Independent reference & toolkit 100 compounds graded · Last reviewed June 2026

← All compounds

Codex Scale 3/10 Animal only

Stenabolic (SR9009)

Class
REV-ERB agonist
Sources
9 cited
Last reviewed
Jun 3, 2026
Read
7 min

History

SR9009 was first described by Solt et al. (Nature, 2012) as a pyrrole-derivative synthetic agonist of the REV-ERB nuclear receptors (alongside its analog SR9011), developed as a research tool and candidate for circadian and metabolic disorders. Cell-based assays reported EC50 values in roughly the 670–800 nM range with selectivity over LXR. In diet-induced obese mice given the compound by intraperitoneal injection, it altered metabolic activity and reduced fat mass. Later work (Dierickx, PNAS 2019) showed substantial REV-ERB–independent effects, complicating the original mechanistic story.

Stenabolic (SR9009) is a lab-made compound sold online as an “exercise mimetic” or “cardio in a bottle.” Even though it’s often sold next to SARMs, it isn’t one. It’s not a peptide, not a hormone, and not an androgen (a testosterone-like compound), and it doesn’t act on the androgen receptor at all. Its whole reputation comes almost entirely from studies in mice — and even those come with big caveats, because the compound is barely absorbed when swallowed and does things in the body beyond what it’s supposed to target. There are no finished human trials showing that it works or that it’s safe.

What it is

SR9009 is a synthetic small-molecule that switches on the REV-ERB nuclear receptors (REV-ERBα/NR1D1 and REV-ERBβ/NR1D2). These receptors are proteins inside cells that act as “off switches” for certain genes, and they help run your body clock and control genes involved in metabolism. SR9009 is not a peptide, not a hormone, and not an androgen, and it is not a true SARM (selective androgen receptor modulator) — it doesn’t latch onto the androgen receptor — even though it’s sold in the same places. It was first described by Solt et al. (Nature, 2012) as a pyrrole-derivative REV-ERB agonist (a compound that turns the receptor on). In lab-dish tests it became active at concentrations of about 670–800 nM (nanomolar, a measure of how much was needed) and it preferred REV-ERB over a related receptor called LXR. Turning on REV-ERB quiets down certain genes, including the clock gene Bmal1 and genes that handle fats and sugar. In mice, that quieting was tied to burning more energy and carrying less fat.

The claims

Sellers pitch SR9009 as an “exercise mimetic” or “cardio in a bottle” — promising more endurance and stamina, plus fat loss, a faster metabolism, better cholesterol numbers, and steadier blood sugar. The pitch is usually “non-hormonal, no side effects.” But these promises are mostly stretched from mouse data and the way the original 2012 paper framed things — not from results in people.

What the evidence actually shows

  • No finished, published human trials show that SR9009 works or is safe for endurance, fat loss, or anything else. For practical purposes, human data simply don’t exist.
  • It’s all animal/lab research so far: the metabolic and body-clock effects (Solt 2012) showed up in mice that got the compound by intraperitoneal injection (a shot into the belly cavity) — and researchers used that route precisely because the body absorbs very little of it when it’s swallowed. That’s a problem for the “Stenabolic” capsules and liquids sold to people, which are meant to be taken by mouth.
  • It doesn’t stay in its lane, which weakens the whole theory: Dierickx et al. (PNAS, 2019) found that SR9009 still had big effects on cell growth and metabolism even in cells that had been engineered to have no REV-ERBα/β at all. In other words, it isn’t a clean tool for studying REV-ERB, and some of what it does has nothing to do with the receptor it’s named for.
  • There’s a fair amount of cancer-lab research using SR9009 on cancer cell lines (for example glioblastoma, a brain cancer; Sulli 2018), but that’s anticancer lab work — not evidence that it’s useful for fitness.

Bottom line: the human evidence is weak to nonexistent. The mouse data look interesting but don’t prove any benefit in people, and they’re muddied by the off-target effects and by how poorly the compound is absorbed when swallowed.

  • SR9009 is an unapproved investigational drug — the FDA hasn’t approved it for any use.
  • SARMs and SARM-marketed compounds are not legal dietary-supplement ingredients. The FDA has publicly warned that bodybuilding products containing SARMs are unapproved drugs (not legal supplements), pointing to the risk of liver damage and a higher risk of heart attack and stroke, and it has sent warning letters to companies selling them.
  • DEA scheduling: SR9009 is not a DEA-controlled substance and is not scheduled — it’s not an anabolic steroid under the Controlled Substances Act. Efforts around a federal “SARMs Control Act” have aimed at true androgen-receptor SARMs; nobody is claiming SR9009 has been scheduled here.
  • For contrast: oxandrolone (Anavar) IS a controlled anabolic steroid (Schedule III) under the Anabolic Steroid Control Act and an FDA-approved prescription drug. SR9009 is a completely different kind of thing — it’s non-androgenic, unapproved, and unscheduled.

Anti-doping (WADA): SR9009 is prohibited at all times for athletes — both in and out of competition. It falls under Hormone and Metabolic Modulators (Section S4) as a metabolic modulator / REV-ERBα agonist. WADA’s exact sub-numbering has changed from year to year; recent lists group REV-ERB agonists, PPARδ agonists, and AMPK activators together under the metabolic-modulator subsection, and the substance has been banned since the mid-2010s. For context, GW-501516 (Cardarine), a PPARδ agonist often wrongly sold as a SARM, is also banned under S4, while true SARMs (ostarine, andarine, LGD-4033, RAD-140) sit under S1.2, “Other Anabolic Agents.”

Safety

  • SR9009 itself: there’s essentially no human safety data, so its long-term risk in people is unknown — not proven safe. The “no side effects” claim has nothing behind it. On top of that, because it’s poorly absorbed when swallowed and products are often adulterated (contaminated or mislabeled), people frequently have no real way to know what they’re actually taking.
  • GW-501516 (Cardarine) — a real, serious finding about a different compound: long-term cancer studies in rodents found it caused cancers in several organs, which led GlaxoSmithKline (with Ligand Pharmaceuticals) to stop developing it (~2007); WADA and USADA have issued clear health warnings. GW-501516 is often stacked with — or mixed up with — SR9009, but that does not mean SR9009 itself causes cancer.
  • True SARMs — warning signs reported in people and case reports (worth flagging because SR9009 is sold and “stacked” in the same world): suppression of testosterone and the HPG axis (the hormone loop that controls testosterone), liver harm (drug-induced liver injury, including the bile-flow type called cholestatic injury), and bad shifts in cholesterol, especially drops in HDL (“good” cholesterol). The FDA points to liver-damage risk and a possible higher risk of heart attack and stroke for SARM-containing products.
  • Andarine (S-4) — a specific warning sign, separate from SR9009: reversible vision problems (a yellowish tint, trouble adjusting to night or to light) are a well-recognized and often-reported effect.
  • There’s no solid human data linking SR9009 itself to QT prolongation (a heart-rhythm change) or to blindness, and we’re not claiming either for SR9009. (The vision effects belong to andarine; the cancer risk belongs to GW-501516.)

Bottom line

SR9009 is a non-peptide, non-androgenic REV-ERB agonist with interesting mouse metabolic data but no credible human evidence that it works or that it’s safe, poor absorption when swallowed, and documented off-target activity that undercuts the original theory of how it works. It’s an unapproved drug, not a legal supplement, and it’s banned in sport at all times. The dramatic cancer story floating around this corner of the internet is real — but it belongs to a different compound (GW-501516); SR9009’s own risk in humans simply hasn’t been measured.

Evidence grade: 3/10 · Animal only.

Sources

Checking ClinicalTrials.gov…

What is Stenabolic (SR9009)?
A synthetic small-molecule agonist of the REV-ERB nuclear receptors (a circadian/metabolic transcriptional repressor) — not a peptide, not a hormone, not a true androgen-receptor SARM.
What is Stenabolic (SR9009) used for?
Stenabolic (SR9009) is mainly studied for circadian and metabolic disorders in preclinical models; marketed (without support) as an endurance and fat-loss 'exercise mimetic'
Is Stenabolic (SR9009) FDA-approved or legal?
Unapproved investigational drug, not a legal supplement; prohibited at all times in sport (WADA S4)
How strong is the evidence for Stenabolic (SR9009)?
On the Codex Scale, Stenabolic (SR9009) grades 3/10 — Animal only. Animal data only. May or may not translate to humans.
What else is Stenabolic (SR9009) called?
Stenabolic, SR9009

sarm metabolic rev-erb exercise-mimetic

Per the forum house rules — evidence over anecdote, no sourcing, no dosing protocols. Comments are reviewed before they appear.

Loading…

New profiles and evidence updates only. No spam, and we never sell or share your email.