The verdicts at a glance.
Sorted by score, highest first. Each card links to the full review with pros, cons, who it's for, and what I'd actually recommend doing instead — when there is a better option.
#1
YEARS clinic
A Berlin preventive-medicine clinic with a clinician who actually thinks beyond the panel. Found my Lp(a) mutation, my low VO₂max, my early insulin-resistance trend, and my dead HRV stress-response — and built a year-one plan that delivered measurable improvement.
Conflict of interest
#2
Function Health
Excellent breadth (100+ biomarkers, twice yearly) at the best mass-market price point. The catch: the testing experience under the hood is just Quest Diagnostics, and the app's insights skew broad-and-shallow rather than actionable.
#3
Aware
The Function Health of Germany. Curated, smaller panel of biomarkers that actually matter — sensible price point and the cleanest entry into preventive testing for EU users. Cooling note: their product has barely moved in two years while US peers expand monthly.
#4
SelfDecode
Genotype intelligence with a serious editorial problem. Solid clinical findings (it correctly flagged my Lp(a) and ApoE) sit next to pseudoscientific recommendations from animal studies in the same UI — undifferentiated by evidence weight. Information overload by design.
Blueprint microplastics test
The actual home test kit, not the protocol. A finger-prick blood collection kit that needs more blood than a finger-prick comfortably yields, returns numbers no one yet knows what to do with. Skip until clinical interventions exist or until they switch to venous draw.
How the scores work.
Each review weighs five things: testing experience (the chair, the sample, the wait), data quality (assay choice, reference ranges, reproducibility), insight quality (does the platform actually help me act on the data?), price-to-value, and direction of travel (is the company shipping or stagnant?). Scores are mine, calibrated against a year of using all five against each other on the same body.
I am not a clinician, a regulator, or a Consumer Reports analyst. These are the same lens I look at every other intervention through on this site — measured, single-subject, and explicit about the confounds. If you've used any of these and saw something different, tell me: niko@nikohems.de. I'll publish revisions when warranted.
Last updated: . Reviews are revised as I run additional retests or when a service ships a meaningful change.