Avalon Pernell, a Bloomberg equities reporter, joins the studio to walk through the drug makers chasing pattern hair loss and the stocks that have moved with them. She covers when the first approvals could land, the three delivery routes the lead companies are pursuing, the side effects that come with a minoxidil-type product, and why the analysts she spoke to think the customer is already paying. This is one of four segments in the episode, each summarized separately; the news quiz that closes the programme is covered in the Stephen Moore summary.
👤 Guest: Avalon Pernell, equities reporter at Bloomberg
🎙️ Hosts: Christina Ruffini and Bailey Lipschultz, Bloomberg This Weekend
📰 Published: 30 August 2026
🔴 YouTube | 🟢 Spotify | 🟣 Apple Podcasts | 🔗 Show notes | ⏱️ 45 min | ✅ Time saved: 37 min
Key Takeaways
Nothing new has been approved for pattern hair loss since the late 1990s, and that is about to change
The show's own framing: it affects "an estimated 50 million men and 30 million women" in the United States
The first products are a year away at the earliest
"Not just yet. We're going to have to be looking into the 2027." Cosmo could be on shelves early next year with an approval
Three companies, three delivery routes: a lotion, a pill and a twice-a-year injection
"And Absci actually potentially has the biggest differentiated product."
Women have never had an FDA-approved pill for this, and analysts think that is the opening
"Most of these women have had to take it off-label"
GLP-1s did the hard part by making injections normal
"given the fact that GLP-1 has kind of already proved that people are willing to take shots"
The side-effect profile is the old one, not a new one
"it could be like heart palpitations, potentially some changes to your sex drive"
The market case is that the customer already pays cash — for clinics, and for transplants abroad
"It's $15,000 to $20,000."
Demand is sticky through a downturn because it is a vanity purchase people do not cut
"Even if the economy has a downturn, they're still willing to pay."
The hosts turned it into a question about a K-shaped economy for appearance
No Approved Treatment Since the Late 1990s, and Two Companies Are Close
Ruffini set the segment up from the obesity trade: drug makers found a promising cure for the obesity epidemic and their stocks were rewarded, and investors are now looking at a new crop of companies working on baldness. She gave the market size — pattern hair loss affects "an estimated 50 million men and 30 million women" in the United States — and the gap that matters, that there have been "no new approved treatments since the late 1990s".
She also flagged that this is not only a men's problem, and Lipschultz noted his own hairline is not as good as it could be, which is roughly where the segment's running joke started.
Ruffini called the piece "One of the most read stories on the terminal over the weekend."
The timing question, asked first: are these drugs going to be on shelves or prescribed by doctors anytime soon?"Not just yet. We're going to have to be looking into the 2027. So next year before we're going to see any of these drugs potentially come to market."Lipschultz pressed on that, and she confirmed: "Exactly. As soon as next year." Ruffini noted it is already August and basically September on Tuesday
Who is in front: "the two that are actually in the lead right now would be Cosmo, which could have a product on the shelves by early next year if they get an approval, and Veradermics, which is also set to potentially go ahead and apply""especially when you consider the fact that Veradermics only actually became public this year"
Three Companies, Three Delivery Routes, and a Pill Women Have Only Had Off-Label
Lipschultz asked the question that decides whether this is a real trade: GLP-1s fundamentally changed how obesity was treated, so is anything here fundamentally different, or is the technology the same? Pernell answered with the lay of the land rather than the chemistry — three companies going at it three ways.
"Cosmo is looking at like a lotion that you would add to your hair. Veradermics is creating a pill."
The regulatory gap on the women's side is the part analysts flagged: "there hasn't actually been an FDA-approved treatment for hair loss that is a pill. Most of these women have had to take it off-label", which the analysts she spoke to said could be a really big deal
"And Absci actually potentially has the biggest differentiated product. They're looking at a shot that you would take maybe every six months or so, and then that would just keep your hair on your head."
Why an injection is a viable product at all: "given the fact that GLP-1 has kind of already proved that people are willing to take shots"
Ruffini agreed that this is the change that opens the category. "Well, this is a big game changer. People are willing to use needles now, right?" And the dosing is undemanding: "I will say six months is not a daily shot." If it is twice a year, she said, you are probably already seeing a doctor anyway.
The Side Effects Are the Minoxidil Side Effects
Ruffini asked what the health issues or side effects could be, saying it is obviously top of mind, and set up the alternative — flying to Turkey for a procedure, which Lipschultz said has become synonymous with hair transplants.
"I mean, it's still a minoxidil type of product. So it's definitely some of the same like side effects that you're seeing potentially where it could be like heart palpitations, potentially some changes to your sex drive."
She said that last one is something a lot of people are not interested in
The hope, she said, is that more data will show fewer problems than with what is already on the shelves
The Customer Already Pays Cash, Which Is Why the Market Looks Big
Lipschultz made the bear case on willingness to pay. GLP-1 drugs do what he called insane things for comorbidities based on recent studies — high blood pressure, obesity, other risk factors — which is why people will pay out of pocket, "sometimes as much as $1,200 a month for those drugs". Hair loss is different. "I think it's going to be a very small subset of the population that's going to pay something similar for hair loss."
Pernell said that is exactly the discussion she had been having with analysts, and their answer is that the spending is already happening.
People going to Turkey, or to men's health clinics that offer treatments today, are putting a lot of money into this
"So if you already have like a cash pay customer that is willing to spend maybe $120."
The hosts filled in the alternative prices themselves. Ruffini: "Or to go to Turkey for $4,000, $6,000." Lipschultz: "Or to get it done in the U.S., I have several friends who've done it. It's about $20,000."Pernell put the range at "It's $15,000 to $20,000."
Stop Taking It and the Hair Goes, but the Spending Is Sticky
Lipschultz raised the commercial catch and the personal one at the same time: "you're on it for life, right?" If he takes the shot every six months his hair looks great, and if he stops to avoid the side effects, it presumably falls out. Pernell agreed that it probably does.
What she found more interesting was what a clinic owner already giving treatments told her about demand.
You would expect interest to move with the economy, and it does not
"for a lot of people, this is a vanity issue that they really care about. You don't want your hair to fall out. So they tend to be fairly sticky and they're going to stick with that. Even if the economy has a downturn, they're still willing to pay."
Ruffini said this is one of the few issues she has seen the men in her life genuinely get upset about, and be willing to spend money on
A K-Shaped Hairline, and What Happens if Everyone Can Buy the Look
The segment ended on where this goes if the drugs work. Lipschultz framed it as a K-shaped economy question: "If you can afford to look better, why not? If there's a drug, even if it's out of pocket and it's a few thousand dollars."
Ruffini took it one step further: "What is it saying? You're not ugly, you're just poor? Are we going to have like a K-shaped hairline if these drugs come into play?"
Pernell said she and her editors had been talking about the same thing: "I mean, we have GLP-1s. Potentially, we're going to have new hair drugs as well. What does the world look like if we're all kind of looking perfect to a certain degree?"Ruffini's version: "You can be skinny and you can have hair forever in theory, right?"
Lipschultz's reservation is the time horizon: he said he is still nervous about the long-term effects of taking a GLP-1 and a hair injection together. "But what happens 20 years from now? I don't know."
Pernell's bottom line is that the first new hair-loss treatments in a quarter-century could reach the market next year, that the injectable is the differentiated one because GLP-1s already taught patients to accept a shot, and that the market case rests on a customer who is already paying cash and does not stop when the economy turns.
Products, Companies & Tools Mentioned
Cosmo (One of the two leaders; a lotion applied to the hair that could be on shelves by early next year with an approval)
Veradermics (The other leader, developing a pill, and set to potentially apply; it only became public this year)
Absci (Potentially the most differentiated product, she said: an injection taken about every six months)
GLP-1 drugs (The reference trade for the whole segment — they changed obesity treatment, proved patients will accept injections, and set the out-of-pocket price expectation Lipschultz put at as much as $1,200 a month)
Minoxidil (The class these products still belong to, and the source of the side effects she named)
Books & Resources Mentioned
Pernell's Bloomberg story on the hair-loss drug makers (The reporting behind the segment, which the hosts said was one of the most-read on the terminal that weekend and which draws on analysts and a clinic owner already giving treatments)
Get the latest market chatter as it happens: