Skip to content
WeighLab
Menu

Head-to-head · Cost-Efficiency Index

TRT Kingdom vs Intimate Rose

Two GLP-1 programs on the bench, scored on the same six factors. Here's how their real cost of ownership compares — and which one we'd start with.

Better valueGrade C · #365

TRT Kingdom

Shoppers open to a TRT-focused telehealth brand's GLP-1 line who are comfortable committing to a 4-month prepay term for the advertised rate.

Visit TRT Kingdom
VS
Grade C · #368

Intimate Rose

Cost-first shoppers who want existing Intimate Rose pelvic-health customers curious about its bolt-on GLP-1 program, not comparison shoppers.

Visit Intimate Rose

The verdict

Winner · TRT KingdomGrade C vs C

TRT Kingdom takes it, leading the Cost-Efficiency Index 54 to 53. TRT Kingdom -- despite its testosterone-focused name -- runs a genuine compounded GLP-1 weight-loss line ('Compounded GLP-1' and 'Compounded GLP-1/GIP') priced at $149/month and $199/month respectively. Intimate Rose still earns a CCost-first shoppers who want existing Intimate Rose pelvic-health customers curious about its bolt-on GLP-1 program, not comparison shoppers.

Worth knowing either way: our overall #1 pick is CoreAge Rx (Cost-Efficiency Index 94/100 — the top of the ranking). See how it stacks up: CoreAge Rx vs TRT Kingdom.

Factor by factor

Both providers scored on our six Cost-Efficiency Index factors. The stronger side on each row is marked in teal.

Normalized Cost/Month

78
50

Price Transparency

38
78

Nationwide Access

24
24

Formulation Options

66
64

Clinical Oversight

73
64

Contract Flexibility

41
37

Pricing, coverage & formulary

The disclosed facts behind the scores. Lower price wins its row (teal).

SpecTRT KingdomIntimate Rose
Cost-Efficiency Index54/10053/100
Semaglutide / mo$149/mo (compounded)$169/mo (starting dose, compounded)
Tirzepatide / mo$199/mo (compounded)Not disclosed
Semaglutide / yr (modeled)$1,788$2,028
Tirzepatide / yr (modeled)$2,388
CoverageCoverage not publishedCoverage not published
Oral / sublingualNoYes
Brand-name accessCompounded onlyCompounded only
Rank here#365#368

TRT Kingdom

54/100

Where the value is

  • Confirmed, real compounded GLP-1 (semaglutide) and GLP-1/GIP (tirzepatide) products exist and are separately priced, despite the company's TRT-focused branding
  • Named clinical group and Chief Medical Officer (REM Health Medical Group, P.A.; Daniel Olivero) plus two named nurse practitioners
  • LegitScript verification badge displayed

The tradeoffs

  • The advertised $149/$199 monthly rates require committing to a 4-month plan; no month-to-month or shorter-term price is published
  • Pharmacy is described only as 'an FDA registered pharmacy in the USA' -- no name, state, or accreditation given
Visit TRT Kingdom

Full TRT Kingdom review →

Intimate Rose

53/100

Where the value is

  • A real, working GLP-1 telehealth funnel exists (not a dead link or vaporware page)
  • The quiz states 'No payment to get started', so shoppers can get a personalized quote before committing
  • Backed by an established, non-fly-by-night e-commerce brand with an existing customer base and content library

The tradeoffs

  • GLP-1 is a secondary bolt-on to a pelvic-health device business, not this company's core competency — no dedicated GLP-1 clinical infrastructure is visible on the public site
  • Only one undifferentiated price point ($169/month) is published — no dose tiers, no separate semaglutide vs. tirzepatide pricing, no fee itemization
Visit Intimate Rose

Full Intimate Rose review →

Regulatory note: the FDA issued a warning letter to Intimate Rose in September 2025. We still list and link to Intimate Rose; you should know the letter is on the public record before you decide.

Assume any provider we list may compensate us — we may earn a commission, at no cost to you. It never changes the Cost-Efficiency Index. Pricing, states and verification reflect each provider's public disclosures at last review; prices change — confirm on the provider's site. Not medical advice. See our disclosure.

Keep comparing

← All head-to-head comparisons