Trikafta vs Trelegy Ellipta
Side-by-side drug price comparison from Medicare Part D data
Verdict
Trelegy Ellipta costs 97% less per claim than Trikafta ($380.00 vs $13935.00). Trikafta has a generic alternative available. Total Medicare spending: Trikafta at $3.5B vs Trelegy Ellipta at $2.9B.
| Metric | Trikafta | Trelegy Ellipta |
|---|---|---|
| Avg Cost per Claim Average cost Medicare pays per prescription claim | $13,935 | $380* |
| Total Medicare Spending Total Medicare Part D spending on this drug | $3.5B | $2.9B |
| Total Claims | 248,000 | 7,560,000 |
| Year-over-Year Change Price change from prior year (lower is better for patients) | 18.4%* | 19.8% |
| Generic Available | Yes | No |
| Condition | Cystic Fibrosis | Asthma/COPD |
| Total Beneficiaries | 18,000 | 865,000 |
Trelegy Ellipta costs 97% less per claim than Trikafta ($380.00 vs $13935.00). Trikafta has a generic alternative available. Total Medicare spending: Trikafta at $3.5B vs Trelegy Ellipta at $2.9B.
Explore More
The side-by-side above pulls the CMS Medicare Part D Drug Spending data data for both Trikafta and Trelegy Ellipta. What follows is the interpretation — which specific axes carry the most weight for Trikafta versus Trelegy Ellipta, and which differences are large enough to influence a real decision.
For households or analysts using this comparison as a decision input, the right framing is usually not "which is better" in aggregate but "which is better for the specific decision in front of you." CMS Medicare Part D Drug Spending data captures the raw data; the framing depends on whether the question is investment, residency, planning, or research.
Source: CMS Medicare Part D Spending, 2026.