Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly stand at the center of one of the most powerful healthcare growth stories: GLP-1 drugs for diabetes and obesity. These two companies are not just shaping patient outcomes — they are also defining equity market performance in the healthcare sector. In 2025, the comparison boils down to three themes: franchise strength, pipeline and execution, and valuation.
Business Focus
Novo Nordisk’s core strength is semaglutide. Ozempic remains central in diabetes care, while Wegovy is rapidly expanding in obesity treatment and has secured an additional cardiovascular risk-reduction label in the U.S. That makes Wegovy more defensible and supports payer adoption.
Eli Lilly anchors its growth with tirzepatide, sold as Mounjaro for diabetes and Zepbound for obesity. These brands have rapidly scaled volumes, making Lilly one of the fastest-growing large-cap healthcare companies worldwide.
Pipelines
Eli Lilly has more diversification. Beyond metabolic health, its neurology pipeline delivered donanemab, now marketed as Kisunla for Alzheimer’s disease. This second pillar broadens the company’s growth profile and reduces reliance on tirzepatide.
Novo Nordisk is doubling down on cardiometabolic diseases, expanding semaglutide into additional indications while also developing next-generation oral GLP-1 candidates. Real-world data have strengthened the clinical story, adding credibility to its obesity franchise.
Execution and Capacity
Scaling supply has been one of the most pressing challenges. Both companies spent 2023–2024 investing in new manufacturing lines. Lilly’s execution has supported strong volume growth, while Novo Nordisk is in the middle of a restructuring to sharpen focus after softer growth and stiffer competition. These changes aim to accelerate decision-making and improve margins.
Valuation Snapshot
The market values the two very differently. Eli Lilly’s market capitalization sits around 650–666 billion USD. Novo Nordisk, after a steep repricing, trades at a value closer to 250 billion USD.
Multiples reflect that gap. Lilly trades at a forward P/E near the high 40s. Novo Nordisk trades closer to the mid-teens. Lilly’s premium reflects the market’s belief in multi-pillar growth, while Novo’s discount reflects execution risk during its reset.
How to Interpret This
For those seeking high-growth exposure, Eli Lilly looks like the premium choice, backed by tirzepatide momentum and the Alzheimer’s franchise. For those seeking lower-multiple exposure to the GLP-1 story, Novo Nordisk trades at a discount, though with higher operational risk.
Capitalise on volatility in share markets
Take a position on moving share prices. Never miss an opportunity.
71% of retail CFD accounts lose money.
Key Drivers to Watch
- Expansion of GLP-1 manufacturing capacity
- Payer decisions after new label approvals
- Cardiovascular outcomes data for obesity drugs
- Donanemab’s launch trajectory
- Pricing shifts as supply begins to meet demand
Trading Angles with CFDs
Traders can approach this comparison in several ways:
- Trade earnings and label updates as news catalysts
- Consider pair trades: long Novo, short Lilly, if spreads appear excessive
- Track major medical meetings and FDA decisions for volatility triggers
CFDs allow both long and short positioning, but require disciplined risk management, stop-loss orders, and careful sizing given volatility.
FAQs
1. Why does Lilly trade at a higher multiple than Novo Nordisk?
Lilly benefits from faster tirzepatide growth, a broader pipeline, and the Alzheimer’s launch, which justify its premium.
2. Does Wegovy’s cardiovascular label matter?
Yes, it expands reimbursement potential, improves the durability of the franchise, and enlarges the treatment population.
3. What could narrow the valuation gap?
Faster execution at Novo, additional capacity, and strong clinical outcomes could reduce the discount.
4. What risks should traders monitor?
Supply constraints, pricing shifts, payer rules, and sudden sentiment changes after trial results.
5. How do CFDs fit here?
They provide exposure to catalysts in either direction, with flexibility to go long or short.
