The population we screened.
We retrieved the state directory pages for all 50 states and DC, then followed their linked city pages with at least three broader listings. 213 city pages were successfully parsed. Smaller unlinked towns, unlisted businesses and cities outside that directory’s coverage are not fully represented.
What determines the list.
The primary measure is the number of observed listing rows tagged “Peptide therapy” on each city page. We do not substitute the larger headline count of GLP-1, hormone and NAD+ locations. We retain all 213 screened market pages and sort descending by peptide-tagged locations, then descending by broader listings, then alphabetically. The original top-100 shortlist remains in the research archive. Twelve markets have no peptide-tagged rows and remain evidence-pending, non-indexable notes even in the production configuration. Peptide-count ranks preserve ties; research position is a display order, not a claim of superiority.
Locations, not companies.
A brand with several local branches may contribute several rows. Multiple businesses can also share a website. We do not know every legal entity or ownership relationship, so location counts are not presented as unique businesses. Cities are the source’s labels, not standardized census boundaries or metropolitan areas; adjacent cities can overlap commercially. Do not add city figures to estimate unique national prospects.
Source and independence.
The primary source is The Peptide Directory. It states that service checks were made on 19 October 2026. We store source URLs, retrieval times and hashes internally. Directory classifications can be incomplete, stale or incorrect. Named examples on city pages remain directory examples unless an explicit additional check is described.
Additional first-party checks.
We follow selected published business-source links and check accessible page text for peptide wording. A successful check is evidence that the wording was visible, not confirmation of location, licensure, service availability, safety or legal eligibility. Blocked, failed and inconclusive pages are recorded without being upgraded to a pass. We do not contact businesses, submit patient forms or infer clinical approval.
Research suppliers and demand.
This dataset is clinic-led. We have not measured research-supplier counts by city and do not add manufacturers, pharmacies and laboratories into the clinic measure without comparable records. Search volumes, patient demand, revenue, marketing budgets and customer acquisition costs are not measured. A city’s research-supplier strategy remains distinct from its local clinical marketing strategy.
How to use the results.
Treat the ranking as a shortlist for qualification. Verify the individual operator, its real audience and its current offer before proposing work. Compare businesses using supported search and website evidence. A larger observed pool can support prospect research; it does not establish willingness to buy agency services.
Content and publication.
Every city page includes original strategic analysis, a sourced local service mix, examples, related market links and separate clinical and supplier pathways. No city page claims a local agency office, clients or results. The live site retains noindex on the 12 evidence-pending markets. Other pages remain eligible for crawling; eligibility does not guarantee indexing.
Download the study.
Download all 213 researched cities and their measures ↧. The CSV preserves source URLs, dates and the explicit “not measured” supplier field. Return to the city-market explorer ↗.
