Follicle Index
Menu

Sixteen treatments · one published rule

Every hair-loss treatment, graded on what you can check

Two questions each: what a regulator has said about it for hair loss, and what randomised trials have been pooled. The grade is the worse answer.

Tap a square for the row behind it · grade = the worse of two answers

Read the indexWhat pattern baldness is

2

graded A — approved here, and pooled independently

3

graded B — off-label, or cleared rather than approved

6

graded C — trials exist, no approval for hair loss

2

graded D — no independent controlled evidence

The rule, in full

A

Tier A — Approved for this use, and the randomised trials have been pooled by someone with nothing to sell. (2 of 16)

B

Tier B — One answer is a step down: prescribed off-label, or cleared rather than approved, or pooled from trials the sellers paid for. (3 of 16)

C

Tier C — Nobody approved it for hair loss, but real controlled trials exist and have been counted. (6 of 16)

D

Tier D — Sold for hair loss with no independent controlled evidence behind it. (2 of 16)

X

Tier X — The FDA has published a safety warning about the category and no approved product exists. (1 of 16)

–

Off the scale — Not a treatment for the condition — it moves hair or hides its absence. (2 of 16)

Where each grade comes from

Read across for what a regulator has said, down for what the trials add up to. The letter in the square is the worse of the two — that is the whole rule.

Treatments plotted by regulatory standing and strength of pooled evidence
Evidence ↓ · Standing →Approved for this useOff-label, or cleared not approvedNeither approved nor clearedOutside drug approvalWarned about by the FDA
Pooled, independentAMxFnBDu
Pooled, but thin or seller-fundedBoMLaCtFPRMnKz
One or two small trialsCRoMe
No independent controlled trialDSpCkXEx

Two things on this site are not on the map at all: Tp and Cm — hair transplant surgery, and micropigmentation, fibres and hair systems. Neither treats the condition, so grading them against trials would measure the wrong thing.

Why a grade, and not a ranking

A ranking answers "which is best", which is a question about you, and this site has never met you. A grade answers something narrower and checkable: how much is actually known about this product for this purpose, and who says so.

So every entry gets the same two questions. What has a regulator said about it for hair loss — approved, cleared, off-label, outside drug approval altogether, or warned about? And what randomised controlled trials of it have been pooled, and were the people who pooled them selling anything? The grade is the worse of the two answers, because a strong answer does not cancel a weak one.

The effect of applying that rule to sixteen treatments is that the top of the index is old, cheap and unglamorous, and the crowded middle is where the money is. That is not an argument this site set out to make. It is what the rule produced.

What this site will not do

It will not tell you how much of anything to take, how often, or in what combination. Those are decisions for a prescriber and for the product's own label, and a website that answers them is doing something it is not qualified to do.

It will not show you before-and-after photographs, invent a percentage, quote a patient who does not exist, or rank a clinic. It will not claim a doctor has reviewed it, because none has.

And it will not move a grade for money. Three companies are linked for money here and each link is marked where it sits; every one of them grades below the two treatments at the top, which pay nothing and have no programme to join.

Explainers

All of them

Questions people send in

What is the best hair loss treatment for men?
On this site's rule, two treatments share the top tier: minoxidil applied to the scalp, and finasteride taken as a tablet. They are the only two the FDA has approved for male pattern hair loss, and both appear in the 2025 network meta-analysis that pooled randomised trials of the conventional monotherapies. Neither is a cure, neither works for everybody, and the tablet carries regulator warnings about mood and sexual side effects that the EU and the UK acted on in 2025 and 2026. Whether either is right for you is a question for a doctor, not for a grade.
Does a high grade here mean a treatment will work for me?
No. A grade measures the paperwork behind a product, not your scalp. It answers two questions — what a regulator has said about the product for this use, and what randomised trials have been pooled — and takes the worse of the two answers. A tier A treatment can do nothing for one person and a great deal for another, and plenty of hair loss is not pattern baldness at all, in which case none of the top of this table is the right answer.
Is there a cure for male pattern baldness?
No. Nothing on this index cures it, and nothing claims to. The approved treatments hold or partly reverse a process while they are being used; the label for the approved tablet says the effect is reversed within twelve months of stopping. Surgery moves hair you still have rather than stopping the loss, and cosmetic camouflage changes how a scalp looks and nothing else.
What does FDA-cleared mean on a hair device?
It means the device went through the 510(k) route by showing it is substantially equivalent to a device already on the market — a different and lower bar than approval. The FDA approves new drugs and the highest-risk devices; it clears moderate-risk ones. That single word is why laser caps sit a tier below the approved medicines here even though sham-controlled trials of them have been pooled.
Which hair loss treatment is cheapest, and does this site earn from it?
The two treatments graded highest here are also among the cheapest: minoxidil sold as a supermarket or pharmacy store brand, and generic finasteride on a prescription filled locally. Neither pays this site anything, and neither has a partner programme we could join if we wanted one. The three paid links on this site go to two telehealth services and one laser cap, all of which grade below those two.