23andMe Health + Ancestry
Only mainstream kit with FDA-authorized health reports.
Includes trait and carrier content alongside risk reports.
Ownership changed under bankruptcy in 2025.
Only mainstream kit with FDA-authorized health reports.
Includes trait and carrier content alongside risk reports.
Ownership changed under bankruptcy in 2025.
Whole-genome sequencing rather than a fixed array.
Data can be re-analyzed over time.
Interpretation goes through third-party apps.
Whole-exome coverage with a very broad report catalog.
Strong wellness and trait content.
Breadth comes at the cost of clinical depth.
Wellness-oriented add-on to an ancestry kit.
Good value if you already tested with MyHeritage.
Outside the FDA-authorized category.
Large report catalog with ongoing updates.
Includes pharmacogenetics content.
European vendor with limited US counseling support.
The regulatory layer is what separates products. In the US, a defined set of consumer reports has gone through FDA review, which means the claims in those reports were assessed against a standard. Products outside that set are not necessarily wrong; they are simply self-certified, and a customer has no independent way to check the claim.
Genetic data is uniquely persistent. A breached password can be changed; a sequenced genome cannot. That makes ownership stability a health-privacy variable rather than a business footnote. When a testing company goes through bankruptcy or a change of control, the customer's data governance changes without the customer doing anything, which is exactly what happened in the consumer genomics sector in 2025.
A report is the beginning of a conversation, not the end of one. The products that score well here either include a counseling session or make the route to one obvious. The ones that score badly hand over a PDF and stop. For anyone who receives an unexpected result, that difference matters more than any feature comparison.
We do not interpret results, and a high score here does not mean a product is medically advisable for you. We score verifiable properties: the scope and authorization status of health reports, whether counseling is reachable, lab accreditation, whether claims can be checked, and what the policy commits to on retention, research use, and deletion.
The scores below compare these products against the same health and evidence topics. A high score means the claim is better documented and the support pathway is clearer. It does not mean a result is diagnostic, and it is not a reason to skip a clinician.
This measures whether the product states which conditions are covered, whether those reports rest on an authorization that can be verified, and whether it says plainly that a result is risk information rather than a diagnosis. It matters because the entire category depends on a distinction most marketing copy blurs.
This measures whether a customer receiving a concerning result can reach a qualified human, whether that is included or sold separately, and whether the product signposts it. It matters because an unexplained probability is the most common way consumer genomics causes distress.
This measures whether testing consent and research consent are separate choices and whether the default protects the customer. It matters because health data consent is the highest-stakes consent in the category.
This measures whether the laboratory is named and holds accreditation that can be checked independently. It matters because a health claim is only as good as the pipeline behind it.
This measures whether headline claims map to an authorization, a certification, or a published methodology that a customer can look up. It matters because 'health insights' is used to describe both regulated reports and wellness content.
This measures the matching pool, which matters less for health than for ancestry but still determines whether a customer can find a relative carrying the same variant.
This measures how clearly the company explains its reference panels and the limits of estimates. It matters because health-focused buyers often receive ancestry results too and tend to over-trust both.
This measures what the policy commits to on retention, whether account deletion destroys the physical sample, and whether backups are addressed. It matters because genetic data cannot be reissued.
This measures ownership history and whether customers were told what happens to their data in a change of control. It matters because governance travels with the asset.
This measures whether research participation is opt-in and whether third-party sharing and law-enforcement requests are described specifically. It matters because these are the clauses that determine where health data can end up.
This is the only mainstream consumer product whose health reports have been through FDA review, and for a category built on unverifiable claims that distinction carries most of the value. Report scope is stated, the conditions covered are named, and the product is explicit about risk rather than diagnosis. Counseling is available but not included by default, and the corporate history is the weakest part of the offer.
Buyers who specifically want a report whose scope has been reviewed by a regulator.
Anyone who has not read the current privacy terms, or who is buying for ancestry primarily.
The strongest health documentation in the category, undermined by the weakest governance record. Download your raw data on arrival, and decide deliberately whether the account should persist.
Sequencing.com sells the data rather than a fixed report. You get whole-genome sequencing, then route the file through a marketplace of third-party analyses. That is the most flexible arrangement here and also the least supervised: app quality varies, and the company that sequenced your sample is not the company making claims about it. After Nebula Genomics shut down in early 2025, this became the practical whole-genome route.
Users who want the underlying data and are comfortable evaluating analyses independently.
Anyone who wants a finished, interpreted answer or a support pathway.
Portable data is the real governance advantage: a change of vendor does not strand your results. The health risk sits in the app layer, where claims are not uniformly regulated.
CircleDNA sequences a broader region of the genome than the consumer arrays and returns a very large report catalog spanning wellness, traits, carrier status and risk. The breadth is genuinely impressive and also the thing to be careful about: a long catalog of non-authorized wellness reports reads as more medical than it is. Counseling support is better than most, and reports are organized to distinguish categories.
Buyers interested in broad wellness and carrier content rather than a narrow authorized report set.
Anyone seeking clinically authorized risk reports, or buying primarily for relative matching.
The catalog is well organized but mostly self-certified, which is the central caveat. Deletion policy is documented and the company has been stable.
MyHeritage Health is best understood as an add-on rather than a standalone health product. If you already have a MyHeritage kit, upgrading is cheap and the reports are clearly written. If you are buying specifically for health risk information, the reports sit outside the authorized category and the catalog is narrower than the dedicated health vendors.
Existing MyHeritage customers adding wellness content cheaply.
Buyers whose primary goal is authorized health risk reporting.
Governance is the strongest part of this product, which is an odd thing to be best at. Health content is wellness-grade and should be read that way.
tellmeGen is a Spanish vendor with a large and frequently updated report catalog, including pharmacogenetics content that most consumer kits avoid. That content is interesting and also the kind that most needs clinical context, which is a gap for US buyers given the limited counseling support. A reasonable choice in Europe, a harder one to recommend elsewhere.
European buyers interested in a broad, evolving report catalog.
US buyers who want an included counseling pathway or authorized reports.
Pharmacogenetics reports are the standout and the caution: they are exactly the kind of result that should be discussed with a clinician before anything changes. Data policy is documented but the company record is shorter than the US majors.