SARMs vs Steroids: Differences, Risks & Which Is Worse?

schedule9 min readcalendar_todayUpdated Nov 29, 2025
GUIDE

SARMs are often marketed as safer than steroids—but is this true? Both carry significant risks. This comparison examines the evidence.

articleMechanism Comparison

FactorSARMsSteroids
Receptor BindingAndrogen receptors (selective)Androgen receptors (systemic)
Tissue SelectivityDesigned for muscle/boneAffects all tissues
ConversionNo aromatization to estrogenCan convert to estrogen/DHT
AdministrationOral (most)Injectable or oral

Reality check: SARMs' claimed selectivity is incomplete in humans. They still affect liver, cardiovascular system, and HPG axis.

articleResults Comparison

MetricSARMs (12 weeks)Steroids (12 weeks)
Muscle Gain5-15 lbs15-30 lbs
Strength+20-40%+30-50%
Water RetentionMinimalSignificant (some)

Steroids produce 2-3x greater gains but with proportionally higher risks.

articleSafety Comparison

RiskSARMsSteroids
Liver ToxicityDocumented (DILI)Documented (oral steroids)
CardiovascularHDL -10-35%HDL -40-70%
SuppressionModerate-SevereSevere-Complete
Gynecomastia15% (RAD-140)30-50%
Hair LossLow riskHigh risk (DHT)
AcneMildModerate-Severe

Neither is safe. Steroids cause more severe side effects, but SARMs have documented liver injury and unknown long-term risks.

help_outlineFrequently Asked Questions

Not necessarily. SARMs cause less severe suppression and fewer androgenic side effects (acne, hair loss), but they have documented liver toxicity that steroids don't always cause. Long-term SARM safety data is absent. Neither is safe.
No. SARMs produce roughly 1/2 to 1/3 the muscle gains of steroids. A typical SARM cycle yields 5-15 lbs; steroids yield 15-30 lbs. The reduced gains come with reduced (but not eliminated) risks.

menu_bookReferences & Sources

Looking for Safe Alternatives?

Explore our complete guide to legal, FDA-compliant pre-workout ingredients and supplements.

verified_userView Safe Supplements