Is Hims & Hers Stock in Trouble?
Novo Nordisk is concerned about the telehealth company's practices, particularly relating to compounded drugs.
10 stocks we like better than Hims & Hers Health ›
Hims & Hers Health (NYSE: HIMS) is a telehealth company that offers personalized solutions for its customers. And demand has been robust, with subscriptions for its products rising significantly in recent years.
While telehealth has for the most part not been a hot place to invest in, Hims & Hers Health has been the exception to that. Last year, its share price jumped by 172%. And this year, shares have already more than doubled in value (returns as of June 27).
Recently, however, its share price took a hit amid some troubling news involving Novo Nordisk (NYSE: NVO), the healthcare company behind popular diabetes and weight loss drugs Ozempic and Wegovy. And it raised questions about Hims & Hers' business practices.
Here's what you need to know about these recent developments and whether you should be thinking twice about buying Hims & Hers stock.
In April, the two companies announced they would collaborate to make it easier for Americans to gain access to effective obesity treatments. Through the Hims & Hers platform, people would be able to obtain Wegovy for $599 per month.
And it seemed as if it would be the start of a promising long-term partnership. Hims & Hers CEO Andrew Dudum said, "We share a vision of what consumer-centered healthcare looks like, and this is just the first step toward delivering that future."
It sounded like a great way for Hims & Hers Health to bring popular drugs onto its platform. And for Novo Nordisk, it would be an opportune way to reach more customers.
Less than two months later, the partnership is over. Novo Nordisk expressed concerns over Hims & Hers marketing practices, which it referred to as "deceptive" and that it "failed to adhere to the law which prohibits mass sales of compounded drugs."
Hims & Hers specializes in selling compounded drugs, which are copies of FDA-approved drugs using adjusted (and unapproved) formulas. They are often made by foreign suppliers and occasionally contain active ingredients that may not be safe. Compounding is used for various appropriate reasons (like certain patients needing a modified version to account for a specific issue) as well as when a drug is in short supply. Among drugmakers, it is considered a controversial practice. Both Wegovy and Ozempic were OK'd for compounding for a time to deal with supply shortages, but that is no longer an issue.
Hims & Hers is justifying the continued use of compounded drugs because it says it offers personalized compounded versions that it says are medically necessary. Novo Nordisk doesn't agree with this practice. Novo Nordisk may have expected that with the partnership, Hims & Hers wouldn't offer compounded versions of its drugs anymore and would instead simply offer the real drugs.
Hims & Hers has been a growth beast over the years. It went from just $272 million in revenue in 2021 to $1.8 billion in sales over the trailing 12 months. It has also gone from being in the red financially to now generating significant profits; earnings over the past four quarters have totaled $164 million -- more than 9% of its top line.
The business has evolved by offering a wider range of products to its customers, including obesity treatments. But in doing so, it has been pushing the envelope with compounded drugs, and the danger is that patients could experience side effects and consequences that may otherwise not happen with FDA-approved drugs.
My concern is that the business could open itself up to potential legal issues down the road. It is winning over customers by offering low-cost, personalized solutions, but the way it's going about that could lead to significant risk in the future. Plus, if the company ends up having to stop selling compounded drugs, that could thwart its growth prospects.
Hims & Hers has done incredibly well in recent years. But with question marks about its future growth, the potential legal risk ahead, and a high valuation (it trades at more than 70 times its trailing earnings), this isn't a stock I would rush to buy right now.
Before you buy stock in Hims & Hers Health, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Hims & Hers Health wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $722,181!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $968,402!*
Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,069% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 177% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join .
See the 10 stocks »
*Stock Advisor returns as of June 30, 2025
David Jagielski has positions in Novo Nordisk. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Hims & Hers Health. The Motley Fool recommends Novo Nordisk. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Is Hims & Hers Stock in Trouble? was originally published by The Motley Fool
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
38 minutes ago
- USA Today
Most Americans think Medicare covers long-term care. Are they right?
Most Americans think Medicare covers long-term care, the regimen of daily help that many seniors will eventually require. It does not. That basic misunderstanding has retirement experts worried. It suggests millions of Americans may have no plan to cover the high costs of aging. Long-term care is a range of services for people who need help with everyday activities, such as bathing, dressing or eating. More than 80% of us will need that help at some point, according to a recent study from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. Americans are badly misinformed about the basics of long-term care, a point driven home in numerous surveys and studies. One of the latest, released in June by Nationwide, found that 58% of U.S. adults wrongly believe Medicare covers long-term care. 'Seventy percent of the people who reach 65 are going to need long-term care,' said Holly Snyder, president of Nationwide Life Insurance. 'And if you get there, people seem to think there are public safety nets that will take care of you.' Long-term care costs can be staggering Many seniors need long-term care for years. Costs can be staggering. The average assisted living facility charges $5,350 a month, according to T. Rowe Price. A typical nursing home charges $9,733. Those prices should alarm older Americans. The problem, according to Snyder and others, is that many people assume Medicare will cover them. 'People just don't distinguish between long-term care and health care,' said Gal Wettstein, a senior research economist at Boston College. Some confusion is natural. Medicare, the federal health insurance program for seniors, does cover some short stays in nursing homes. But Medicare generally does not cover longer stays. The reason: Most long-term care is not considered medical care. 'Someone to make sure Mom eats her food, takes her medicine and, when she wakes up, she doesn't walk out the door: That's custodial care,' said Patrick Simasko, an elder law attorney in Michigan. And here's where things get really confusing: While Medicare doesn't cover most long-term care, Medicaid does. Medicaid, the government health insurance program for Americans of limited means, generally covers long-term care for seniors who spend down their assets. In fact, Medicaid is the nation's largest payer of long-term care. Many Americans 'confuse Medicare and Medicaid,' Simasko said. Why don't more Americans have long-term care insurance? The pervasive belief that Medicare covers long-term care may also help explain why so few Americans own long-term care insurance. Long-term care insurance does just what the name implies: It covers costs of long-term care. Yet, by one industry estimate, only about 4% of older Americans hold policies. Why do so few Americans purchase long-term care insurance? 'Because so many people think Medicare covers it,' Wettstein said. 'They don't want to buy a product that they think they already have.' The notion that Medicare covers long-term care is one of several prevalent misconceptions about the costs of aging. In the Nationwide survey, 41% of respondents said they doubt they will live long enough to use long-term care insurance. In fact, most seniors will eventually need it. The Nationwide survey reached 1,324 adults, ages 29 and up, with household incomes of at least $75,000. Another survey, fielded in 2024 by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), found that only four in 10 workers believed they would need long-term care. In that survey, employees also vastly underestimated the costs of long-term care, with most believing the tab would not exceed $50,000. 'There's been so much focus on saving for retirement, accumulation, but there's not much talk about addressing the risks associated with aging,' said Bridget Bearden, research and development strategist at EBRI. Americans underestimate long-term care as a retirement risk Many older Americans underestimate long-term care as a retirement risk. In one 2024 survey of affluent older Americans, Boston College researchers found, long-term care ranked fifth among financial worries in retirement, behind stock market turbulence, Social Security cuts and other concerns. Many Americans don't grasp the implications of tapping Medicaid to cover long-term care, Wettstein said. To qualify for the benefit, as a rule, you must spend all of your money. 'It's an insurance product that has 'everything you own' as a deductible,' Wettstein said. 'You have to spend everything you own in order to use it.' Medicaid requirements yield a long-term care industry of haves and have-nots, according to Wettstein and others. Only affluent Americans can easily afford long-term care costs out of pocket. And only impoverished Americans get it for free. 'When you get old, you'd better have a lot of money, or you'd better be broke,' Simasko said. 'It's those in-between people who are having a hard time.' If this report has you worried about long-term care, here are a few expert tips. Consider long-term care insurance Many Americans consider long-term care insurance prohibitively expensive, Snyder said. In fact, long-term care policies come in many varieties. Costs rise and fall dramatically according to the dollar amount of the benefit, the length of care covered, and other variables. A typical policy, providing a $165,000 benefit for a single adult of 55, might cost $950 a year for a man, $1,500 for a woman, the National Council on Aging reports. One big drawback to many traditional long-term care policies: You collect no money if you get no care. But the industry is evolving. Under various 'hybrid' policies, if you don't exhaust the long-term care benefits, they go to your beneficiaries when you die. Shop around for long-term care Long-term care costs vary widely depending on where you live. Assisted living costs average $8,093 a month in Albany, N.Y., but only $4,600 in Boulder, Colorado, according to the National Council on Aging. If you live in a high-cost city, look at prices in the suburbs, or in the next county. Consult a cost-of-care calculator. You could buy yourself more years of care. 'Find the best place for the best price,' Simasko said. Meet with a retirement planner Financial planners are trained to help people budget for all the potential costs of retirement, including long-term care. A retirement planner can help you unpack the complexities of long-term care and craft a plan to pay for it. 'It really is about talking to your financial professional,' Snyder said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Morgan Stanley Raises PT on Apellis Pharmaceuticals (APLS) to $26, Keeps a Hold Rating
Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:APLS) is one of the 13 Best Pharma Stocks to Buy According to Wall Street Analysts. On July 1, analyst Judah Frommer from Morgan Stanley raised the firm's price target on Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:APLS) to $26.00 from $25.00 while maintaining a Hold rating on the stock. Frommer attributed the rating to the company's market position and recent financial strategies. A biomedical scientist in a lab coat conducting research on biopharmaceutical compounds. He cited the company's significant royalty purchase agreement with Sobi, securing up to $300 million and including a $275 million upfront payment, stating that it would slash Sobi's royalty obligations on Aspaveli sales by 90%. This would result in immediate financial benefits for Apellis and may even ease investor concerns regarding the company's profitability. Despite this positive development, Frommer maintained a cautious outlook for Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:APLS) due to its future prospects. He stated that while the anticipated regulatory decisions from the FDA and CHMP and the launches of Empaveli/Aspaveli in new indications are significant events, they bring in as much uncertainty as confidence in the company's market potential. Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:APLS) is a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical company that discovers, develops, and commercializes novel therapeutic compounds for treating diseases with unmet needs. Its product portfolio primarily includes EMPAVELI and SYFOVRE. SYFOVRE treats geographic atrophy secondary to age-related macular degeneration (GA), while EMPAVELI treats paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH). While we acknowledge the potential of APLS as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: The Best and Worst Dow Stocks for the Next 12 Months and 10 Unstoppable Stocks That Could Double Your Money. Disclosure: None.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Gen Z Are Living in Fear of Layoffs
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. A growing number of Gen Z Americans are worried about losing their jobs in the event of an economic downturn—despite signs the broader labor market remains stable. A new report from Allianz Life shows that 64 percent of Gen Z workers fear they could be laid off in the next year, up from 55 percent just a few months ago and significantly higher than the 45 percent of millennials and 41 percent of Gen Xers who share the same concern. The findings show a growing generational divide in workplace confidence, and these fears are not necessarily unfounded. Along with the headline-grabbing job culls in the federal government which began earlier this year, a throng of companies have already laid off workers so far in 2025, including Microsoft, UPS, Dell, BP and others. What's more, a July 2 report by outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas found that job cuts have soared to their highest midyear total since the COVID-19 pandemic. "It can definitely lead to you feeling expendable," David Rice, a HR expert at People Managing People, told Newsweek. "You don't feel you have influence at that stage of your career and the idea of freelancing or contract work probably feels like the Wild West to many of them." Perception Vs. Data Despite the rising concern, labor market indicators have shown relative strength in recent months. The unemployment rate remains low and overall layoffs have stayed low, according to the most recent Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS). Job growth has also increased, with U.S. employers posting 7.8 million vacancies in May, the Labor Department reported Tuesday, up from 7.4 million in April Rice said perception matters just as much as data. "They've not weathered many storms like this," he said of Gen Z workers. "Many of them still have very raw skill profiles, and all this is happening at a time when entry-level jobs are said to be in flux." Columbia Business School professor Rita McGrath said that Gen Z's uncertainties around layoffs are still well-founded, given that their positions at work can often be precarious. "If you're young, it's often kind of last hired, first fired, and if companies aren't hiring and if they are trying to lay people off, they might be cutting their youngest, least-experienced workers who aren't yet providing a lot of value to their companies," she told Newsweek. Composite image created by Newsweek. Composite image created by Newsweek. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/Canva Where Layoffs Are Happening Much of Gen Z's concern may stem from the industries they're entering. Sectors like tech, retail, media and government have seen notable job losses in the past year, and younger workers are often overrepresented in these areas. "Tech has seen one of the biggest booms in layoffs," Rice said. "Is it a coincidence that it's the sector developing AI and starting to think it needs less people? No, I don't think it is." Jason Leverant, president and COO at staffing firm AtWork Group, agrees that younger workers are being disproportionately affected by news from the tech world. "This is likely shaping the fear and uncertainty that we're seeing from Gen Z," he told Newsweek, adding that it could be a "great catalyst" for young professionals to look at other industries where their skills might be better utilized. Still, Rice warned that it's not just tech. "Media has been laying people off en masse for 20 years... and the mass layoffs in government has created a ton of uncertainty." Financial Pressures Economic anxiety isn't happening in a vacuum. Younger workers are entering the job market under a mountain of student debt and facing high costs, particularly in cities. "Student debt is astronomical," Rice said. "The average graduate finishes school with around $77,000 in debt... Rent is out of control in most major cities. This generation doesn't have assets because they simply can't afford the price." He added that housing costs have outpaced income growth by a wide margin: "Since 1985, the average price of a house has increased 408 percent, but median household income has only increased 241 percent," which further demonstrates the financial pressures on workers. In cities like New York, even a seemingly solid salary may not go far. "If you've landed a job in the NYC metro area as a young person making $80,000 a year... your CEO has ordered everyone back to the office in a metro area where a studio apartment costs $3,200 a month," he continued. "Does an economic downturn sound threatening to your ability to sustain yourself? Of course it does." AI Anxiety Emerging technologies are also contributing to Gen Z's fears, with the rise of artificial intelligence being one of the most profound changes to how we live and work in recent memory. In a recent World Economic Forum survey, 41 percent of global companies said they expect to reduce their workforce in the next five years due to AI. "Is it a coincidence that tech is laying people off and building AI tools at the same time? I don't think so," said Rice. "It creates this feeling that you're training yourself for a job that might not even exist by the time you're good at it." Rice argued that the impact of AI is especially acute for workers in creative, administrative, and technical support roles—jobs that were once considered safe entry points but are now at the center of the AI frontier. "A lot of early-career roles are being reimagined or eliminated entirely. That makes it harder for young workers to even get a foot in the door," he said. Still, AI may not necessarily be an imminent job killer. Leverant believes the anxiety surrounding AI is certainly worthwhile, but perhaps premature. "AI is a tremendous efficiency-gaining tool, and not really able to truly take jobs away... yet," he said. "There are many, many jobs that exist in the economy today that require human hands to get the work done." Still, the pace of change is disorienting, especially for workers still trying to build up their skill set. The uncertainty around where AI is headed—and how fast—adds a psychological burden to an already complex job market. "Right now, we don't have clear pathways for adapting to AI disruption," Rice said. "There's no universal AI literacy program, no standard upskilling route. It's just constant headlines and speculation, and that's enough to make anyone anxious—especially if you're just starting out."
