Comparison

Function Health vs InsideTracker

Last updated Mon Jun 08 2026 00:00:00 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time)· 1 min read

Panel breadth

Function Health: ~100 markers per draw, biannually. Includes uncommon-in-routine markers (apoB, Lp(a), heavy metals, full thyroid panel, broad hormones).
InsideTracker: tiered — Essentials ~12 markers, Ultimate ~48 markers, plus DNA add-on and InnerAge biological-age score.

Function Health: simpler dashboard; expert-led recommendations; physician oversight (varies by state).
InsideTracker: deeper longitudinal trend tracking; integrates wearable data from Garmin, Fitbit, Apple Health; athlete-specific feature set.

Function Health: ~$500/year covers two full panels + dashboard.
InsideTracker: $200–600 per panel; more à-la-carte. Subscription pricing for repeat testing available.

Cardiometabolic depth: Function Health (apoB, Lp(a), broader thyroid).
Athlete-specific metrics: InsideTracker (cortisol, ferritin, testosterone, vitamin D, magnesium with athletic-context interpretation).
Longitudinal trends with wearable integration: InsideTracker.
Single-fee broad screen: Function Health.
Both share: algorithmic recommendations that lack physician judgement; "optimal range" markings tighter than clinical references (can drive over-testing).

Do you have a clinician who will help you act on results? Both services rely on you to handle abnormal findings.
Are you trend-tracking or screening once? InsideTracker is more flexible for one-off; Function for annual repeating.
Is there a specific endpoint you care about (athletic performance, apoB optimisation, hormone tracking)?

Thorne — cheaper test bundles, tighter supplement integration.
Direct clinical testing via primary care — cheaper if insurance covers; less polished UX.
Levels for CGM (different modality).