NAD+ + MOTS-c + 5-Amino-1MQ
Three compounds sold as three angles on energy. They are three routes to the same one.
Sold premixed as a mitochondrial or metabolic blend. Every compound in it works by raising NAD+, the molecule cells use to turn fuel into energy. One of the three has no human trial of any kind, and the blend costs nearly three times what the separate vials do.
Tiredness that sleep does not fix.
This is aimed at a specific complaint. Energy that has dropped without an obvious cause, training that feels harder than it used to, and the sense that metabolism has slowed with age.
NAD+ is the molecule underneath all of that. Cells use it to turn food into usable energy, and levels fall as people get older. The pitch is that three compounds approach it from three directions: supply it, signal for more of it, and stop it being consumed.
Fat loss is the secondary draw, and it comes from 5-Amino-1MQ. In mice, blocking the enzyme it targets reduced fat mass without the animals eating any less.
Four benefits, and how well each one holds up.
Nothing here says proven. That is unusual even for this site, and it is the accurate reading.
Three questions, answered before anything else.
Three compounds, one mechanism.
Blends normally justify themselves by covering different ground. This one does the opposite, and the product description is where you can see it.
Every row ends at the same place. That is not automatically wrong, since attacking one target three ways is a real strategy in pharmacology. It does mean the usual argument for a blend, that each compound covers something the others miss, does not apply here.
It also means the failure modes are correlated. If raising NAD+ turns out not to produce the energy people are after, all three compounds fail together rather than one covering for another.
Zero human trials, of any kind.
5-Amino-1MQ is the weakest evidence base on this site, and by a clear margin. A targeted PubMed search for a human clinical trial of it returns nothing. No published human study reports weight or fat loss as an outcome.[3]
That is not thin evidence. It is the absence of any. No efficacy data, no safety data, and oral absorption never measured in a person, which matters because the compound is usually sold as capsules.[1]
What exists is a real piece of laboratory science. In diet-induced obese mice, blocking NNMT reversed obesity and improved glucose tolerance over 11 days, without the animals eating less.[1] Later mouse work found 5 to 7 percent body weight reductions against controls over eight weeks.[2]
The enzyme is real and the biology is interesting. Preclinical metabolic findings also fail at the human trial stage often enough that several promising targets before this one did exactly that.[1]
One more thing worth knowing, and it comes from the community rather than a study. Around 40 percent of users report no effect at all.[4] That is uncontrolled and self-selected, so treat it as a caution rather than a finding.
It is also not a peptide. It is a small molecule sold on peptide sites, the same situation as MK-677.
One has a trial running. The other has never had one.
MOTS-c is the only compound here with a dated answer coming. Its first human efficacy trial began on 2 February 2026 in adults with prediabetes and excess weight, and reports around February 2027.[5] That page covers it in full, including the finding that exercise raises MOTS-c about twelvefold on its own.
NAD+ is the oldest and least examined of the three. It is sold injected, and no controlled trial has tested whether injecting it improves energy, fatigue or anything else people take it for.
The question specific to NAD+ is whether it reaches the inside of cells at all. Raising it in blood and raising it where mitochondria use it are different problems, and the second is the one that matters.
The SS-31 version of this stack covers the broader mitochondrial evidence, including a 218-patient Phase 3 trial that measured walking distance and found a difference of minus 3.2 metres.
Two and a half times the parts, from one seller.
We track a single listing of this blend, at $149.00 for a 120 mg vial split 100 mg of NAD+, 10 mg of MOTS-c and 10 mg of 5-Amino-1MQ.[6]
Buying the three compounds separately costs $56.55 at the cheapest in-stock listings. The blend is 2.6 times that.
On the CJC pairing the blend wins on cost per milligram and the argument for it is straightforward. Here it does not, and the one listing means there is no market to compare against.
Nothing here is approved, and one thing is banned in sport.
None of the three has FDA approval for any use. MOTS-c has no classification on the 503A list at all, the register of ingredients compounding pharmacies may work with, meaning it has not been assessed either way.
MOTS-c is banned at all times by WADA, the World Anti-Doping Agency, as an AMPK activator. Any tested athlete taking this blend has committed a doping violation.
There is no human safety data for 5-Amino-1MQ at any dose or duration.[3] There is none for injected MOTS-c either, and preclinical work has not evaluated its safety thoroughly.
One interaction is worth naming. 5-Amino-1MQ improved glucose tolerance in mice, so additive effects with insulin or other diabetes medicines are mechanistically plausible, and human data on that is absent.[1] Anyone on those drugs has a reason to have glucose monitored, and that is a conversation for a doctor.
What people ask about this stack
Does 5-Amino-1MQ burn fat?
In mice, yes. Blocking NNMT reversed obesity and improved glucose tolerance in diet-induced obese mice without them eating less, and later work found 5 to 7 percent body weight reductions against controls. In people, nobody knows. A PubMed search for a human clinical trial of the compound returns nothing, and no published human study reports weight or fat loss as an outcome.
Is 5-Amino-1MQ a peptide?
No. It is a small molecule that blocks an enzyme, sold on peptide sites because of what it does rather than what it is. The same is true of MK-677. It is usually sold as capsules, and its oral absorption has never been measured in a person.
Do the three compounds do different things?
Not really. All three converge on NAD+, the molecule cells use to turn fuel into energy. One supplies it, one signals through the same energy-sensing machinery, and one stops it being consumed in fat tissue. Attacking one target three ways is a legitimate strategy, but the usual argument for a blend, that each compound covers what the others miss, does not apply here.
Is the blend worth it?
We track one listing, at $149.00 for a 120 mg vial. Buying the three compounds separately costs $56.55 at the cheapest in-stock listings, so the blend is about 2.6 times the parts. The vials hold different amounts so it is not a like-for-like comparison, and buying separately also lets you drop whichever compound you decide is not earning its place.
Can athletes take it?
No. MOTS-c is banned at all times by WADA as an AMPK activator, which covers compounds that switch on the cell's low-energy response. Any tested athlete taking this blend has committed a doping violation regardless of the other two compounds.
Is there anything with better evidence?
For the energy question, the compound tested most rigorously is SS-31. Its largest trial measured walking distance in 218 patients and found a difference of minus 3.2 metres against a dummy treatment. That page covers it. MOTS-c is the only compound here with a dated answer coming, in February 2027. Compare against the other stacks.
What this page is built on
- 015-Amino-1MQ evidence and status review, April 2026. Source for the pivotal 2018 mouse study reversing obesity at 20 mg/kg over 11 days without changes in food intake, the absence of any completed or registered human trial, the absence of FDA approval, the note that preclinical metabolic findings frequently fail to replicate in humans, and the plausible additive glycemic interaction with diabetes medicines.
- 02Preclinical figures: NNMT activity in adipose tissue reduced 60 to 80 percent in vitro, intracellular NAD+ in fat cells rising 30 to 50 percent, and 5 to 7 percent body weight reductions against controls in eight-week mouse studies.
- 03Assessment reporting that a targeted PubMed search for a human clinical trial of 5-amino-1-methylquinolinium returns zero results, that no published human study reports weight or fat loss as an outcome, and that there is no published human safety or efficacy data.
- 04Community reporting that roughly 40 percent of users experience no effect, alongside the note that oral bioavailability has never been measured in people.
- 05MOTS-MET, Phase 2a in adults with prediabetes and overweight or obesity. Hudson Biotech. NCT07505745. Started 2 February 2026, primary completion estimated 14 February 2027.
- 06Peptide Decoding vendor pricing data, 16 September 2026. One in-stock blend listing at $149.00 for 120 mg, composition 100 mg NAD+, 10 mg MOTS-c, 10 mg 5-Amino-1MQ. Lowest in-stock single-compound listings: NAD+ $10.00, MOTS-c $27.55, 5-Amino-1MQ $19.00.