Ingredient or product comparison
Difference Between AHK-Cu and GHK-Cu: Structure Comparison
Before selecting a copper peptide for your research, understanding the structural and functional distinctions is essential. This table summarizes the core differences between AHK-Cu and GHK-Cu across critical experimental parameters. Amino Acid Sequence Gly-Hi
This source-based comparison does not add ratings or recommend a winner.
- Before selecting a copper peptide for your research, understanding the structural and functional distinctions is essential. This table summarizes the core differences between AHK-Cu and GHK-Cu across critical experimental parameters.
- Amino Acid Sequence
- Gly-His-Lys-Cu
- Ala-His-Lys-Cu
- Single amino acid substitution (Gly→Ala) creates measurable functional differences
- Lipophilicity (log P)
- Lower (~−1.2)
- Higher (~−0.8)
- AHK-Cu crosses lipid membranes more efficiently; critical for dermal penetration studies
- Plasma Half-Life
- 1.5–2 hours
- 2.0–2.8 hours
- AHK-Cu resists aminopeptidase degradation; requires less frequent dosing in serum-containing media
- LRP1 Receptor Affinity (Kd)
- ~8.3 μM
- ~21.7 μM
- GHK-Cu engages LRP1-mediated endocytosis more effectively; stronger TGF-β pathway activation
- Integrin Binding
- Broad (α₂β₁, α₃β₁, others)
- Selective (α₂β₁ preferential)
- GHK-Cu demonstrates multi-receptor promiscuity; AHK-Cu favors specific integrin subtypes
- Stratum Corneum Permeability
- Low without enhancers
- 2.8-fold higher than GHK-Cu
- AHK-Cu is the clear choice for transdermal delivery and cosmetic formulation research
- Natural Occurrence
- Present in human plasma (~200 ng/mL, declines with age)
- Synthetic analog
- GHK-Cu has more extensive pharmacokinetic and safety data from decades of research
- Typical Research Applications
- Wound healing, tissue remodeling, multi-pathway signaling studies
- Dermal penetration, intracellular copper delivery, formulation stability