Function Health vs Mito Health

Function Health vs Mito Health: Function is $365 a year and Mito's Core Panel is $315.12–$320.62 in the first year, and they're built differently. Function tests you twice a year across a very wide panel and leaves the interpretation to its app. Mito runs a slightly narrower panel once, then puts a doctor in front of every result. If you want the broadest raw data and a second draw, Function wins; if you want a physician actually reading your labs, Mito does, for less.

Mito repriced in 2026 and the gap is now real money. It also sells four tiers rather than one, from $207.11–$212.61 for Essential up to $1,621.01–$1,626.51 for Ultra in the first year. Those Mito totals include twelve months of its $9 membership and the collection site's $9.50–$15 draw fee; Function's price is also all-in.

I've personally tested Function Health and worked through its full results experience, and I reviewed Mito Health's panel, pricing, and care model on their own site. To keep the biomarker counts honest I pulled each provider's current list and normalized the marker names, since the same test is often spelled three different ways.

Below: pricing and cost per biomarker, the exact tests each includes and where they diverge, who founded each company (both have a doctor on the founding team, with one important caveat), and the apps.

Function Health vs Mito Health: pricing

Cost per biomarker is the sticker price divided by the number of markers, a rough apples-to-apples figure. It ignores cadence, the app, and any doctor review, which the sections below cover.

Function Health vs Mito Health: biomarkers compared

Function Health's Annual Membership covers 114 biomarkers and Mito Health's Core Panel covers 99. They share 78. 36 are unique to Function Health and 21 are unique to Mito Health.

Function Health vs Mito Health: founders and team

Function Health vs Mito Health: apps, testing, and care

• Function Health: Function markets Medical Intelligence as proprietary AI, but has published no model card, paper, or named provider. It reads as an orchestration/RAG layer over existing LLMs plus its biomarker data; a genuine trained foundation model can't be verified from public sources.
• Mito Health: Web dashboard plus an AI chat concierge over iMessage; no native app or proprietary trained model announced.

Function Health vs Mito Health: which is better?

For the widest possible panel and a second draw later in the year, Function at $365 is the better raw-data buy, and its app is the more polished place to track trends. Mito's Core Panel, at $315.12–$320.62 in the first year for a panel not far off Function's size, is the better pick if you'd rather a physician review your results and build a plan than read the numbers yourself, which is the piece Function leaves to software. Mito's Pro tier at $441.43–$446.93 overtakes Function on marker count if breadth is what you're buying.

One honest caveat on Mito's doctor: co-founder and CMO Dr. Ryan Ware is a Singapore-credentialed physician, not US-licensed, so the clinician reading your labs may not be a US doctor. Check the biomarker breakdown above too, each panel carries markers the other skips. See our Function Health biomarker list for the full breakdown.