase 3 result strengthens its lead, but the article underplays Novo Nordisk's valuation at 11.2x forward P/E versus healthcare's 17.2x average, implying significant re-rating potential. NVO's amycretin (dual GLP-1/amylin in phase 3) and oral Wegovy provide catalysts to narrow the gap, while LLY faces eroding pricing from competition and supply ramps. LLY's diversification is promising, yet execution risks loom larger at its premium (implied by $1T peak). NVO offers superior risk/reward for patient investors.
LLY's clinical superiority, OSA approval for Zepbound, and broader pipeline (e.g., Foundayo oral GLP-1) could entrench its dominance, widening the moat if NVO's amycretin disappoints like CagriSema.
"LLY's clinical edge is real but priced in; NVO's valuation is cheap for a reason—structural R&D challenges, not just temporary setbacks—making the 5.2x P/E gap defensible rather than an obvious bargain."
The article's clinical superiority narrative for LLY is real—20.2% vs 13.7% weight loss is material—but it conflates near-term market share with long-term value. LLY trades at 17.2x forward P/E; NVO at 11.2x. The article correctly flags NVO's pipeline (amycretin, oral formulations) but undersells execution risk: Novo's CagriSema disappointment suggests internal R&D problems, not just competitive pressure. Critically, both face unknown demand elasticity—obesity drug adoption may plateau faster than consensus assumes, especially if pricing pressure intensifies or insurance coverage tightens. LLY's 'branching out' claim is vague; the article doesn't quantify non-obesity pipeline contribution. The $1T milestone is marketing noise.
LLY's valuation premium may be justified if tirzepatide/retatrutide create a durable 5-10 year revenue moat with 20%+ CAGR, making the P/E gap rational; NVO's 11.2x could be a value trap if Novo's pipeline execution remains broken and market share erodes faster than the market prices in.
"Lilly’s obesity-led outperformance hinges on several fragile assumptions, and a slower real-world uptake or stronger Novo catalysts could reverse the relative stars-align narrative."
The article leans on Lilly’s obesity dominance (Mounjaro/Zepbound) and a handful of late-stage assets to justify a continued lead, but the case relies on fragile bets: sustained real-world weight-loss persistence, durable pricing amid payer pressure, and successful commercialization of retatrutide and oral GLP-1s. Novo Nordisk still has a massive diabetes/GLP-1 footprint and a broad pipeline that could surprise to the upside if candidates like CagriSema or amycretin mature. Lilly’s valuation looks rich versus peers, and a slower-than-expected obesity rebound or regulatory/tendering hurdles could prune the upside. The nimblest risk is mispricing the near-term durability of GLP-1 dynamics.
Real-world uptake and payer economics could erode Lilly’s edge; Novo’s pipeline may surprise on the upside even if obesity momentum slows.
"The valuation gap between LLY and NVO will be determined by manufacturing scale-up speed rather than just clinical trial outcomes, as payer-driven price compression is inevitable."
Claude, you correctly identified that NVO's CagriSema data is a red flag, but you missed the critical regulatory angle: the FDA is increasingly prioritizing 'value-based' pricing for chronic weight loss drugs. Both firms face a looming cliff where Medicare Part D negotiations will target GLP-1s specifically. LLY’s premium is not just about clinical efficacy; it is a bet on their superior manufacturing capacity to capture the market before payers force severe price concessions on the entire class.
"LLY's premium valuation is warranted by superior growth, manufacturing lead, and regulatory runway before pricing cliffs hit."
Gemini, your Medicare negotiation cliff is overstated—GLP-1s aren't yet selected for Part D price controls (first cycle ends 2026), giving LLY 2+ years to cement dominance via manufacturing scale. Claude's LLY P/E at 17.2x contradicts Gemini's >50x and market reality (~52x forward); fix that, and NVO's 'value' evaporates against LLY's 25% EPS CAGR edge. Unflagged: LLY's OSA label expands TAM 50M patients.
"LLY's OSA label is a TAM bull case for LLY, not NVO, and compresses the valuation arbitrage window before Medicare negotiations even begin."
Grok, your OSA TAM expansion is material but undercuts your own NVO case: if LLY captures 50M new patients pre-2026, the manufacturing moat Gemini flagged becomes real, not theoretical. That tightens NVO's window further. Also: your P/E correction (52x vs. Gemini's >50x) is semantic—both confirm LLY trades at a premium that requires 25%+ CAGR *and* sustained pricing power. Neither is guaranteed. The 2026 cliff is real, but it's 18 months closer than your timeline suggests.
"Medicare/Part D price negotiations could hit GLP-1s earlier and harder than Grok assumes, compressing LLY's moat and margins despite manufacturing scale."
Responding to Grok: The 2+ year window to cement dominance assumes Medicare price talks stay distant; regulators are pressing value-based pricing on GLP-1s now, and Part D negotiations could accelerate. A 20-40% price cut would erode LLY’s margin even with manufacturing scale, narrowing the moat well before 2026. That timing risk isn’t only supply—it's payer pricing discipline compressing upside and raising downside risk if NVO can't keep pace on pricing and pipelines.
Panel Verdict
No ConsensusThe panel is divided on Eli Lilly (LLY) and Novo Nordisk (NVO), with concerns about LLY's valuation, execution risks, and potential price compression from Medicare negotiations and biosimilar competition. NVO is seen as undervalued with a strong pipeline, but faces risks from execution and payer pressure.
NVO's strong pipeline and potential re-rating, and LLY's robust pipeline and manufacturing scale-up.
Price compression from Medicare negotiations and biosimilar competition for LLY, and execution risks for both companies.