SLU-PP-915 vs MOTS-c: Endurance Evidence, Prices, and COA Checks

Short Answer: Choose the Mechanism and Proof, Then Compare Value

SLU-PP-915 and MOTS-c both occupy the endurance-research lane, but they are fundamentally different products.

SLU-PP-915 is an orally bioavailable synthetic small-molecule pan-agonist of ERR-alpha, ERR-beta, and ERR-gamma. It is not a peptide. MOTS-c is a 16-amino-acid mitochondrial-derived peptide linked to metabolic-stress signaling, AMPK, skeletal-muscle metabolism, and nuclear gene regulation.

Both have endurance-related animal evidence. Neither has a controlled human trial showing that an administered product improves endurance, and no head-to-head study supports calling either one superior in people.

The practical buying difference is market maturity. MOTS-c has a live PeptidePub guide at /peptides/mots-c and current price comparisons at /prices/mots-c. PeptidePub does not currently track SLU-PP-915 in its peptide catalog, price tables, or compound guides, so there is no defensible market price range to quote.

Use this buying sequence:

1. Confirm the exact compound, product class, format, and active mass.

1. Inspect current, lot-matched analytical proof.
2. Compare verified unit economics.
3. Check /deals for a valid code before checkout.

For MOTS-c, that process can produce a clear price-per-mg comparison. For SLU-PP-915, identity and assay documentation must come first because powder, liquid, and capsule listings are not directly comparable until the active content is verified.

SLU-PP-915 vs MOTS-c at a Glance

SLU-PP-915 is a synthetic small molecule targeting all three estrogen-related receptor subtypes. The published performance work demonstrated oral bioavailability in mice and measured mouse treadmill outcomes. No controlled human outcome evidence was identified.

MOTS-c is encoded within mitochondrial 12S rRNA. Mouse treatment studies used injected MOTS-c, while a small human experiment measured the body’s endogenous MOTS-c response to exercise. PeptidePub currently tracks MOTS-c pricing, but not SLU-PP-915 pricing.

Do not call SLU-PP-915 a peptide, convert doses between the two compounds, or treat mouse results as a human protocol.

How the Two Endurance Mechanisms Differ

SLU-PP-915 directly activates estrogen-related receptors ERR-alpha, ERR-beta, and ERR-gamma. These orphan nuclear receptors regulate programs involved in mitochondrial biogenesis, oxidative phosphorylation, fatty-acid oxidation, and the Krebs cycle.

Probechem reports EC50 values of 414 nM for ERR-alpha, 435 nM for ERR-beta, and 378 nM for ERR-gamma. The primary paper describes SLU-PP-915 as chemically distinct from the earlier compound SLU-PP-332 and demonstrates oral bioavailability in mice.

In plain English, SLU-PP-915 is the direct ERR exercise-program lane. Researchers interested in ERR activation, Ddit4, and mitochondrial gene expression have a specific mechanistic reason to examine it.

MOTS-c works through a different biological frame. It is a 16-amino-acid peptide encoded within mitochondrial 12S rRNA. Published work connects it with AMPK-linked signaling, metabolic-stress adaptation, skeletal-muscle metabolism, and direct regulation of nuclear genes after translocation from the mitochondria.

That makes MOTS-c the mitochondrial stress-signaling and metabolic-homeostasis lane. Its research footprint extends beyond exercise performance into aging and metabolic adaptation.

The overlap is mitochondrial and endurance interest, not interchangeability. A direct pan-ERR agonist and a mitochondrial-derived signaling peptide have different targets, analytical requirements, and evidence records. Pick the biological question first. Only then should price and vendor choice decide between products within that same lane.

Our Peptide Handbook at /handbook?src=blog grades evidence across 40 compounds, which is useful when mouse performance data, human biomarker data, and mechanism claims start sounding more comparable than they really are.

Endurance Evidence: What SLU-PP-915 Actually Did

The key SLU-PP-915 study is PMID 41421047, published in the January 2026 Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. It studied male C57BL/6 mice, not humans.

SLU-PP-915 increased treadmill distance and duration similarly to SLU-PP-332 when administered intraperitoneally. After researchers adjusted for systemic exposure, the compound retained comparable efficacy when given orally.

The study also measured Ddit4, a gene that responds acutely to exercise. SLU-PP-915 produced robust Ddit4 induction at levels matching or exceeding treadmill running, depending on the muscle examined. Combining exercise training with SLU-PP-915 further increased Ddit4 and mitochondrial gene expression.

An indexed full-text excerpt describes a chronic arm in which trained or untrained mice were treated twice daily for 7 days at 32 mg/kg. Trained mice ran for 1 hour daily at 14 m/min. These numbers describe the mouse experiment. They are not a human dose, schedule, or conversion guide.

The useful takeaway is specific: SLU-PP-915 activated the intended ERR-linked program, worked through oral administration in mice, and improved measured mouse treadmill performance. The evidence does not establish an administered-product benefit in humans.

The paper also reports a relevant conflict disclosure. SLU-PP-915 is covered by Saint Louis University intellectual property, author Thomas P. Burris is an inventor, and he holds stock in two companies developing ERR agonists. That does not invalidate the findings, but it belongs in a complete evidence assessment.

Endurance Evidence: What MOTS-c Actually Did

The MOTS-c evidence separates into human exercise-response measurements and mouse treatment experiments.

The human arm in PMCID PMC7817689 enrolled 10 sedentary healthy young men. Mean age was 24.5 plus or minus 3.7 years, and mean BMI was 24.1 plus or minus 2.1.

After stationary cycling, skeletal-muscle MOTS-c rose 11.9-fold. It remained elevated after 4 hours, with a trend back toward baseline. Circulating MOTS-c rose 1.6-fold during exercise and 1.5-fold afterward, then returned to baseline after 4 hours.

This is useful human biology, but it measured endogenous MOTS-c produced in response to exercise. It did not test whether administered MOTS-c improves human endurance.

The treatment outcomes came from mice. Old mice treated with MOTS-c ran 2-fold longer and 2.16-fold farther. In young mice, 100% of the higher-dose group reached the final treadmill stage of 23 m/min, compared with 16.6% in both the lower-dose and vehicle groups. PMID 35808870 adds further preclinical work on exercise performance and skeletal muscle.

The evidence therefore supports two distinct points. Human exercise strongly changes endogenous MOTS-c, and administered MOTS-c improved performance measurements in mice. It does not prove the effect of a purchased MOTS-c vial in people.

That distinction prevents a common comparison error. SLU-PP-915 has administered-compound treadmill evidence in mice. MOTS-c has administered-compound evidence in mice plus a small human study of endogenous response. Neither record creates a human head-to-head winner.

Availability and Current MOTS-c Price Per Mg

PeptidePub does not currently list SLU-PP-915 in its catalog, /prices, or /peptides. A current result showed a 60 mg MA Research Chems product out of stock. The snippet did not support a reliable price, so no market range should be inferred.

MOTS-c has a clearer buying market. Snapshot checked August 23, 2026:

• Peptide Society, 40 mg: $69.99 list, $1.75/mg. A 20% PEPTIDEPUB code illustrates $55.99, about $1.40/mg.
• Atomik, 40 mg: $99 list, $2.48/mg. A 15% PEPTIDEPUB15 code illustrates $84.15, about $2.10/mg.
• Valor, 30 mg: $89.99 list, $3.00/mg. A 10% PEPTIDEPUB code illustrates $80.99, about $2.70/mg.
• Double R, 10 mg: $34.99 list, $3.50/mg. A 15% PEPTIDEPUB code illustrates $29.74, about $2.97/mg.
• Mile High, 40 mg: $139.99 list, $3.50/mg. A 10% PEPTIDEPUB code illustrates $125.99, about $3.15/mg.
• Ascension, 10 mg: $75 list, $7.50/mg. A 50% PEPTIDEPUB code illustrates $37.50, or $3.75/mg.
• World Wide, 10 mg: $131, or $13.10/mg. Its 40 mg listing is $384, or $9.60/mg.

Figures exclude shipping and tax. Prices, codes, stock, and eligibility can change. Check /prices/mots-c and model value at /tools/cost-per-dose after verifying content. The Ascension route /go/bodybuilding-health is available after confirming the lot, code, stock, and delivered price.

COA and Identity Checklist Before Buying

Product class determines what analytical proof should exist. A seller grouping SLU-PP-915 beside peptides does not make a peptide COA suitable evidence for it.

For SLU-PP-915, confirm:

• Exact chemical identity and CAS 2285432-92-8
• Molecular formula C17H13BFNO3S
• Molecular weight about 341.2 g/mol
• A report matching the product lot
• The named testing laboratory
• Identity through a suitable method such as LC-MS or NMR
• Quantitative assay or active content
• The stated purity method
• Residual-solvent or broader contaminant data when available

For MOTS-c, confirm:

• Exact 16-amino-acid peptide identity
• A lot number matching the product for sale
• A named independent laboratory
• LC-MS identity
• HPLC or UPLC purity
• Quantitative net content
• Sterility, endotoxin, and heavy-metal results when available

The critical distinction is purity versus amount. A report showing high purity does not prove that a vial contains its labeled milligrams. Quantitative content is necessary for honest price-per-mg math.

Use /blog/how-to-read-peptide-coa-before-you-buy for the full inspection workflow and /vendors to compare testing transparency. Reject a listing if the report belongs to a different lot, omits identity, hides the laboratory, or cannot establish active content.

For SLU-PP-915, also confirm whether the listing is powder, solution, or capsule and how much active material is present. A cheap-looking package is not comparable with another format until assay, concentration, and total active mass are clear. For MOTS-c, compare delivered price per verified mg only after the vial passes the same evidence standard.

Which Research Buy Fits Which Goal

Choose the SLU-PP-915 lane when direct pan-ERR activation, oral mouse pharmacology, Ddit4, or mitochondrial-gene endpoints match the research question. Because PeptidePub does not yet maintain a live market table, demand stronger identity and assay documentation before treating any listing as comparable.

Choose the MOTS-c lane when the intended focus is mitochondrial-derived peptide biology, AMPK-linked stress signaling, aging, skeletal-muscle metabolism, or metabolic homeostasis. MOTS-c also has the easier buying workflow because current vial sizes and price per mg can be compared at /prices/mots-c.

Community endurance anecdotes can show demand, but they cannot establish comparative efficacy. A StairMaster report or similar experience should never outrank controlled measurements, exact identity, or batch evidence.

If two MOTS-c products provide equivalent proof, compare the final delivered price per verified mg and then use /deals. For SLU-PP-915, do not compare a liquid, powder, or capsule with a peptide vial until the active mass and assay are explicit.

For more MOTS-c buying context, see /blog/mots-c-buyer-guide and /blog/ss-31-mots-c-testing-price-guide.

FAQ

Is SLU-PP-915 a peptide?

No. SLU-PP-915 is a synthetic small-molecule pan-ERR agonist. MOTS-c is a 16-amino-acid mitochondrial-derived peptide.

Which compound has human evidence?

MOTS-c has human data showing how endogenous MOTS-c changed during and after exercise in 10 men. That was not a controlled trial of administered MOTS-c. The cited SLU-PP-915 endurance study was conducted in mice. Neither has controlled human efficacy evidence that supports a direct winner.

Which is cheaper?

Selected MOTS-c listings range from $1.75 to $13.10 per mg at list price, with an illustrated low of about $1.40/mg after a recorded code. PeptidePub has no tracked SLU-PP-915 market range, so a fair price comparison is not yet possible.

Can SLU-PP-915 and MOTS-c doses be converted?

No. They are different product classes acting through different targets. There is no validated dose conversion, and animal conditions should not become a human protocol.

What is the strongest buying check?

Confirm exact identity with a current, lot-matched analytical report, then compare delivered price. For MOTS-c, require LC-MS identity, purity, and quantitative net content. For SLU-PP-915, require suitable small-molecule identity testing, active-content assay, and relevant contaminant data.

Bottom Line

SLU-PP-915 offers a direct pan-ERR lane with oral activity and treadmill evidence in mice. MOTS-c offers a mitochondrial-derived peptide lane with broader aging, metabolic-stress, and skeletal-muscle research, plus a mature buying market.

August 23 after-code value leaders include Peptide Society at about $1.40/mg, Atomik at $2.10/mg, Valor at $2.70/mg, Double R at $2.97/mg, and Mile High at $3.15/mg. All figures exclude shipping and tax.

The buying sequence is simple:

1. Read /peptides/mots-c for the compound overview.
2. Compare current offers at /prices/mots-c.
3. Verify current batch proof and vendor transparency at /vendors.
4. Check /deals for the best valid offer.
5. Reject any listing whose identity, active content, or lot evidence is unclear.

Do not claim a winner until the two compounds have comparable human outcomes and comparable verified market data. Today, MOTS-c is the easier product to price-shop. SLU-PP-915 is the more specialized ERR research buy, with a higher burden on the buyer to verify exact identity and value.