Most writing about what Hims & Hers charges for a GLP-1 quotes a price from an advertisement. There is a better source, and it is public: the company files quarterly with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and those filings say things about its weight-loss business that its marketing pages do not.
Everything below is from the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended 30 June 2026, filed on 10 August 2026 under SEC accession number 0001773751-26-000163. This page reports what the company discloses. It does not recommend a medicine or a provider, as our editorial standards set out.
The number that survives a price change
Advertised telehealth prices move month to month, which is why quoting one without a date is close to useless. The company's own subscriber economics move more slowly, and it publishes them.
| Metric, quarter ended 30 June | 2026 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subscribers (end of period) | 2,891,000 | 2,439,000 | +19% |
| Monthly Revenue per Average Subscriber | $92 | $76 | +21% |
| United States revenue | $621.8m | $537.3m | +16% |
| Rest of the World revenue | $131.4m | $7.5m | +1,641% |
Ninety-two dollars a month is what the average subscriber generates across everything the company sells — weight loss, hair, skin, mental health, sexual health, the lot. The company adds two qualifications to it. Excluding its Eucalyptus acquisition, the quarterly figure would have been $90. And the metric includes people who made one-time purchases and are not subscribers at all; without them it would be roughly $10 lower.
That is a blended average, not a price, and nobody is quoted $92 at checkout. Its use is as a reality check. A subscription business whose average customer yields about ninety dollars a month is not one where large numbers of people are paying several hundred dollars a month for long.
The $38.1 million the filing does not put in an advertisement
Here is the disclosure that changes how the price should be read.
In March 2026, the Company announced a strategic shift for its United States weight loss offering ("2026 US WL Announcement"). As a result, the Company evolved its United States weight loss offering to match the Company's global approach towards providing access to branded glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist ("GLP-1") medications, and offering access to compounded GLP-1 medications through the platform on a limited scale.
And the cost of doing it: $4.6 million in restructuring and other related charges in the second quarter, $38.1 million across the first six months of 2026.
The compounded-GLP-1 offering is what made this company's weight-loss pricing famous. The filing says the US business has been reorganised to lead with branded medications instead, with compounded access continuing "on a limited scale" — and that reorganisation cost thirty-eight million dollars in half a year. Companies do not spend that unwinding a product line they expect to keep selling at the same volume.
For a prospective customer the implication is practical rather than dramatic: the cheap compounded tier is the part of this business the company itself has been moving away from, and a price quoted against it is a price attached to a shrinking offering.
The lawsuit, stated fairly
In the same filing, under contingencies:
On February 9, 2026, Novo Nordisk A/S and Novo Nordisk Inc. (together, "Novo Nordisk") filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware captioned Novo Nordisk A/S, et al. v. Hims & Hers Health, Inc., et al., No. 1:26-cv-0014. The complaint asserts claims for patent infringement related to Novo Nordisk's U.S. Patent No. 8,129,343 (the "'343" patent) in connection with compounded GLP-1 products containing semaglutide available, based on a prescription, through the Company's digital platform.
Novo Nordisk seeks damages, enhanced damages for alleged willful infringement, and a permanent injunction barring the conduct.
Two things need saying about this, and both matter. First, a complaint contains allegations, not findings. Nothing has been decided, the company has not been found to infringe anything, and it is entitled to defend itself. Second, an injunction request is nonetheless a real fact about supply: the remedy being sought is not money but a court order stopping the product. A patient building a year of treatment around a particular compounded supply route has an interest in knowing that the route is the subject of a pending injunction request, whatever the eventual outcome.
Read together with the $38.1 million restructuring, the direction is consistent. The company was already moving toward branded medications before the case is anywhere near resolved.
Where the growth is actually coming from
The headline for the quarter is 38% total revenue growth. That is true and it is mostly not the US business.
Rest of the World revenue went from $7.5 million to $131.4 million — a 1,641% increase that reflects the Eucalyptus acquisition rather than organic demand. Strip it out and the picture is quieter: United States revenue rose 16% for the quarter and 3% for the half, $1,151.7 million against $1,116.0 million. Over six months, the US business is close to flat.
Within that, the filing is specific about the source:
The increases in United States Revenue ... were primarily driven by growth in our Hers brand as a result of an expanded assortment of branded weight loss offerings
So the growing part of the US weight-loss business is the Hers side, and it is growing on branded products. Both storefronts belong to one operator with one subscriber count and one set of filings, which is worth knowing for anyone comparing a price on one against a price on the other — and it is a further sign that the branded shift is where the business is going, not merely where the accountants are.
What this means for the price on the page
None of the above tells anyone what they will be quoted this week, and that is the point. Advertised telehealth prices in this category are promotional, change frequently, and increasingly attach to a compounded tier the company is deliberately shrinking. A figure without a date and a product type — branded or compounded — is not a comparable number.
What the filings give instead is durable context: a business of 2.9 million subscribers averaging about $90 a month, growing 3% in the US over six months, that has spent $38.1 million pivoting its weight-loss line toward branded medicines while contesting a patent suit over the compounded ones.
For a reader comparing routes on price alone, the branded manufacturers' own self-pay programmes are the other side of the comparison, and their published conditions do more to the real cost than the headline does — the detail is on our GLP-1 cost page and in the brand pages for Zepbound and Wegovy. For how a membership-plus-medication structure prices out in practice, the arithmetic is worked through in our Mochi Health review. And the wider question of what happened to compounded semaglutide as a category is covered in what replaced it.