Function Health vs. Superpower
The numbers.
NOT CLEARED
No FDA clearance, registration, or CE marking found.
- Price
- $365–$499
- Founded
- 2021
- HQ
- Austin, TX, USA
NOT CLEARED
No FDA clearance, registration, or CE marking found.
- Price
- $16–$199
- Founded
- 2023
- HQ
- New York, NY, USA
Which route is yours?
Choose Function Health if you prioritise the trade-offs in column A — see the bench above and the long-form below.
Choose Superpower if column B's trade-offs fit your stack better.
Side-by-side, in detail.
The Matchup
The most editorially defining comparison in the 2026 DTC bloodwork market. Function Health filed suit against Superpower in January 2026 alleging Superpower’s “100+ biomarkers” marketing overstates the count of unique measured biomarkers — primarily by counting calculated ratios as separate “tests.” Our independent verification suggests Superpower delivers ~55 unique measured analytes vs Function Health’s 110+ unique measured biomarkers. The lawsuit is unresolved at this writing; the comparison stands on the underlying data regardless of how courts rule.
Head-to-Head Comparison
| Feature | Function Health | Superpower |
|---|---|---|
| Annual price | $499/yr | $199/yr |
| 3-Year TCO (diagnostic only) | $1,497 | $597 |
| 3-Year TCO (with supplement upsells) | ~$1,497 (no supplement marketplace) | $15,000+ (supplement-marketplace economics) |
| Marketed biomarker count | 110+ | 100+ |
| Verified unique measured analytes | ~110+ | ~55 (calculated ratios counted as “tests”) |
| Cost per verified biomarker (annual) | $4.50/biomarker | $3.62/biomarker |
| Lab partner | Quest Diagnostics | Partner labs (less transparently disclosed) |
| Clinician consultation | No (data + portal only) | No licensed clinician (AI chat only) |
| Supplement marketplace | None | Aggressive AI-driven recommendations ($400+/mo typical) |
| Brand age | 2020-founded | 2023-founded |
| Active legal disputes | Plaintiff in Superpower lawsuit | Defendant in Function Health lawsuit |
Where Function Health Wins
- Verified measured-biomarker leader. Independent verification confirms 110+ unique measured analytes — the highest in the consumer DTC market. Quest Diagnostics lab infrastructure provides the underlying credibility.
- Clean editorial position. No active legal disputes around marketing claims. The platform is the plaintiff in the Superpower lawsuit, not the defendant.
- No supplement-marketplace conflict-of-interest. Function Health is data-only — the platform doesn’t profit from selling supplements you take based on results. Recommendations (where they exist) aren’t biased toward platform-marketed products.
- Established editorial recognition. Function Health is the category-defining brand for “comprehensive longevity bloodwork” — when buyers think the category, they think Function Health first.
- Predictable cost structure. $499/year covers the diagnostic. There’s no realistic supplement upsell pathway that materially changes the 3-year TCO.
Where Superpower Wins
- Cheapest serious DTC bloodwork. $199/yr is the lowest-priced entry point in the category for sophisticated DTC blood testing. Function Health is 2.5× more expensive for diagnostic-only access.
- Modern AI-driven user experience. The 24/7 AI health-chat is genuinely useful for results interpretation if you can resist the supplement-upsell pressure.
- Biological-age calculation included. Function Health doesn’t include biological-age scoring; Superpower does (methodology less transparent than InsideTracker’s InnerAge but functional for trend tracking).
- Aggressive entry pricing reflects rapid execution. 2023-founded with aggressive consumer adoption — the brand has scaled fast at the price point.
The Biomarker-Count Truth
This is the central editorial issue and the central legal issue.
| Metric | Function Health | Superpower |
|---|---|---|
| Marketed count | 110+ | “100+“ |
| Verified unique measured analytes | ~110+ | ~55 |
| Calculated ratios counted as “tests” | Few/none | ~30+ |
| Marketing-vs-reality gap | None | ~45-test gap |
Counting calculated ratios as separate biomarkers is a marketing convention some platforms use; Function Health’s lawsuit alleges this constitutes deceptive advertising in Superpower’s case. Whether courts agree is unresolved; the editorial answer is to normalize biomarker counts to unique measured analytes for any comparison.
For buyers prioritizing maximum measured-biomarker density per dollar, Function Health is structurally better at $4.50 per biomarker vs Superpower’s apparent $3.62 — but the apparent advantage disappears when you correct for the biomarker-count discrepancy.
The Supplement-Upsell Economics
This is the second structural difference. Superpower’s revenue model depends on supplement-marketplace conversions. The AI is not neutral; it recommends products Superpower benefits from selling.
| Use case | Function Health 3-yr cost | Superpower 3-yr cost |
|---|---|---|
| Diagnostic only | $1,497 | $597 |
| Diagnostic + AI-recommended supplement stack ($400+/mo) | $1,497 (no marketplace) | $15,000+ |
For users disciplined enough to ignore Superpower’s supplement upsells, the diagnostic-only price advantage holds. For users who actually follow the AI recommendations, the realistic 3-year TCO inverts dramatically.
The Verdict — Editorial Position vs Aggressive Entry Price
Choose Function Health if:
- You want verified maximum measured-biomarker count at predictable cost
- You want a clean editorial position without active legal disputes around marketing claims
- You don’t trust AI-driven supplement recommendations from platforms that sell supplements
- You value established category-defining brand over aggressive new entrants
- You’ll commit to annual diagnostic-only without supplement-stack temptation
Choose Superpower if:
- You want cheapest serious DTC bloodwork entry ($199/yr is genuinely the cheapest)
- You’re disciplined enough to ignore supplement upsells that drive realistic 3-yr TCO 25× higher
- You’re comfortable with the lawsuit-uncertainty around marketing claims
- You’ll independently verify what the platform measures vs what it markets
- You want AI-driven results interpretation and biological-age calculation
The honest middle case: for cost-sensitive first-time buyers who can resist the supplement-marketplace pressure, Superpower’s $199 entry is genuinely defensible. For everyone else — buyers prioritizing verified biomarker density, clean editorial positioning, or who aren’t sure they can resist AI-recommended supplement stacks — Function Health is structurally better.
The lawsuit will resolve into editorial clarity over time. The biomarker-count discrepancy is real today; buyers should normalize for it regardless of how courts rule on whether it constitutes deceptive advertising.
We’ll update this comparison after the lawsuit resolves and after independent third-party biomarker-count verification on both platforms.
Related Reading
- Function Health Review — full deep-dive
- Superpower Review — full deep-dive
- Function Health vs Lifeforce — closed-loop comparison
- Function Health vs InsideTracker — biomarker count vs personalization
- At-Home Blood Tests Hub — full category overview
Changelog
- 2026-05-06: Initial comparison published.