Eli Lilly's $92B Forecast: Can Viking Therapeutics Compete?

Eli Lilly reported third-quarter revenue of $24.4 billion, a 39% year-over-year increase, driven by a 49% surge in Zepbound sales to $5.4 billion. This impressive performance prompted the company to raise its full-year sales guidance to $91–$92 billion, up from $85–$87 billion.

The company's weight-loss franchise continues to outperform, solidifying Eli Lilly's leadership in the obesity market. Zepbound, a dual-hormone therapy mimicking GLP-1 and GIP, has set a high bar for competitors.

Meanwhile, Viking Therapeutics is advancing its own dual-hormone candidate, VK2735, which showed up to 14.7% mean weight loss in a 13-week Phase 2 trial. The subcutaneous version is now in Phase 3 studies, with results expected in 12–18 months.

Viking is also developing an oral formulation of VK2735, which posted encouraging mid-stage results but raised tolerability concerns due to high discontinuation rates at the highest dose. Additionally, the company is exploring maintenance dosing strategies, showing that patients maintained up to 97% of their initial weight loss after switching to bi-weekly or monthly dosing.

With Eli Lilly's strong position and Viking's promising pipeline, the weight-loss market is heating up, and both companies could capture significant opportunities in the coming years.

Eli Lilly's raised guidance reflects robust demand for its weight-loss drugs and reinforces its dominant position in a market expected to reach $100 billion by 2030. The company's diversified pipeline, including late-stage asset retatrutide and newer drugs like Kisunla for Alzheimer's, provides multiple growth drivers beyond obesity.

However, pricing pressure is emerging as average realized prices for Zepbound declined in Q3, though volume growth more than offset the impact. As competition intensifies, Eli Lilly's ability to maintain pricing power and volume growth will be critical.

Viking Therapeutics represents a pure-play opportunity in obesity, but as a clinical-stage biotech, it carries significant risk. Positive Phase 3 data for VK2735 could send shares soaring, but any setback could be devastating. The company's multi-pronged approach—subcutaneous, oral, and maintenance—could carve out a niche, but it must prove efficacy and tolerability in larger trials.

For investors, the choice between Eli Lilly and Viking comes down to risk tolerance. Eli Lilly offers stability and diversified growth, while Viking offers explosive upside but with binary risk. Both could be winners in a growing market, but their risk profiles are vastly different.