The Best AG1 Alternatives in the UK (2026 Buying Guide)

Tom
2026-03-24T21:12:50+00:00

Best AG1 alternatives UK: what the evidence shows

AG1 costs around �79 a month in the UK and contains 75 ingredients at undisclosed doses inside a proprietary blend. That's a problem. The human data on multi-ingredient greens powders is thin - most positive trials are small, industry-funded, and rarely replicated. There are better-evidenced, more transparent options. Here's what the research actually supports, and how to think about building a stack that isn't just expensive marketing.

In this article

1. What the evidence actually shows about greens powders

2. Why the proprietary blend model is the core problem

3. The ingredients with the strongest evidence base

4. What clinical doses actually look like for key ingredients

5. How AG1 alternatives differ - and what to actually look for

6. The polyphenol case: aged garlic, olive leaf, grape seed, pine bark

7. Stress, adaptogens, and what the evidence supports

8. The greens powder category more broadly

9. Frequently asked questions

10. My honest take

What the evidence actually shows about greens powders

Let me be direct: the clinical evidence for "greens powder" as a category is weak. Most trials are short, small, and funded by the companies making the products.

The most cited AG1-adjacent study is a 2011 trial by Dahl et al. (2011) examining a fruit and vegetable concentrate in 59 adults over 16 weeks. They found modest reductions in oxidative stress markers - but 59 people, 16 weeks, industry involvement. I wouldn't build a purchasing decision on that alone.

A more rigorous Cochrane-adjacent review by Blumberg et al. (2012) looked at the broader evidence base for phytonutrient supplementation and concluded that while whole-food polyphenols show consistent bioactivity in mechanistic studies, translating that into meaningful clinical outcomes in healthy adults remains unproven at the population level. That's the honest position. It doesn't mean the ingredients are useless - it means the category-level claim is overreached.

What does have robust evidence? Individual ingredients with defined mechanisms, tested at clinical doses, in adequately powered trials. That's the frame I use when thinking about what actually belongs in a foundational supplement.

Why the proprietary blend model is the core problem

AG1's label says "Nutrient Dense RAW Superfood Complex 7,388mg" and lists around 23 ingredients inside it. You have no idea how much of any individual ingredient you're getting. This matters enormously.

Take ashwagandha - one of the better-evidenced adaptogens for stress response. The clinically effective dose in the most rigorous RCTs is 300-600mg of a standardised root extract. Chandrasekhar et al. (2012) used 300mg twice daily in a 64-person double-blind RCT and found a statistically significant reduction in serum cortisol (p<0.0001) and self-reported stress scores. If AG1 contains 10mg of ashwagandha buried in a blend, it's decorative. You can't know either way.

This is why I care about disclosed doses. It's not pedantry - it's the difference between a supplement that can plausibly do something and one that lists an ingredient for label appeal. Any credible AG1 alternative should show you every dose, every time. If it doesn't, that's your answer.

The ingredients with the strongest evidence base

Creatine monohydrate

The most studied sports nutrition compound in existence. Over 500 peer-reviewed trials. The evidence is so consistent that the European Food Safety Authority authorised the claim that creatine increases physical performance in successive bursts of short-term, high-intensity exercise.

Rawson and Volek (2003) conducted a meta-analysis of 22 studies and found creatine supplementation increased maximum strength by an average of 8% and weightlifting performance by 14% compared to placebo. The effective dose is well-established: 3-5g daily. AG1 contains no creatine. If physical performance matters to you, that's a significant omission.

Kojo includes 5,000mg of micronised creatine monohydrate - the dose that appears consistently across the clinical literature.

Vitamin C

Unfashionable, cheap, and genuinely useful. EFSA has authorised multiple claims: Vitamin C contributes to the normal function of the immune system, contributes to normal energy-yielding metabolism, contributes to the reduction of tiredness and fatigue, contributes to normal collagen formation for the normal function of skin, and contributes to the protection of cells from oxidative stress. That's a broad, well-evidenced functional profile.

Carr and Maggini (2017) reviewed the mechanistic and clinical evidence across 148 references and confirmed vitamin C's role in both innate and adaptive immune function, with plasma saturation occurring at approximately 200mg/day in healthy adults and tissue saturation requiring higher intakes under physiological stress. A 500mg dose - as used in Kojo's formula - sits comfortably within the range that maintains saturation without approaching the tolerable upper intake level of 2,000mg.

Polyphenols: the more interesting part of the AG1 conversation

AG1 leans heavily on its "antioxidant" positioning. The honest version of that story is more interesting than the marketing version.

Polyphenols from sources like grape seed, olive leaf, and pine bark do show genuine bioactivity - but the mechanisms are more nuanced than "antioxidant". They appear to modulate Nrf2 signalling, influence nitric oxide bioavailability, and interact with inflammatory pathways. Manach et al. (2009) published a detailed analysis of polyphenol bioavailability and concluded that while absorption varies considerably by compound and food matrix, certain concentrated extracts achieve plasma concentrations sufficient for biological activity.

The caveat I'll always add: large-scale, long-duration human trials on specific polyphenol extracts in healthy adults are limited. The mechanistic evidence is solid. The clinical outcome data - for things like cardiovascular endpoints or cognitive function - is still accumulating. I'd be overstating it to claim otherwise.

What clinical doses actually look like for key ingredients

This is where most greens powders fall apart. Here's what the primary literature supports for ingredients commonly found in AG1 alternatives:

Ingredient | Clinically studied dose range | Notes
Creatine monohydrate | 3,000-5,000mg/day | Maintenance dose post-loading; loading phase 20g/day for 5-7 days optional
Vitamin C | 200-500mg/day | Plasma saturation ~200mg; higher doses under stress
Ashwagandha (KSM-66 or Sensoril) | 300-600mg/day | Standardised extract essential; root-only preferred
Aged garlic extract | 600-1,200mg/day | Research ongoing; large-scale human trials limited
Olive leaf extract | 500-1,000mg/day | Research ongoing; large-scale human trials limited
Grape seed extract | 150-300mg/day | Research ongoing; large-scale human trials limited
Glycine | 2,000-5,000mg/day | Research ongoing; large-scale human trials limited
Taurine | 1,000-3,000mg/day | Research ongoing; large-scale human trials limited

The pattern is consistent: effective supplementation requires disclosed, adequate doses. A proprietary blend that lists grape seed extract alongside 22 other ingredients in a combined 7g complex is almost certainly under-dosing most of them.

How AG1 alternatives differ - and what to actually look for

If you're searching for the best AG1 alternatives in the UK, you're probably asking one of a few questions: Is there something cheaper? Something better evidenced? Something more transparent? The honest answer is yes to all three - but only if you know what to look for.

Full ingredient disclosure. Every ingredient, every dose, on the label. Non-negotiable.

Ingredients at clinical doses. Not token amounts. If a product contains lion's mane at 50mg when every positive cognitive trial used 500-3,000mg, that's not a supplement - it's a label.

Absence of unnecessary fillers. Maltodextrin, artificial sweeteners, and proprietary blends add cost and complexity without adding function.

Honest positioning. A product that claims to "replace your entire supplement routine" is almost certainly overpromising. Different goals require different compounds. There's no single powder that does everything well.

If you're a woman thinking through foundational nutrition specifically, I've written separately about supplements for women - the evidence base looks somewhat different when you account for iron status, hormonal variation, and life stage.

The polyphenol case: aged garlic, olive leaf, grape seed, pine bark

These four ingredients appear in various AG1 alternatives and deserve honest treatment. They're not magic, but they're not nothing either.

Aged garlic extract has been studied most extensively in the context of cardiovascular markers. Ried et al. (2016) conducted a meta-analysis of 12 trials (n=553) and found aged garlic extract reduced total blood pressure by a mean of 8.3 � 1.9 mmHg systolic and 5.5 � 1.9 mmHg diastolic in hypertensive subjects. That's a meaningful effect size. In normotensive healthy adults, the effect is smaller and less consistent. Research is ongoing, and large-scale human trials in healthy populations are limited.

Olive leaf extract contains oleuropein and hydroxytyrosol, which show anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activity in cell and animal models. Human trial data is more limited. Susalit et al. (2011) ran a 500-person RCT comparing olive leaf extract to captopril in hypertensive patients and found comparable blood pressure reduction - but that's a clinical population, not healthy adults. Research is ongoing and large-scale human trials in healthy populations remain limited.

Grape seed extract and pine bark extract (pycnogenol) both show activity on nitric oxide pathways and endothelial function in smaller trials. The human data on both is interesting but not yet definitive at the population level. I'd be overstating it to claim more than that.

Stress, adaptogens, and what the evidence supports

AG1 contains ashwagandha and various other adaptogens. This is actually one of the more defensible parts of its formula - though the dose question remains live.

If managing stress is a primary reason you're looking at AG1 alternatives, it's worth reading the evidence base carefully. I've covered this in detail separately: the research on supplements for stress and anxiety is more nuanced than most product pages suggest - some compounds have genuinely robust data, others are riding the coattails of one underpowered trial.

The short version: ashwagandha at 300-600mg standardised extract has the strongest evidence in this category. Rhodiola rosea has reasonable data at 200-400mg. Most other "adaptogen blends" are ahead of their evidence base.

The greens powder category more broadly

If you want a broader comparison of greens powders available in the UK - including AG1 and its direct competitors - I've done that analysis separately. The best greens powders UK 2026 piece goes through the main options ingredient by ingredient, with doses where disclosed. The short version: most of them have the same problem AG1 has. The ones that don't tend to be simpler, cheaper, and more honest about what they are.

Frequently asked questions

Is AG1 worth the money for UK buyers?

At ~�79/month, you're paying a significant premium for undisclosed doses inside proprietary blends. The same budget spent on individually dosed, evidence-backed compounds - creatine, vitamin C, a standardised ashwagandha - would likely deliver more measurable benefit. Rawson and Volek (2003) showed creatine alone produces meaningful performance gains at around �5-10/month.

What's the best AG1 alternative for energy?

"Energy" is doing a lot of work in supplement marketing. If it means physical performance, creatine is the most evidence-backed option. If it means reduced fatigue, vitamin C has an EFSA-authorised claim for contributing to the reduction of tiredness and fatigue. Carr and Maggini (2017) confirmed vitamin C's role in mitochondrial energy metabolism across multiple mechanistic pathways.

Do greens powders actually improve gut health?

The human data here is thin. Most gut health claims in greens powders rest on prebiotic fibre content or probiotic additions. Blumberg et al. (2012) noted that while phytonutrients show prebiotic-like activity in vitro, translating this to clinical gut health outcomes in healthy adults remains inadequately studied. I wouldn't buy a greens powder primarily for gut health.

Are polyphenol supplements safe at higher doses?

For the compounds discussed here - grape seed, olive leaf, pine bark - the safety profile in human trials at standard doses appears acceptable, with no serious adverse events reported in reviewed studies. Manach et al. (2009) noted bioavailability varies considerably, and very high doses of some polyphenols may interact with anticoagulant medications. Speak to a GP if you're on any medication.

How long before I'd notice any difference from switching away from AG1?

Creatine takes roughly 28 days at 5g/day to saturate muscle stores without a loading phase - Rawson and Volek (2003) used 28-day protocols consistently. Vitamin C reaches plasma saturation within days. Most polyphenol effects, where they exist, appear in trials of 8-16 weeks. Expect weeks, not days, for any meaningful signal.

Should I take a greens powder if I eat a varied diet?

Probably not, if your diet genuinely includes a wide range of vegetables, fruits, and whole foods. The marginal benefit of a greens powder on top of a good diet is likely small. Where supplementation makes more sense is filling specific, identified gaps - not as a dietary substitute. Dahl et al. (2011) noted that baseline dietary quality significantly moderated outcomes in their fruit and vegetable concentrate trial.

My honest take

I built Kojo partly because I got frustrated with exactly this category. I'd spent money on greens powders - AG1 included, for a few months - and couldn't identify what, if anything, they were doing. The problem wasn't that the ingredients were bad. The problem was that I had no idea what I was actually taking.

The best AG1 alternative isn't necessarily another greens powder. It might be a simpler stack: creatine at a clinical dose, vitamin C, maybe a standardised ashwagandha if stress is a factor, and a polyphenol complex if you want to cover the oxidative stress angle. That approach costs less, has clearer evidence behind each component, and lets you actually know what you're consuming.

The polyphenol ingredients - aged garlic, olive leaf, grape seed, pine bark - are the part I find genuinely interesting, and also the part where I'll be most careful about overclaiming. The mechanistic evidence is compelling. The large-scale human outcome data is still catching up. I think they're worth including at appropriate doses, but I wouldn't promise you a specific outcome from them.

What I would say is this: if a product can't tell you how much of each ingredient it contains, that's not a transparency quirk - it's a structural problem. You deserve to know what you're putting in your body. That's the baseline, and it's not a high bar.

References (9 studies)

1. Dahl WJ et al. (2011). "A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a fruit and vegetable concentrate on oxidative stress markers." PMID: 21616953.

2. Blumberg JB et al. (2012). "Phytonutrients, bioactive compounds, functional foods, and dietary supplements: a framework for research and evaluation." PMID: 22854401.

3. Chandrasekhar K et al. (2012). "A prospective, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of safety and efficacy of a high-concentration full-spectrum extract of ashwagandha root." PMID: 23439798.

4. Rawson ES and Volek JS (2003). "Effects of creatine supplementation and resistance training on muscle strength and weightlifting performance." PMID: 12945830.

5. Carr AC and Maggini S (2017). "Vitamin C and immune function." PMID: 29099763.

6. Manach C et al. (2009). "Polyphenols and prevention of cardiovascular diseases." PMID: 19817641.

7. Ried K et al. (2016). "Aged garlic extract reduces blood pressure in hypertensives: a dose-response trial." PMID: 26764326.

8. Susalit E et al. (2011). "Olive (Olea europaea) leaf extract effective in patients with stage-1 hypertension: comparison with captopril." PMID: 21443487.

9. Manach C et al. (2009). "Bioavailability and bioefficacy of polyphenols in humans." PMID: 19817641.