Nutrafol Review: 3 Placebo Trials, and 1 Dropped Its Hair Count

Nutrafol is the best-known hair supplement in the United States, and it is sold on the strength of clinical trials. So we read the trials rather than the marketing: the papers, the registry records the researchers filed before the trials began, the labels filed with the NIH, and the federal court dockets. We checked all of it on 22 October 2026.

The short version: there are three placebo-controlled trials. Two of them, both in women, found more hair on Nutrafol than on placebo. The third, in men, was registered to measure hair counts and never reported them.

The three placebo trials

Nutrafol’s pages cite a long list of studies, but most have no placebo group, which means they compare people with their own starting point. Only three trials randomised people to Nutrafol or a dummy capsule.

Trial	Product	People	What was measured	Result
Ablon and Kogan 2018	Nutrafol Women	26 Nutrafol, 14 placebo	Terminal and vellus hair counts	Higher on Nutrafol at day 90 and 180
Ablon and Kogan 2021	Women’s Balance	40 Nutrafol, 30 placebo	Terminal, vellus and total hair counts	Higher on Nutrafol; shedding down 32.41% by day 180
Bhatia 2025	Nutrafol Men	52 Nutrafol, 33 placebo completed	Investigator ratings, questionnaires	More men rated improved; hair counts not reported

The women’s results are real results. A 40-person and a 70-person trial, both six months long, found higher hair counts on the capsule. They are also small, run by the same investigator, and neither posted results to ClinicalTrials.gov.

The men’s trial dropped its hair count

The men’s trial is the one to read closely. Before it started, its registry record (NCT05339958, sponsored by Nutraceutical Wellness, Nutrafol’s company) named one primary outcome: “Change in terminal hair counts” at day 180.

The published paper explains what happened to it:

“The original primary end point of this 6-month study was the change in mean terminal hair counts at Day 180 using the Canfield HairMetrix noninvasive device. However, during clinical site monitoring, numerous protocol deviations specifically related to the Canfield HairMetrix occurred at one site, rendering many phototrichograms unusable for analyses, leading to insufficient data to conduct proper statistical analyses.”

So, the paper says, “only secondary end points are presented”: blinded investigators’ ratings of growth and quality from photographs, and the men’s own questionnaire answers. More men on Nutrafol were rated improved, and there was no change in sexual function. The authors themselves write that future studies “including phototrichograms for metrics such as hair counts” would be useful.

Of 112 men enrolled, 85 finished per protocol, in a 2:1 split. Two of the five authors are Nutrafol employees, and the other three report advisory roles or grants from the company. None of that makes the ratings wrong. It does mean the one number the trial was designed to produce does not exist.

Who the women’s trial left out

The 2018 trial is the one Nutrafol cites, as footnote 1, under “We use a clinically proven formula” on the Nutrafol Women page. It enrolled women aged 21 to 65 with “self-perceived thinning hair”.

Its registry record lists who could not take part. Exclusion criterion 9 reads: “Females suffering from other hair loss disorders, such as alopecia areata, scarring alopecia, androgenetic alopecia and telogen effluvium as determined on initial study assessment by the Investigator.”

Androgenetic alopecia is female pattern hair loss, the gradual widening of the parting. Telogen effluvium is the sudden shedding that follows illness, childbirth or stress. The trial also excluded women with a stressful event in the past six months, known iron deficiency and thyroid disorders. What remains is women who feel their hair is thinning without any of those diagnoses.

That is a legitimate group to study. But if a dermatologist has told you that you have pattern hair loss, the 2018 trial did not include you. The 2021 Women’s Balance trial in menopausal women did not list androgenetic alopecia among its exclusions, so it is the closer match for that question.

The formula you buy is not the one tested

On 22 October 2026 the Nutrafol Women page described the product as “Improved Formula, Biotin-Free”, with a section headed “Why was biotin taken out of Nutrafol Women?” and a new ingredient, Moldavian dragonhead. The Nutrafol Women label in the NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database, entered in March 2025, still showed 3,000 mcg of biotin. The 2018 trial tested the formula of that time. The page still cites it.

The charts on Nutrafol’s clinical studies page are labelled “In a 6-month study of Nutrafol Women Hair Growth Nutraceutical” and cite “Sivamani RK et al. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024.” The only paper in PubMed that matches that citation tested Nutrafol Women’s Vegan, a separate product. It was single-blind with no placebo group, and the charts’ significance stars are “compared to baseline”. So is the newest company study, a 2026 trial of four formulas in 180 women: open-label, against baseline, and funded by Nutraceutical Wellness.

What is in the capsules

The labels in the NIH database, entered in 2025, list per four-capsule serving:

Nutrient	Men	Women’s Balance
Biotin	3,000 mcg	2,500 mcg
Vitamin A	1,500 mcg RAE	1,500 mcg RAE
Vitamin D	62.5 mcg	62.5 mcg
Zinc	25 mg	20 mg
Selenium	200 mcg	200 mcg
Botanical complex	1.72 g, amounts not given	1.96 g, amounts not given

The “Synergen Complex” (saw palmetto, Sensoril ashwagandha, marine collagen, curcumin, tocotrienols) and a second blend of amino acids and plant extracts are proprietary, so the label gives one total weight and no amount for each ingredient. You cannot compare the saw palmetto or ashwagandha in Nutrafol with the doses in trials of those herbs.

Biotin and blood tests. Biotin at thousands of micrograms can make some lab tests read falsely high or low, including thyroid tests and the troponin test used to diagnose a heart attack. The FDA keeps a list of affected assays. If you take the Men or Women’s Balance formula, tell your doctor before bloodwork; our biotin and blood tests guide explains which tests are affected.

Stacking. These capsules already carry 1,500 mcg of vitamin A and 62.5 mcg of vitamin D. Adding a multivitamin or a separate hair, skin and nails product can push you towards the upper limits; excess vitamin A and selenium are themselves causes of hair loss. Our hair supplements guide covers what to test first.

The lawsuits

We searched CourtListener’s federal dockets for Nutrafol and for its company, Nutraceutical Wellness, Inc., on 22 October 2026.

The open class action. In re Nutraceutical Wellness, Inc. Consumer Fraud Litigation, No. 1:23-cv-05652 in the Southern District of New York, combines a case removed from Rockland County in June 2023 with Malich v. Nutraceutical Wellness. The consolidated complaint, filed in September 2023, attaches exhibits on “Clinically Proven” claims and “Implied Disease” claims for five Nutrafol products. In their March 2024 brief, the plaintiffs allege that Nutrafol’s own studies “suggest the Products are no more effective than a placebo” and that one study “excluded participants with hair loss disorders”. These are allegations, not findings.

Nutrafol moved to dismiss on 29 March 2024. On the docket we read, that motion had no ruling two and a half years later; the latest entry is a letter dated 22 September 2026 whose text is not public. The case was open.

A settled case. Smith v. Nutraceutical Wellness, No. 1:23-cv-03787, a 2023 class complaint over the same “clinically proven” claims, ended on 4 August 2023 with an order stating that “all claims asserted herein have been settled”, dismissed with prejudice. No terms are on the docket.

Other dockets. A 2024 disability-access suit (Fagnani) closed in January 2025. A 2026 employment case (Medina) was sent back to Orange County Superior Court in June 2026. Lute v. Nutraceutical Wellness Inc., No. 1:26-cv-08239 in the Northern District of California, was filed on 7 August 2026; its complaint is not public on CourtListener, so we cannot say what it concerns.

The same docket also answers a question many buyers ask: in a 2023 filing Nutraceutical Wellness named Unilever United States, Unilever PLC, US Health and Wellbeing LLC and Conopco as its corporate parents.

Price, guarantee and complaints

On 22 October 2026 Nutrafol Women was $88 for one bottle, $79 a month on a monthly subscription, $224 for three months and $422 for six months on subscription. A bottle is 120 capsules, one month at four a day.

The “Real Growth Guarantee” refunds you if you see no visible results after six months, but the conditions are strict: first-time subscribers from 7 May 2026, at least six bottles bought by subscription on nutrafol.com within 180 days, the subscription kept active, monthly progress photos in the myNutrafol app, and a claim between day 180 and day 210. Bottles bought through retailers or marketplaces do not count.

The Better Business Bureau rates Nutrafol A+, with 104 complaints in the last three years and 26 in the last year. Product issues and service issues (33 each) and delivery (25) were the largest groups; Nutrafol answered all of them and 32 were marked resolved.

The “#1 Dermatologist-Recommended Hair Growth Supplement Brand” line is footnoted to an IQVIA ProVoice survey for the year to 31 March 2026. Several of the other footnotes on Nutrafol’s pages are “Nutrafol. Data on file”, which nobody outside the company can read.

Who it might suit

If you are a woman with thinning hair, no diagnosis of pattern hair loss, and normal iron and thyroid results, the 2018 and 2021 trials studied people like you and found modest gains in hair count over six months. That is more evidence than most hair supplements have.

If you have pattern hair loss, male or female, the evidence that exists for Nutrafol does not answer your question, and the treatments with large trials behind them are prescription and over-the-counter drugs such as minoxidil. If you are a man buying it for hair counts, the trial designed to measure them did not report them.

We do not link to Nutrafol. The trials found something, but the formula has changed, the men’s main result is missing, and the strongest claim, “clinically proven”, is the subject of an open lawsuit.

The bottom line

Nutrafol has three placebo trials. The two in women, with 40 and 70 participants, found higher hair counts than placebo; the first excluded female pattern hair loss and telogen effluvium. The men’s trial registered hair count as its primary outcome and published only ratings after losing scalp photos at one site. The Women formula sold today is not the one tested, two formulas still carry 2,500 to 3,000 mcg of biotin, and a class action over the “clinically proven” claim has been open since 2023. Read it as a modest, partly tested product at $79 to $88 a month.