Longevity Funding: A Quarter-by-Quarter Analysis

All funding deals in the longevity market over the last years

Below is the table listing all the deals. You can find our methodology at the end of this page.

If you want a deeper understanding of the market and its current dynamics, get our report covering the Longevity Market.

Is longevity funding actually accelerating right now?

Longevity funding is stronger today than it was in mid-2025, but the latest record quarter makes the improvement look much broader than it really is.

The headline numbers jump around dramatically. Known funding went from $256.9 million in Q2 2025 to at least $112.3 million in Q3, then $571.7 million in Q4, $504.5 million in Q1 2026 and a record $657.1 million in Q2 2026.

Deal activity followed a completely different path. We counted eight financings in Q2 2025, ten in Q3, 13 in Q4 and 20 in Q1 2026 before activity fell back to 15 deals in Q2.

Strip out rounds above $50 million and the recent progression becomes much calmer: roughly $103 million in Q4, $135 million in Q1 and $142 million in Q2. That gives us a better sense of what is happening beneath the giant rounds. The underlying funding market has been improving lately, just at a much slower pace than the headline totals suggest.

Period	Deals	Known capital	Capital excluding >$50M	Median round
Q2 2025	8	$256.9M	$50.9M	$9.3M
Q3 2025	10	$112.3M+	$112.3M known	$11.0M
Q4 2025	13	$571.7M	$103.4M	$10.5M
Q1 2026	20	$504.5M	$134.5M	$6.0M
Q2 2026	15	$657.1M	$142.1M	$9.2M
Q4 2025 → Q1 2026	+53.8% deals	-11.8% capital	+30.0% ex >$50M	-42.9% median
Q1 → Q2 2026	-25.0% deals	+30.3% capital	+5.7% ex >$50M	+53.3% median

Did longevity funding really collapse in Q3 2025?

Q3 2025 was a healthier longevity funding quarter than the headline capital drop suggests.

Known capital fell sharply after Q2, but the previous quarter had been heavily inflated by NewLimit's $130 million Series B and Juvenescence's $76 million Series B. Once those giant rounds disappeared, the rest of the market actually became busier.

Deal count rose 25%, from eight to ten. The median financing increased from $9.3 million to $11 million. Half of Q3 financings were first financings, twice the Q2 share. Most importantly, known capital from deals below $50 million more than doubled.

Q3 also had the strongest visible middle of the market. Around 70% of financings with known amounts sat between $5 million and $50 million, including Jocasta Neuroscience at $35 million, OneSkin at $20 million, Fountain Life at $18 million and Oisín Biotechnologies at $10 million.

Even the $112.3 million known total is understated. Corsera Health had a financing known to exceed $50 million for which we could not establish a clean exact round value, while Foundry BioSciences had an additional financing described only as several million dollars.

The quarter was more active, more evenly distributed and friendlier to newly financed companies. What disappeared was the Q2 megaround effect.

Was Q4 2025's longevity funding jump mostly a few giant deals?

Q4 2025's longevity funding jump came mostly from a handful of giant rounds, while the typical financing barely changed.

Known capital increased more than fivefold from Q3 to $571.7 million. Yet capital excluding rounds above $50 million actually slipped by roughly 8%, and the median deal edged down from $11 million to $10.5 million.

Function Health explains a huge part of the difference. Its $298 million Series B represented just over half of all known Q4 funding. Lanserhof added an approximately $110.3 million transaction, and Blueprint raised another $60 million. Together, the three largest financings accounted for about 82% of the quarter.

Function's round also came during a period of unusually rapid expansion for the company. Earlier in 2025 it had acquired Ezra, combining Function's lab-testing platform with Ezra's AI-supported MRI and CT imaging. Function then raised the $298 million round while pushing further into what it calls Medical Intelligence.

That helps explain why Preventive Health Platforms suddenly represented more than half of Q4 capital even though the category's median financing was still only $8.5 million. One company had become dramatically more capital-intensive.

Q4 was still an active quarter, with deal count rising from ten to 13. The fivefold capital jump, though, says much more about a few companies reaching very large financing events than it does about the typical longevity startup.

Why was Q1 2026 such a strong quarter for longevity funding?

Q1 2026 was the strongest longevity funding quarter for market breadth, even though Q2 later posted the bigger dollar total.

We counted 20 financings, the highest number in the period. Capital from deals below $50 million rose 30% from Q4. At the large end, four separate financings exceeded $50 million rather than one company swallowing most of the quarter.

Cognito Therapeutics raised $105 million, Loyal raised $100 million, Tenpoint Therapeutics raised $85 million in equity and Corsera Health raised $80 million. The largest financing represented only about one-fifth of known quarterly capital, far below the concentration seen in Q4 or the quarter that followed.

The small end expanded at the same time. Eleven Seed financings appeared during Q1, which pulled the median round down to only $6 million.

That lower median can look weak without context. In practice, Q1 had more small financings and more independently large financings at the same time. Early-stage experimentation was expanding while several more mature companies were also able to raise $80 million to $105 million.

This was the broadest financing ladder we found across the five quarters.

Was Q2 2026's record longevity funding basically a NewLimit quarter?

Q2 2026's longevity funding record was heavily a NewLimit story: its $435 million Series C supplied about two-thirds of known capital.

The quarter reached $657.1 million, the highest total in our period, even as deal count fell from 20 to 15. Once financings above $50 million are removed, capital increased by only about 6% from the previous quarter.

NewLimit is particularly useful for understanding how the market is changing because the company raised three times during the period we studied. It closed a $130 million Series B in Q2 2025, added $45 million in Q4 and then raised the $435 million Series C in Q2 2026.

The company said its October financing followed technical breakthroughs that accelerated planning for clinical studies. By the June Series C, NewLimit was talking about bringing its first aging-reprogramming medicine into human trials after identifying a prototype designed to reverse cellular-age characteristics in old human liver cells.

This looks much closer to capital following technical progress inside an existing company than to hundreds of millions suddenly becoming available to longevity startups generally.

Company	Quarter	Financing	Amount	What it tells us
NewLimit	Q2 2025	Series B	$130M	Early sign of very large therapeutics financing
Juvenescence	Q2 2025	Series B	$76M	Added to Q2's concentration
Function Health	Q4 2025	Series B	$298M	Drove the preventive-health capital spike
Lanserhof	Q4 2025	Growth transaction	~$110.3M	Made clinic funding look stronger than its deal trend
Loyal	Q1 2026	Series C	$100M	Large capital around regulatory progress
Cognito Therapeutics	Q1 2026	Series C	$105M	Another independent $100M-scale financing
Tenpoint Therapeutics	Q1 2026	Series B equity	$85M	Financing arrived around FDA approval and commercialization
Life Biosciences	Q2 2026	Series D	$80M	Capital followed the move into human clinical development
NewLimit	Q2 2026	Series C	$435M	Turned Q2 into the record quarter

Are longevity investors writing bigger checks now?

Longevity investors are writing some enormous checks now, but the typical financing has not marched steadily upward.

The quarterly median went from $9.3 million to $11 million, $10.5 million, $6 million and then $9.2 million. There is no steady rise there.

What changed is the shape of the funding market. Q3 2025 was unusually strong in the middle, with many deals between $5 million and $50 million. Q4 developed a much wider gap between ordinary rounds and the biggest financings. Q1 pushed that further by combining 11 Seed rounds with several $80 million-plus deals.

Q2 remained active in the middle, with eight known financings between $5 million and $50 million, but one enormous transaction towered over everything else.

These days, saying that the "average longevity round is getting bigger" hides too much. Some companies can now raise vastly more money than before, while many others are still closing single-digit or low-double-digit million-dollar rounds.

Is longevity funding spreading to more companies or concentrating around winners?

Longevity funding has spread to more companies than it did in early 2025, while the dollars have become more concentrated around a few winners.

Those two things can happen at once, and they did.

Q1 showed how broad the ecosystem can become when 20 separate companies raised money and no individual financing controlled the quarter. Q2 then kept a reasonably large company base but shifted a much greater share of capital toward the top.

The concentration is visible across the whole period. NewLimit alone represents roughly 29% of all known funding we tracked. NewLimit and Function Health together account for about 43%. The five companies receiving the most capital account for close to 58%.

Meanwhile, dozens of much smaller financings continued underneath those giant rounds.

More companies are participating in longevity funding today than the Q2 2025 starting point would suggest. The distribution of dollars is much less democratic.

Is longevity therapeutics taking over funding right now?

Longevity therapeutics is currently the one category with clear, persistent funding momentum.

The category went from two financings in Q2 2025 to three in Q3, four in Q4 and eight in each of the two most recent quarters. Its share of all deals rose from 25% to 53%.

That consistency is important because the capital totals themselves are much noisier. Therapeutics had huge quarters when NewLimit or several clinical-stage companies raised, but the increase in deal count survives even when we ignore those individual checks.

Q2 2026 makes the point especially well. Total market activity dropped by five deals from Q1, yet therapeutics stayed at eight. The contraction came from other parts of longevity.

At the same time, the therapeutics median dropped sharply from $80 million in Q1 to $8 million in Q2. Large capital and broad company activity were happening inside the same category, rather than every therapeutics company suddenly raising giant rounds.

Category	Q2 2025 deals	Q3 2025	Q4 2025	Q1 2026	Q2 2026	Direction
Longevity Therapeutics Developers	2	3	4	8	8	Persistent expansion
Preventive Health Platforms	5	1	3	8	5	Expanded, then narrowed
Healthy Aging Clinics	1	3	2	1	0	Falling since Q3
Diagnostics / Biomarkers	0	1	2	2	0	Brief expansion, then reversal
Consumer Longevity Brands	0	1	2	1	1	Small and episodic
Aging Research Platforms	0	1	0	0	1	Too sparse for a trend
Total market	8	10	13	20	15	Breadth peaked in Q1

Why are longevity therapeutics suddenly raising much bigger rounds?

The biggest longevity therapeutics rounds are increasingly following concrete clinical, regulatory or product milestones.

Look at the companies behind Q1's large financings. Loyal raised $100 million to move LOY-002 toward FDA approval after the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine had accepted both a reasonable expectation of effectiveness package and, later, its Target Animal Safety section.

Corsera raised $80 million as it started dosing patients in a Phase 1 trial of COR-1004, its PCSK9 siRNA program. Tenpoint raised $85 million of equity alongside FDA approval of YUVEZZI and a separate $150 million loan facility for commercialization. We count only the equity financing in our funding totals.

Cognito's $105 million Series C was aimed at getting its Spectris Alzheimer's program through pivotal-study data, an FDA submission and commercialization preparation. Life Biosciences then raised $80 million in Q2 to support the Phase 1 trial of ER-100 after its IND had been cleared.

NewLimit fits the same broader pattern at a much larger scale. Its financings grew as the company moved from platform development toward planning human studies.

There is also a fresh check on this thesis. After our funding period ended, Loyal announced another FDA reasonable-expectation-of-effectiveness acceptance, this time for LOY-003. It says this is the third time one of its lifespan-extension programs has reached that regulatory milestone.

Clinical and regulatory progress cannot explain every financing decision. Still, the clustering is hard to ignore. The very large checks are increasingly going to companies that can show investors something more concrete than an interesting aging mechanism.

Are preventive-health platforms losing funding momentum?

Preventive-health funding is still active today, but the category has been moving toward smaller typical rounds since Q3 2025.

The median preventive-health financing fell from $10 million in Q3 to $8.5 million in Q4, $4.8 million in Q1 and $3.5 million in Q2. That is a much cleaner trend than the category's headline capital totals.

Q4 is the deceptive quarter. Preventive Health Platforms captured roughly 54% of all known funding because Function Health raised $298 million. Three preventive-health companies raised during the quarter, so the huge capital share did not represent similarly huge funding across the category.

Q1 looked almost completely different: eight preventive-health financings appeared, yet together they represented only about 4% of known quarterly capital.

There is still real company-building happening here. Function continued expanding after the Ezra acquisition and bought supplement platform SuppCo in Q2 2026. Other companies kept raising smaller rounds.

For now, preventive health looks more like an active field producing plenty of modest financings than the place where large venture checks are becoming systematically more common.

Are longevity clinics and diagnostics fading?

Longevity clinics are clearly fading in deal count, while diagnostics had a brief run that stalled by Q2 2026.

Healthy Aging Clinics peaked at three financings in Q3 2025, then dropped to two, one and finally zero. Lanserhof's approximately $110 million Q4 transaction temporarily made the category look powerful in dollar terms, but the company count kept going down.

Diagnostics followed a more hopeful path at first. We went from zero deals in Q2 2025 to one in Q3, then two in Q4 and two again in Q1 2026.

That looked like the beginning of a real category expansion. Q2 produced no diagnostics financing at all.

A couple of stronger quarters can be interesting without becoming a trend. Therapeutics kept its deal momentum through the latest quarter; diagnostics did not.

Are longevity investors pulling away from early-stage startups?

Longevity investors are still funding early-stage companies, but most of the serious money now lands further down the development path.

Early-stage financings represented 65% of Q1 deals and 67% of Q2 deals. Q1 alone produced 11 Seed transactions, so there is very little evidence of an early-stage funding freeze.

The dollar split is almost the opposite. Later-stage companies captured roughly 71% of known Q1 capital and around 78% in Q2.

We saw the same tension much earlier in the period. In Q2 2025, three-quarters of transactions were early stage while roughly four-fifths of known capital went to later-stage companies.

The longevity market still creates and finances young companies. What changes dramatically after a company hits development milestones is the amount of money it can potentially access.

That two-speed structure is much more useful than describing longevity funding as simply becoming "later stage."

Are new longevity startups getting squeezed out of funding?

New longevity startups are still getting financed, but they are losing share to companies that have already raised before.

First financings reached 50% of all deals in Q3 2025. From there, the share fell each quarter, to 38.5%, 35% and finally 26.7%.

The size gap widened too. Median first-financing size fell from $12 million in Q3 to around $5 million in the latest two quarters. Follow-on recipients, meanwhile, gained access to far larger pools of capital.

Company age points in the same direction. From Q3 onward, companies receiving follow-ons were generally several years older than first-time recipients. In Q1 2026, for example, the median first-financing company was only around one year old, versus roughly 4.5 years for follow-on recipients.

We would not push the company-age comparison too far in Q2 because founding-date coverage is weaker there. The financing-status trend itself is much clearer.

Young companies have not vanished. What has changed is how much of the market's money flows back into companies that have already survived an earlier financing cycle.

Measure	Q3 2025	Q4 2025	Q1 2026	Q2 2026
First-financing count	5	5	7	4
Follow-on count	5	7	12	10
First-financing share	50.0%	38.5%	35.0%	26.7%
Follow-on share	50.0%	53.8%	60.0%	66.7%
First-financing capital	$49.4M	$87.0M	$22.2M	$18.1M
Follow-on capital	$63.0M	$374.4M	$465.3M	$635.4M
Median first financing	$12.0M	$8.5M	$4.8M	$5.1M
Median follow-on financing	$10.0M	$10.5M	$35.0M	$18.5M

Is longevity funding becoming more global?

Longevity funding is becoming more global in deal count, while North America still dominates the money.

Q1 2026 was the clearest geographic expansion. North America and Europe each accounted for 35% of deals, APAC reached 25%, and the Middle East appeared at 5%.

The capital distribution was far less balanced. North American companies still collected around 75% of known Q1 funding.

The latest quarter pushed the contrast further. APAC represented about 27% of deals and the Middle East reached 13%, yet North America captured roughly 86% of known capital. European activity also fell sharply from its Q1 high.

APAC is worth watching because its deal share rose from 8% in Q4 to around a quarter of transactions in both recent quarters. So far, though, the rounds tend to be much smaller than the large North American financings.

More longevity companies are getting funded outside North America these days. The biggest checks have barely globalized.

Are new investors entering longevity, or do the same funds keep coming back?

The disclosed lead-investor base in longevity looks unusually broad, with little evidence that the same lead funds control every quarter.

Across the five quarters we studied, no exact disclosed lead or co-lead name appeared as the lead on more than one financing. Q1 2026 was particularly broad: 16 deals disclosed a lead, involving 24 separate lead or co-lead investors.

The names also span different investor types. Loyal brought in age1. Corsera's round was co-led by Forbion and Population Health Partners. Tenpoint's equity financing included Janus Henderson, EQT Nexus, Hillhouse and British Business Bank among its leads. Cognito's round was led by Morningside Ventures, IAG Capital Partners and Starbloom Capital.

We should be careful with the apparent turnover because lead disclosure is incomplete, particularly in Q2 2026, when only 60% of deals had a disclosed lead.

Still, longevity funding currently looks capable of pulling in a wide group of investors rather than depending on two or three specialist funds repeatedly leading every round.

Why are strategic investors showing up around longevity therapeutics now?

Strategic investors are showing up around longevity therapeutics when there is a specific program, technology or commercial angle they can understand.

The overall share of strategic-backed deals has bounced around rather than climbing consistently. It moved from 12.5% in Q2 2025 to 20% in Q3, 15.4% in Q4, 10% in Q1 and back to 20% in Q2.

Recent examples are much more revealing than that sequence.

Boehringer Ingelheim Venture Fund led TECregen's CHF10 million Seed round for its thymus-regeneration platform. Eli Lilly returned as an investor in NewLimit after first joining its October 2025 financing. Merck Animal Health participated in Rejuvenate Bio's $6 million round while also entering an R&D collaboration around animal-health gene therapy.

Those companies are working in areas where a pharmaceutical or animal-health group can bring more than money. There can be drug-development expertise, regulatory knowledge, research collaboration or a direct commercial connection.

Strategic participation has not broadly surged lately. The more interesting change is that corporate capital is clustering around programs where the strategic fit is easy to see.

What does the longevity funding market look like today after five quarters of change?

As of today, longevity funding looks like a two-speed market: plenty of small early bets, plus a narrow group of companies capable of raising very large follow-on rounds.

The path to that structure was messy. Q2 2025 was small in company count and heavily concentrated. Q3 broadened into more middle-sized and first-time financings. Q4 brought giant company-specific rounds. Q1 2026 was the broad ecosystem peak. Q2 then narrowed again while pushing the headline total to a record.

Therapeutics came through those transitions with the clearest momentum. Preventive health stayed active but moved toward smaller typical checks. Clinics weakened. Diagnostics briefly expanded and then disappeared from the latest quarter.

The financing-status shift may be even more important. New companies still enter the market, but follow-ons increasingly dominate both deal share and capital. Several of the largest financings have also arrived close to clinical, regulatory or commercialization milestones.

That gives us a fairly clear picture of the market now. Longevity is still generating experiments at the bottom, but investors reserve the really large checks for a much smaller set of companies that have already proved something.

What is the funding trend actually telling us?

Longevity funding has improved, but the improvement is much steadier underneath than the headline totals suggest. The recent rise in capital below $50 million is real, while several record-looking quarters were amplified by individual financings.

Q1 2026 remains the strongest quarter for breadth. It combined the highest deal count, a large Seed cohort and several independent $80 million-plus financings. Q2 raised more money while benefiting fewer companies.

Therapeutics has become the clearest long-term winner. It was the only major category to keep its deal count at the Q1 peak when the wider market contracted.

Capital is also moving back toward companies that have already raised. First financings are still happening, but their share and typical size have come down while follow-on financing has become more important.

The apparent globalization of longevity is stronger in company count than in dollars. APAC and the Middle East are appearing more often, but North America still captures most large-scale capital.

The quarter most likely to mislead a casual reader is Q2 2026. A record funding total makes it look like the whole market suddenly accelerated. The more useful reading is narrower: core funding improved a little, therapeutics remained busy, and one company showed just how large a longevity financing can become once investors believe the technical path has materially de-risked.