What are the funding trends in longevity right now?

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 booming right now?

Longevity funding is clearly stronger today, and the jump in deal activity is broad enough to call it a real acceleration.

We count 43 financings across 39 companies so far in 2026, compared with 29 deals across 28 companies over the same part of 2025 and 25 deals across 25 companies two years ago. That works out to 48% more deals and 39% more funded companies in a year. More companies are genuinely finding investors.

The dollars have moved much faster. Usable disclosed capital reached $1.904 billion, versus $854 million over the comparable 2025 period. Even more strikingly, the 43 deals recorded so far already exceed the number completed during the whole of 2025, while disclosed capital has reached about 134% of last year's full-year total.

We should be more careful with the capital comparison than with the deal count, though. A few enormous rounds have pushed the dollar total far above the rest of the market. The typical financing has actually become smaller.

Metric	2026 YTD	2025 same period	2024 same period
Financing deals	43	29	25
Unique funded companies	39	28	25
Usable disclosed capital	$1.904B	$854.0M	$590.8M
Capital excluding >$50M rounds	$319.5M	$268.0M	$301.8M
Median round	$7.5M	$10.0M	$8.5M
Average round	$52.9M	$32.8M	$23.6M
Largest round	$700M	$260M	$170M
Top-three capital share	65.1%	59.7%	48.9%
Deals as share of full-year 2025	102.4%	—	—

Would longevity funding still look strong without the megadeals?

Longevity funding still looks better without the giant rounds, but the apparent boom shrinks from spectacular to fairly modest.

Once we remove every financing above $50 million, current disclosed capital falls to $319.5 million. The comparable 2025 figure was $268 million, so underlying capital growth drops to 19% rather than the 123% implied by the headline total. Compared with 2024, the difference is only about 6%.

Roughly $999 million of the $1.05 billion increase in disclosed capital versus last year came from the change in financings above $50 million. Around 95% of the extra dollars therefore came from the upper end of the market.

Even removing only rounds above $100 million leaves capital much higher than last year because 2026 also has a strong cluster around $80 million to $100 million. Corsera Health raised $80 million, Life Biosciences raised $80 million, Tenpoint Therapeutics raised $85 million of equity, and Loyal raised exactly $100 million.

So the funding recovery has some depth, but the huge headline number comes mainly from companies capable of raising unusually large checks.

Outlier test	2026 YTD	2025 same period	Change
Total usable capital	$1.904B	$854.0M	+123%
Capital excluding >$50M	$319.5M	$268.0M	+19%
Capital excluding >$100M	$664.5M	$344.0M	+93%
Top-one capital share	36.8%	30.4%	+6.4pp
Top-three capital share	65.1%	59.7%	+5.4pp
Top-five capital share	74.8%	72.7%	+2.1pp
>$50M financings	7	4	+3
Largest financing	$700M	$260M	+169%

Are more longevity startups actually getting funded today?

More longevity startups are getting funded today, including at the small end of the market.

The number of funded companies has risen from 28 to 39 in a year. We also found more first financings, more countries represented and many more disclosed lead investors. That breadth is hard to reconcile with the idea that the current funding increase belongs to only a few famous longevity companies.

Smaller rounds help explain what is happening. Financings below $5 million increased from seven to ten, while rounds between $5 million and $20 million rose from nine to 13. That gives us 23 sub-$20 million deals today, compared with 16 over the same period last year.

The middle looks much quieter. We found six financings between $20 million and $50 million in 2026, exactly the same number as in 2025.

These days, getting a first or relatively small longevity check appears easier than getting a substantially larger middle-stage one. Meanwhile, a small group at the top can raise sums that barely existed in this market a few years ago.

Are longevity funding rounds getting bigger?

The typical longevity funding round is getting smaller, even as the average round shoots upward.

The median financing has fallen from $10 million last year to $7.5 million currently. Two years ago it was $8.5 million. That gives us a much better picture of what an ordinary fundraising company is experiencing than the $52.9 million current average.

The average has jumped because the biggest deals have become enormous. Neko Health raised $700 million, NewLimit raised $435 million, and several other companies landed rounds around or above $100 million.

If investors were broadly increasing check sizes across longevity, we would expect the median and average to rise together. Instead, they have moved in opposite directions.

As we saw above, the current market combines a growing number of relatively modest financings with a much heavier upper tail. That gap is one of the clearest changes in longevity funding right now.

Is longevity funding turning into a barbell market?

Longevity funding now looks strikingly barbell-shaped, with lots of Seed activity at one end and huge Series C checks at the other.

Seed rounds account for 53.5% of current financings, up from 41.4% last year. Series A moved the other way, falling from 27.6% of deals to 11.6%.

At the top, four Series C rounds appeared this year after none in either of the previous comparable periods. Neko Health, NewLimit, Cognito Therapeutics and Loyal raised about $1.34 billion between them.

The middle has barely kept pace. Series B deal count fell from six to two, while the $20 million to $50 million bucket stayed flat at six deals.

That gives founders two very different funding markets. Young companies are getting plenty of relatively small opportunities to start, while companies that reach major clinical, regulatory or commercial milestones can suddenly access hundreds of millions of dollars. The path between those two points looks less crowded.

Are new longevity startups getting squeezed out?

New longevity startups are still getting funded, but investors are giving them much smaller checks than the established winners.

We found 15 first financings this year, versus ten over the same period in 2025 and five in 2024. First financings still account for about 35% of all current deals, almost unchanged from last year.

Yet total capital going into those first financings fell from $80.3 million to $59.2 million, and their median size dropped from $8.95 million to $5 million.

Follow-on funding is moving in the opposite direction. We found 27 follow-on financings, up from 19, with disclosed capital climbing to $1.828 billion. The median follow-on round rose from $19 million to $23.75 million.

New companies are getting through the door. Existing companies are getting most of the money.

Because first-financing status is based on the financing histories we could establish from public evidence rather than a perfect reconstruction of every historical transaction, we treat that split as directional. The gap in check sizes is large enough that the overall conclusion is still quite hard to miss.

Metric	2026	2025	2024
First financings	15	10	5
First-financing share	34.9%	34.5%	20.0%
Usable first-financing capital	$59.2M	$80.3M	$71.4M
Median first financing	$5.0M	$8.95M	$6.0M
First financings with usable amount	13	8	5
Follow-on financings	27	19	19
Follow-on share	62.8%	65.5%	76.0%
Usable follow-on capital	$1.828B	$773.7M	$518.1M
Median follow-on financing	$23.75M	$19.0M	$10.1M
Follow-ons with usable amount	22	18	19

Why is Series C swallowing so much longevity funding now?

Series C is swallowing longevity funding because several companies have reached expensive milestones around clinical development, regulation or international scale.

Neko Health is the clearest commercial example. Its $700 million Series C came ahead of its US rollout after the company reported more than 350,000 people registered or waiting for scans and more than 100,000 users in Sweden and the UK. Its latest Year Three report now covers more than 80,000 members and 92,000 scans. The first New York clinic is also now preparing to open, with more than 25,000 people on its local waitlist.

The biotech examples are just as concrete. NewLimit raised $435 million while preparing its first aging-reprogramming medicine for human trials. Its subsequent progress update reported a 100-fold manufacturing scale-up for its lead therapeutic asset.

Life Biosciences raised $80 million to support its ER-100 program and has since dosed the first patient in its Phase 1 trial. Corsera Health's $80 million Series A arrived as dosing started in Phase 1 for COR-1004. Cognito Therapeutics has fully enrolled 673 participants across 70 sites in its pivotal HOPE Alzheimer's study.

These are expensive steps. Once a longevity company reaches them, the amount of capital it can reasonably deploy changes dramatically. That helps explain why the top of today's funding market has pulled so far away from the median round.

Is longevity therapeutics the hottest funding category right now?

Longevity therapeutics is currently showing the strongest broad funding momentum because both deal activity and capital have moved sharply upward.

We count 18 therapeutic financings this year, twice the nine recorded over the same period in 2025. The category's share of all deals climbed from 31% to 41.9%, while its share of usable capital rose from 36.8% to 51.5%.

NewLimit's $435 million round obviously pushes those numbers upward, but therapeutics still looks strong after removing it. The remaining companies raised about $547 million, roughly 74% more than the entire category raised during the comparable 2025 period.

The money also spans several approaches. Corsera is developing preventive RNAi medicines for cardiovascular disease. Life Biosciences is already in a Phase 1 study for epigenetic restoration. Loyal is moving a canine longevity drug toward FDA approval. Cognito is testing a device-based Alzheimer's treatment in a pivotal study. TECregen is working on thymus regeneration.

That makes the therapeutics shift harder to dismiss as a one-company effect.

Category	2026 deals	2026 usable capital	Deal-share change vs 2025	Capital-share change vs 2025
Longevity Therapeutics	18	$981.6M	+10.8pp	+14.7pp
Preventive Health Platforms	18	$830.1M	+7.4pp	-8.6pp
Healthy Aging Clinics	2	$9.7M	-12.6pp	-7.1pp
Consumer Longevity Brands	2	$56.5M	-5.7pp	+0.2pp
Diagnostics / Biomarkers	2	$9.5M	+1.2pp	-0.1pp
Aging Research Platforms	1	$17.0M	-1.1pp	n/m
Total	43	$1.904B	—	—

Is preventive health really booming, or is Neko Health distorting the numbers?

Preventive-health funding is booming by company activity, while Neko Health accounts for most of the category's spectacular dollar total.

We found 18 Preventive Health Platform financings, up from ten last year. Their share of all longevity deals has risen from 34.5% to 41.9%. Quite a few new and young companies are attracting capital.

Neko's $700 million round represents roughly 84% of the category's usable capital, though. Remove it and current preventive-health funding falls to about $130 million, far below the $445.8 million raised during the comparable 2025 period. The category's median round has also fallen to roughly $5.2 million.

Below Neko, the operating evidence is getting harder to ignore. Everlab says it has supported about 20,000 patients, completed more than 40,000 consultations, integrated with over 1,850 healthcare locations and processed more than 21 million biomarker results. Lucis reports more than 10,000 users and over one million biomarker tests. Ahead Health says 25% of its users have discovered a previously unknown medical issue through its service.

Neko itself has also moved beyond a fundraising story. Its latest real-world report covers 80,858 members, including more than 9,000 repeat users, although the company is careful to say the observational data does not prove that its scans caused the health improvements it observed.

So preventive health currently has real breadth and increasingly visible usage. The huge funding number still belongs mostly to Neko.

Are longevity clinics falling out of favor with investors?

Healthy Aging Clinics are having a much quieter funding year, with both deal activity and capital falling sharply.

We found two clinic financings in the current period, compared with five last year. Their share of longevity deals has fallen from 17.2% to 4.7%, while usable capital dropped from $65.4 million to $9.7 million.

At the same time, investors are still financing businesses that combine diagnostics, doctors, biomarker tracking and preventive interventions. The difference is that much of today's money sits in technology-led platforms such as Neko, Everlab, Lucis, Ahead Health and Aeon rather than businesses we classify primarily as clinics.

The sample is small, so one large clinic financing could change the picture quickly. Still, the same category represented 12% of deals two years ago, 17% last year and less than 5% now. For the moment, investor attention has clearly shifted toward other models.

Are younger longevity startups raising money earlier?

Younger longevity startups are raising money earlier now, even though older companies still collect the biggest checks.

The median company age at financing has fallen from 4.72 years two years ago to 3.64 years last year and 2.51 years currently. We could establish reliable founding dates for 38 of the 43 current financings, so this trend covers most of the market.

At Seed, the typical funded company is only about 1.5 years old, down from roughly three years in 2024. Current Series A companies are also younger, with a median age just under three years compared with more than five years last year.

Therapeutics follows the same direction. The median funded therapeutic company is around 3.6 years old today, compared with about 5.5 years over the matched 2025 period.

There is a sharp split between company creation and capital allocation. Newer companies are entering the funded cohort earlier, while the giant late-stage checks go to businesses that have spent years building clinical evidence, regulatory progress or operating scale.

Is longevity funding finally going global?

Longevity funding is much more global today by number of companies, although the biggest checks remain concentrated in North America and Europe.

We found companies from 13 countries this year, compared with eight over the same period last year and six two years ago. Europe has 12 current deals, Asia-Pacific ten and the Middle East four.

North America's share of all deals has consequently fallen from 72.4% to 39.5%. That sounds dramatic until we look at the money: disclosed North American capital actually climbed from roughly $495 million to $953 million. The region is raising more money even while losing share of deal count.

Europe has broadened strongly too, but Neko creates a huge distortion in the capital figure. Its financing represents around 81% of current European disclosed capital.

Asia-Pacific and the Middle East show a different pattern. Together they now account for roughly one-third of deals but less than 5% of usable capital. China, India, Singapore, Australia, Saudi Arabia, Israel and the UAE are producing funded longevity companies, generally at much smaller check sizes.

The startup base is spreading geographically much faster than the large-check market.

Are longevity investors getting more selective now?

Longevity investors appear more selective about how much money they commit, even as more investors are willing to fund the sector.

A genuinely cautious funding market would usually show fewer deals. Instead, current deal activity has expanded while first checks have become smaller and the middle of the funding ladder has barely grown.

Investor breadth has increased at the same time. We identified 41 distinct disclosed lead or co-lead investors currently, compared with 25 over the same period last year. Lead disclosure stayed almost unchanged at around 72%, so better disclosure does not explain the jump.

Only RTP Global appears as a lead or co-lead on more than one current financing. Last year, Forerunner Ventures and Left Lane Capital each appeared twice. Funding leadership is therefore more dispersed these days rather than revolving around a tiny club of repeat longevity specialists.

Put together, the pattern is pretty clear. More investors are testing the market, more young companies are raising, and relatively modest initial checks are common. Much larger commitments tend to arrive only once a company has something stronger to show.

Are corporate investors moving into longevity earlier?

Corporate investors are showing up more often in longevity deals now, particularly around therapeutics, but the numbers are still small enough to treat this as an emerging pattern.

We found strategic participation in six current financings, compared with three over the same period last year. Four of those six deals involve longevity therapeutics.

Boehringer Ingelheim Venture Fund led TECregen's CHF10 million Seed financing. Eli Lilly participated in Juvena Therapeutics, while Eli Lilly Ventures backed NewLimit. Merck Animal Health invested in Rejuvenate Bio alongside a new R&D collaboration. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories and Matrix Pharma joined YouLabs' financing. Adesso Ventures invested in YOU(th) Health Tech.

The typical strategic-backed round has also become much smaller, falling from about $40.5 million last year to $9.3 million currently. That fits with corporates appearing in some younger financings rather than waiting only for large late-stage rounds.

Six deals cannot establish a durable market-wide trend. What we can say today is that corporate participation is showing up in more places, and some of those relationships combine capital with research, distribution or technical capabilities that could matter beyond the check itself.

What is actually changing in longevity funding?

The biggest change is breadth. More longevity companies are getting funded, across more countries and by a wider set of lead investors. The current market has moved well beyond a handful of specialist-backed projects.

The second change is where the money goes. Extraordinary late-stage financings explain most of the jump in total capital, while ordinary rounds have not experienced anything close to the same inflation. That makes the headline funding boom much narrower than it first appears.

The third change is the shape of the market. Seed financing has expanded, younger companies are raising earlier, and first financings remain plentiful. At the other end, companies with clinical, regulatory or commercial proof can now raise hundreds of millions. The middle is developing much more slowly.

The clearest category rotation is toward longevity therapeutics. Therapeutics is gaining deals and capital at the same time, across several companies and scientific approaches. Preventive health is also producing many more funded businesses, although its current capital total depends heavily on Neko Health.

Investors also seem more willing to experiment with new companies while being demanding about follow-on capital. Smaller first rounds and much larger follow-ons suggest that getting initial backing and earning a major scale-up check are becoming two very different tests.

The trend we would treat most cautiously is strategic-investor participation. The activity is interesting and currently more frequent, especially in therapeutics, but six financings are too few to claim that corporate capital has permanently changed the longevity funding market.