At-home blood tests: which startup is ahead?

Which startups really count as at-home blood testing companies?

We count eight serious competitors, split between blood samples people collect themselves and conventional blood draws brought to their homes.

LetsGetChecked, Everlywell, SiPhox Health and Thriva sell self-collection products. The customer collects a capillary sample, usually from a finger or the upper arm, and sends it to a laboratory. Function Health, Superpower, InsideTracker and Lifeforce mainly use venous blood, with a phlebotomist visiting the customer where home service is available.

Those two models belong in the same market because they compete for the same preventive-testing budget. We still keep the distinction visible. A five-minute self-collection kit is more convenient, while a venous draw supports a much broader panel.

Function qualifies more clearly than it did a year ago. In April 2026 it acquired mobile-phlebotomy company Getlabs, giving members a direct route to a blood draw at home or at work. Members can still choose one of more than 2,000 Quest locations instead, which is how most of its testing was done before the deal.

We excluded Getlabs as a separate competitor because Function now owns it. Tasso and Sprinter Health provide collection infrastructure rather than owning the consumer relationship; Business Insider reported in October 2026 that Tasso has shipped about 4 million capillary collection devices. Mito Health sells some home kits, but its full panels mainly send users to partner laboratories. Neko Health, Prenuvo and Fountain Life require clinic visits or imaging centers, which places them in the wider preventive-health market rather than this narrower race.

Funding totals remain approximate. Function's total is now above $800 million after its July 2026 growth financing; MedCity News reported "more than $800 million" and Dealroom counts $804 million. LetsGetChecked reports $263 million. Superpower's total depends on the source: about $42 million in some counts, while Sacra lists $34 million. We use rounded figures rather than pretending these private-company totals are exact.

Startup	Main at-home model	What it currently sells	Approximate funding raised
Function Health	Visiting phlebotomist	160+ annual lab tests, clinician review, imaging, health-data platform	About $800 million (incl. $450 million growth financing, July 2026)
Everly Health / Everlywell	Self-collected kits	More than 30 targeted home tests and broader lab-based testing	$330 million
LetsGetChecked	Self-collected kits	Diagnostic and wellness tests, HPV self-collection, laboratories, telehealth and enterprise programs	$263 million
Superpower	Visiting phlebotomist	100+ biomarkers, health records, recommendations and treatment marketplace	$34 million to $42 million, depending on the source
SiPhox Health	Upper-arm self-collection	Up to 62 biomarkers, trend tracking and personalized recommendations	About $35 million
InsideTracker	Optional visiting phlebotomist	Blood analysis connected to nutrition, fitness and wearable data	$17.5 million
Thriva	Finger or upper-arm collection	More than 75 available markers, doctor review and repeat testing	$17.1 million
Lifeforce	Visiting phlebotomist	50+ biomarkers, clinician consultation and longevity coaching	$12 million

Does Function Health's $450 million make it the company to beat?

Yes. Function Health leads the broad at-home blood testing market, and the July 2026 financing makes its lead harder to close. LetsGetChecked is still close enough to keep the contest open.

Function closed $450 million in growth financing from General Catalyst's Customer Value Fund, announced on 30 July 2026, eight months after a $298 million Series B at a $2.5 billion valuation. No new valuation or terms were disclosed, and the release does not say whether the money is equity, so it should not be read as a $450 million equity round. The money adds to an offer that already had hundreds of thousands of paying members, 160+ lab tests a year for $365, a Quest network and, since April, its own mobile-collection business.

Function told MedCity News that members have completed more than 100 million lab tests over three years, while its own Function Index page still shows 70 million; the two figures likely reflect different dates, and neither is audited. At 160 tests per membership, 100 million tests equal roughly 625,000 full annual panels. Repeat tests and smaller panels mean that is not a member count. It still shows a business far past the pilot stage.

LetsGetChecked remains stronger in parts of the actual home-testing workflow. It has served 15 million patients and more than 5,000 organizations, and it controls manufacturing, logistics, laboratory analysis, clinical support and telehealth. Function runs a broader consumer-health experience; LetsGetChecked has spent more than a decade learning how to ship, collect and process samples at scale.

The gap is real and growing on capital, but it is not decided on operations. Function leads on consumer momentum, panel breadth, recurring membership, funding and platform scope. LetsGetChecked leads on accumulated home-testing volume, enterprise delivery, laboratory control and regulatory experience. Everlywell forms a clear third tier, followed by smaller companies that lead single niches.

Who has built the biggest real home blood testing business?

LetsGetChecked still has the largest documented home-testing operation, although Function appears to have the bigger recurring consumer business.

LetsGetChecked's 15 million figure covers many years, countries, testing categories and large enterprise programs, including the testing surge of the pandemic. Its own about page describes the number as patients in one place and as tests completed in another, so it is best read as a broad volume figure. Even so, no rival publishes a comparable number tied to an integrated home-health platform.

Function's membership model is more revealing economically. It says it serves hundreds of thousands of paying members. Even a low reading of 200,000 members would mean $73 million in annual membership billings at $365, before discounts, testing costs, home-draw fees and scans. That is our calculation, not a disclosed revenue figure, but it shows why Function has moved ahead commercially. Turning member counts into billings is the same ground-up arithmetic we use, with every assumption visible, to size the market in our report on digital health.

Everlywell's reach is broad but hard to compare. The company said one in 86 US households received an Everlywell test during 2024, a single-year figure. Its website now claims more than 60 million customers and a reach of one in eight US households, which appears to be a cumulative measure that may include employer, partner and clinical programs.

Thriva gives the clearest number among the smaller companies, with more than 200,000 customers. Superpower now says it has more than 64,000 members, a company-stated figure we could not confirm elsewhere. It also claims more than 6 million biomarkers analyzed, or at most about 60,000 full panels, which roughly fits that member count. SiPhox reports one million biomarkers tested; even at the maximum 62 biomarkers per panel, that is at least 16,000 panels, and likely more. Lifeforce discloses too little for a serious scale comparison.

Is Superpower catching up now that it has 64,000 members?

Not yet. Function is still moving fastest, while Superpower is the smaller challenger putting the most pressure on prices and now has a first scale figure to show for it.

Sacra estimated that Function grew from roughly 40,000 members to more than 200,000 within twelve months. That estimate is external, not audited, but it fits Function's own statement that it serves hundreds of thousands of paying members.

Function has also widened its product unusually quickly. It acquired Ezra in May 2025 to add MRI and CT scans, bought Getlabs in April 2026 for home collection, and acquired SuppCo to connect lab results with supplement data. Scans are now offered at more than 200 locations for under $1,000 extra. The July 2026 financing gives it room to keep buying and building without starving the core testing product.

Superpower follows a more aggressive pricing playbook. Its annual membership costs $199, against about $500 when Business Insider covered its Base acquisition, a headline cut of roughly 60%. It has acquired Base and Feminade and expanded into treatments and peptides.

That member count matters, but it does not change the order. It is about a third of Thriva's customer base and a fraction of Function's. Superpower still publishes no revenue, retention or repeat-testing data, so we cannot tell whether the $199 price builds a business or only buys sign-ups. We call it the fastest smaller challenger, not a contender for first place.

Thriva has moved more quietly. Its Compass program now costs £360 a year for three at-home tests, each with a doctor consultation, plus ongoing guidance. It is a sensible push toward repeat use rather than constantly finding new one-time buyers.

Who has a finished product, and who still has a science project?

LetsGetChecked, Everlywell, Function and Thriva sell mature services today; SiPhox is the clearest case where the product on sale and the long-term technology remain separate.

LetsGetChecked has already built manufacturing, shipping, laboratory, physician-support and prescription capabilities. Its products return results in roughly two to five days after laboratory processing, and its platform serves consumers as well as large health-plan and employer programs. In August 2026 it added the Onclarity HPV self-collection kit, which the company describes as FDA-cleared and tested with BD's FDA-approved HPV assay.

Function also sells a finished service, but it reaches maturity through established venous testing rather than a new collection invention. Quest performs much of the testing, Getlabs specialists can handle home draws, and Function organizes the results, clinician review, recommendations and long-term record.

SiPhox's EasyDraw service is on sale. Customers collect blood from the upper arm in about five minutes, with live support, and results arrive in seven to ten days according to the company. Its more ambitious silicon-photonic analyzer, meant to produce results inside the home, is not mentioned on its current how-it-works page, and the company has not disclosed a launch date. Customers today are buying a mail-to-laboratory service.

Superpower also has a working service, with home collection and more than 2,000 Quest locations in over 37 states. Its uncertainty is commercial, not technical: the service exists, but it has not shown how smoothly it runs at high volume.

Who can test the most from a single visit at home?

Function offers the broadest home-draw program, Superpower offers the strongest low-price challenge, and SiPhox leads when customers want to collect the sample themselves.

Function includes 160+ lab tests a year, spread across an initial assessment, a second round of testing later in the year and selected add-ons. The word "tests" deserves attention: several tests can form one panel, and some measurements repeat. Still, the product covers far more ground than a normal targeted home kit.

Superpower advertises 100+ biomarkers from one venous draw for $199 a year. Home collection costs extra; its membership page does not state the fee, so the full first-year home price is not disclosed there. The panel covers blood counts, metabolic health, lipids, thyroid, hormones, vitamins, iron and inflammation.

SiPhox can test up to 62 biomarkers with its Ultimate 360 panel, collected without a phlebotomist. Thriva lists more than 75 markers across its range, although no single self-collected panel includes all of them. InsideTracker measures up to 48 biomarkers and charges an extra $119 for a mobile draw, while Lifeforce tests more than 50 through a visiting phlebotomist and retests every quarter.

Everlywell's 360 product covers 83 biomarkers but requires an appointment at one of 2,000+ Quest locations. It is a useful price and breadth benchmark, but not an at-home collection product. Everlywell's real home catalog is mostly smaller tests built around one question, such as cholesterol, HbA1c, thyroid, hormones or vitamin status.

Company	At-home collection	Headline breadth	Current customer cost
Function Health	Visiting specialist	160+ annual lab tests	$365 per year, plus location-dependent home fee
Superpower	Visiting phlebotomist	100+ biomarkers	$199 per year, plus a home-collection fee not listed on its membership page
SiPhox Health	Five-minute upper-arm collection	Up to 62 biomarkers	Base plan plus upgrades (+$75 or +$125 for larger panels)
Thriva Compass	Finger or upper-arm collection	More than 75 available markers	£360 yearly for three tests with doctor consultations
Lifeforce	Visiting phlebotomist	50+ biomarkers	Premium program with consultation and coaching

Which company makes collecting blood at home least annoying?

SiPhox offers the easiest real self-collection process, while home phlebotomy remains the safer choice for people who want a large panel without handling blood themselves.

SiPhox's EasyDraw device attaches to the upper arm and collects the sample in around five minutes. There is no finger-pricking and no squeezing drops into a narrow tube. Live one-to-one support is available during collection, and the sample then goes back by courier.

Thriva offers both finger-prick and upper-arm collection. The experience depends on the panel: some tests need more than one tube and roughly ten drops of blood. Many customers manage easily, while people with poor circulation or a fear of blood may struggle to produce a usable sample. Hard-to-give samples are a pain point we weigh when we study who the customers are and what they would pay to fix in our report covering the digital health market.

A visiting phlebotomist removes that uncertainty. Function, Superpower, Lifeforce and InsideTracker can collect enough venous blood for broad testing in one appointment. The customer must book a slot, live inside the service area and usually pay an extra fee, but a failed collection becomes much less likely.

LetsGetChecked is working on a middle ground. Its ImPress collection device received FDA 510(k) clearance as a professional-use blood lancet. The company presents it as an alternative to conventional finger-pricking, but that clearance does not make ImPress a nationwide, unsupervised consumer device.

For a customer who wants to do everything alone, SiPhox has the best experience. For a customer who values reliability and breadth, a ten-minute visit from a phlebotomist is usually the easier route in practice.

Can we trust these at-home blood test results?

We can trust selected at-home blood tests when the collection method has been validated for the specific biomarker; the category as a whole does not deserve a blanket accuracy claim.

Venous draws performed by a licensed professional use the same basic route as ordinary clinical testing. Function, Superpower, Lifeforce and InsideTracker therefore avoid many problems caused by tiny capillary samples, although lab methods and the clinical value of each test still need scrutiny.

Self-collected capillary blood has become much more credible. A published study found that mailed capillary samples gave results comparable with venous samples for HbA1c, creatinine, LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol. Another study of several self-collection devices concluded that agreement with venous blood must still be checked systematically before broad clinical use. The method works well for some measurements and less consistently for others.

Shipping adds another variable. Heat, delays, clotting, low volume and poor technique can damage a sample before it reaches the lab. Companies need stability studies and clear rejection rules on top of an accredited laboratory.

LetsGetChecked has the strongest regulatory record in the group. The FDA granted De Novo authorization to its Simple 2 system for at-home collection of samples used to detect chlamydia and gonorrhea. Its August 2026 HPV self-collection kit adds another home product the company describes as FDA-cleared. Each decision covers one product and specimen type, but together they show a company that knows how to take home collection through the FDA.

Thriva says it compares its capillary assays with venous collection and tests sample stability under postal conditions. SiPhox uses CLIA- and CAP-accredited laboratories, but its mail-in program is sold for wellness purposes and relies on laboratory-developed tests. Accreditation builds confidence in lab operations without proving that every marker performs the same after home collection.

Who gives you the most useful testing for the money?

Superpower is the cheapest broad panel per biomarker, while Function offers more listed testing per membership and a clearer home-draw option.

Superpower costs $199 a year for 100+ biomarkers drawn at a Quest location, or about $1.99 per biomarker. Home collection costs extra, and the fee is not listed on its membership page, so its at-home price per marker is higher and not fully disclosed. Treating every biomarker as equally valuable is crude, but it gives the right order of magnitude.

As seen above, Function charges $365 for 160+ tests a year, about $2.28 per listed test before any home fee. Some tests repeat, and a lab "test" is not always the same as a Superpower biomarker, so the ratios should guide the comparison rather than decide it. A $365 membership is one business model among several, and we compare which ones keep their margins in our digital health market report.

Everlywell 360 costs $399 for 83 biomarkers, about $4.81 per marker, and the draw happens at Quest. SiPhox charges extra for larger panels, $75 or $125 on top of its base plan according to its site. Thriva's Compass membership costs £360 for three test rounds, or £120 per round before counting the doctor consultations and ongoing support.

Turnaround also affects value. LetsGetChecked generally reports results two to five days after lab processing. Thriva says some results are ready within 48 hours of lab receipt. Superpower usually takes about a week, and SiPhox quotes seven to ten days. These clocks start at different points, so a two-day lab turnaround can still become a longer door-to-result wait.

Which startup can handle a national rollout without falling apart?

LetsGetChecked has the best proof that it can run large home-testing programs, while Function now owns the collection network it used to lack and has the capital to extend it.

As pointed out above, LetsGetChecked has served 15 million patients and more than 5,000 organizations. The company controls manufacturing, logistics, lab analysis, telehealth, physician support and prescription fulfillment. Few competitors can replace all of that without stitching together several outside vendors.

Its place inside Fuze Health adds pharmacy and care-delivery capabilities from the combination with Truepill and Alto. The group can send a kit, process the test, connect the customer with a clinician and deliver medication through one organization. That structure suits health plans and employers trying to close specific care gaps, as its August 2026 HPV kit, sold through partners, illustrates.

As we saw previously, Function bought Getlabs in April 2026 after building its business on Quest locations. The deal brings a nationwide network of mobile specialists to homes and offices, and the July 2026 financing gives Function money to expand it. The integration is still young, so we do not know how much of Function's volume has moved into homes or whether appointment coverage is consistent in every region.

Everlywell has the next-best consumer distribution. It sells more than 30 home tests, reaches employers and health plans, and increasingly acts as the access layer for outside diagnostic companies. Its partnership with GRAIL is a good example: Everlywell brings the consumer relationship and logistics, while GRAIL supplies the cancer-detection test.

Thriva has proven it can run a sizeable UK service, but expanding abroad would require new labs, medical oversight and regulatory arrangements. SiPhox's operation is much smaller and depends on courier returns. Superpower's 64,000+ members and Quest network suggest it can handle growth, though it publishes no collection volume.

Startup	Best evidence it can scale	Strongest distribution advantage	Main bottleneck today
LetsGetChecked	Millions of patients and thousands of organizations	Integrated labs, logistics, telehealth and enterprise sales	Current growth and revenue are not disclosed
Function Health	Hundreds of thousands of members and 100 million+ completed lab tests (company-stated)	Quest access plus the acquired Getlabs mobile network	Home-service coverage and economics remain unclear
Everlywell	Roughly one in 86 US households received a test in 2024	Large consumer brand and diagnostic partnerships	Broadest panel still requires a laboratory visit
Thriva	More than 200,000 UK customers	Strong direct consumer brand in Britain	Limited geographic reach
Superpower	64,000+ members (company-stated) and 2,000+ Quest locations	Very low entry price	No published revenue, retention or testing volume

What can Function or LetsGetChecked do that rivals cannot easily copy?

LetsGetChecked owns more of the physical testing workflow, while Function combines the richest consumer health record with by far the largest expansion budget.

LetsGetChecked's advantage comes from years of operational work customers rarely see. Making kits, managing returns, rejecting unusable samples, running accredited labs, handling abnormal results and serving health-plan clients take different teams and systems. A new competitor can design a dashboard quickly; rebuilding that stack takes much longer.

Function's defense comes from repeated data under one membership. Its company-stated 100 million+ completed lab tests form a large long-term dataset, and it keeps adding imaging, home collection, wearables, medical records and supplement data to the same account. Function says it is building a continuous-learning system to predict health changes from that record. A member with several years of results is less likely to move to a cheaper service that cannot read that history.

Function's weakness is that many components remain available to others. Quest can serve other startups. Phlebotomy networks can sign other clients. Health dashboards and AI explanations keep getting cheaper to build. Function's edge depends on combining these pieces better and keeping customers, not on owning an exclusive lab technique.

Everlywell has built a different barrier through distribution. Its consumer brand, health-plan relationships and ability to launch partner diagnostics make it a useful channel for companies that have a test but no national direct-to-consumer operation.

SiPhox may one day own the hardest technology to copy. Its proposed silicon-photonic analyzer aims to test biomarkers at home within minutes. It has not disclosed a launch date, so we give that potential moat little weight in the ranking.

InsideTracker deserves more credit than its rank suggests. Its platform holds years of blood, nutrition, fitness and wearable data. A peer-reviewed retrospective study of more than 20,000 users found that platform use was associated with improvements in blood and fitness-tracker measures. The design cannot prove cause, but few competitors have published outcome research at that scale.

Is Function's $800 million in funding producing a better company?

Partly. Function has raised and spent fastest, but the return on that spending is still hidden; LetsGetChecked has the clearest proof that funding became infrastructure.

The eight companies in our core comparison have raised about $1.5 billion combined. Function, Everly Health and LetsGetChecked account for about $1.4 billion, or roughly 92%. Function alone now holds more than half of the total. Capital is concentrated in the three companies at the top of our ranking, although the order of their funding does not match the order of their operating strength. With three companies holding most of the capital, the question is where investors place their bets, and we trace it in our report on digital health.

LetsGetChecked used its capital to build or buy labs, manufacturing, logistics, genomics, telehealth and enterprise testing. Its patient and organization counts show those assets have carried large volumes, and it keeps adding regulated products such as its HPV kit.

Function raised most of its money in the past year: a $298 million Series B in November 2025 and $450 million of growth financing in July 2026. It has used that capital to move into imaging, mobile collection, supplements and AI tools. The strategy could produce a much larger health platform. It could also raise costs and complexity before the core blood-testing model has disclosed retention or profitability.

Everly Health has raised about $330 million, yet its most visible consumer product remains a catalog of targeted tests. Its reach is impressive, but it publishes little current revenue, growth or repeat-purchase data, which makes capital efficiency hard to judge.

Superpower has raised $34 million to $42 million and now claims more than 64,000 members. That is decent traction per dollar raised, but without revenue or churn we cannot judge its economics. SiPhox has raised around $35 million, and part of that funds an analyzer that is still not on sale.

Funding explains who can survive a costly expansion. It does not fix weak collection economics, poor retention or a product that customers only try once.

How much of the evidence can we actually trust?

The ranking is strong at the top and much less certain from fourth place down, because the largest companies disclose operating scale while younger ones mainly disclose features and prices.

Prices, lab locations, panel descriptions, FDA decisions, acquisitions and announced funding rounds are relatively easy to verify. Peer-reviewed studies give stronger evidence on collection accuracy or health outcomes, although a study of one device or biomarker cannot validate a whole platform.

Scale figures need more care. Function reports individual lab tests, LetsGetChecked reports patients, Everlywell reports households and customers, Thriva and Superpower report customers or members, and SiPhox reports biomarkers. These units describe different things. Putting them in one leaderboard would create precision without comparability.

Some claims are especially broad or inconsistent. Everlywell's one-in-eight-households claim is cumulative and may include employer and partner programs. Function's lab-test count appears as 70 million on one company page and more than 100 million in a later statement. LetsGetChecked's 15 million is labeled both patients and tests on its own site. We use these numbers as evidence of activity, not as interchangeable customer counts.

The missing information says more. None of the companies publishes a full set of revenue, customer acquisition cost, gross margin, home-draw volume, sample rejection rate, retention, repeat-testing frequency and enterprise backlog. Function and Superpower also do not disclose what home collection costs them compared with a partner-lab visit.

So which at-home blood testing startup is actually ahead?

Function Health is ahead overall, and its lead has grown. LetsGetChecked remains the only challenger close enough to take first place back.

Function combines hundreds of thousands of paying members, the broadest mainstream panel, a low annual price, more than 100 million completed lab tests by its own count, an owned home-collection network and more than $800 million in total funding after its July 2026 financing. Its lead rests on membership scale and breadth, not on a better collection technology.

LetsGetChecked remains the better pure testing operator. Its labs, manufacturing, logistics, regulatory record and enterprise relationships have been tested across millions of patients, and it is still adding FDA-reviewed home products. It could return to first place if Fuze Health shows fresh revenue growth, rising repeat use or a major expansion of self-collected blood products.

Everlywell ranks third because its consumer distribution is enormous, but its broadest blood panel still sends people to Quest. Thriva ranks fourth through proven adoption, a mature UK operation and a recurring Compass program at £360 a year.

Superpower takes fifth place. Its $199 price, broad panel, acquisitions, treatment marketplace and newly stated 64,000+ members make it the fastest-moving smaller challenger. It stays below Thriva until it shows a larger base or any revenue and retention data.

SiPhox ranks sixth overall while winning the narrower contest for the best customer-operated collection. Its position would rise sharply if volume grows and its home analyzer becomes a cleared, mass-produced product.

InsideTracker has stronger published outcome evidence than several companies above it, though blood collection is one part of a broader analytics product. Lifeforce offers a polished premium service but has disclosed too little scale to compete with the leaders.

The lead is clear, but not locked in. Function is the number one in broad preventive blood testing from home. LetsGetChecked remains number one in integrated home-testing operations. SiPhox leads full self-collection, while Thriva leads that model in the UK.

Rank	Startup	Why it holds this position
1	Function Health	The best combination of membership scale, test breadth, pricing, data and owned home collection, backed by more than $800 million in funding
2	LetsGetChecked	The most proven end-to-end home-testing operator, with unmatched patient volume, enterprise delivery, labs and a growing list of FDA-reviewed home products
3	Everlywell	Exceptional US consumer distribution and a broad test catalog, held back by limited transparency and an 83-marker flagship product that requires Quest
4	Thriva	More than 200,000 customers, mature UK operations, doctor-reviewed results and a recurring Compass program
5	Superpower	The most aggressive price challenger, with 100+ biomarkers and 64,000+ members (company-stated), but no disclosed revenue or retention
6	SiPhox Health	The best comprehensive self-collection experience and promising proprietary technology, still operating at a much smaller commercial scale
7	InsideTracker	Strong long-term analysis and unusually good published outcome evidence, though at-home collection is an add-on rather than the core product
8	Lifeforce	A high-quality premium service with home phlebotomy and clinical support, but limited evidence of scale and a harder model to expand cheaply