Function Health is best when you want a broad annual biomarker baseline drawn through a lab-location workflow. AMORTAL is different — it isn't a lab company. It takes whatever results you already have and turns them into one ranked next action, a watchlist of what to expect, a clinician-ready question, and a loop that checks whether the action actually worked.
Function Health built one of the densest consumer biomarker memberships available: a broad annual panel, clinician-reviewed results, and action plans, with the draw done through a national lab-location network. It answers the question “what do my numbers look like?” very well.
It is deliberately not built to answer the next question — “so what should I actually do, and what should I ignore?” That’s the gap this page is about. Below is a fair, source-backed look at what Function is excellent for, and where AMORTAL fits as the decision layer on top. It’s educational, not medical advice.
+
Use Function for the data. Use AMORTAL to decide what the data should change, what to ignore, what to watch, and when to retest.
The short version: who each is for
These two aren’t really competitors — one produces the data, the other decides what to do with it. Here’s the honest split.
Which one fits which job
Function HealthBest for a broad annual baselineA wide, clinician-reviewed biomarker panel run once or twice a year through a lab-location draw. Strongest when you want a dense snapshot of where your body stands and a structured report to react to.
AMORTALBest for deciding what to do nextNot a lab. A longitudinal decision layer that reads whatever results you already have — from Function or anywhere — and returns one ranked next action, a watchlist, a clinician-ready question, and an outcome loop. Including when to do nothing.
This isn't an "A beats B." Function answers what are my numbers; AMORTAL answers what should they change. The strongest setup uses both.
Function Health vs AMORTAL, at a glance
Tap between the two to see what each is actually responsible for.
What each one owns
Same goal — better decisions from your blood — split into the data job and the decision job.
The data layer
Function runs a broad annual biomarker membership — a wide panel (Function advertises 160+ lab tests annually), clinician-reviewed results, and action plans, with the draw done through a national lab-location network.
You want a dense, clinician-reviewed snapshot of where you stand and a structured report to work from. Verify the current marker count, price and partner network before you buy.
The decision layer
AMORTAL doesn't draw blood. It takes your Function results (or any lab's), normalises them into a memory, and produces one ranked next action, a watchlist, a clinician-ready question, and an outcome loop — with restraint built in.
You already have results and the real question is "what now?" — what to change, what to ignore, what to watch, and when a retest is actually worth it.
AMORTAL has no direct Function integration — you bring the data in by upload or manual entry.
The comparison, row by row
| Dimension | Function Health | AMORTAL |
|---|---|---|
| Best use case | Broad annual biomarker baseline | Deciding what the data should change |
| Collection method | Blood draw at a lab location | No draws — works from results you already have |
| Lab partner / processing | Draw via a national lab-location network (as advertised) | Lab-agnostic; vendor-neutral by design |
| Biomarker breadth | Wide annual panel (Function advertises 160+) | Doesn’t test; reads whatever you bring |
| Upload existing labs | Its own panel is the product | Yes — bring Function or any other results in |
| Wearable integration | Not the core product | Connects labs to Oura / Whoop / Apple Watch context |
| Clinician review | Clinician-reviewed results + action plans (as advertised) | Clinician-compatible questions; not a clinician |
| Action plan depth | Standardised action plans | One ranked next best action, plus restraint |
| Retesting cadence | Annual membership cadence | Tells you when not to retest yet |
| Result trend tracking | Trends across your Function panels | Longitudinal memory across providers and time |
| Abnormal-result handling | Flags + clinician review | Safety-gated; routes urgent flags to a clinician, never diagnoses |
| Data portability | Your results live in Function | Cross-provider memory you carry with you |
| Cost model | Annual membership (Function advertises ~$365/yr; verify) | Decision layer — founding membership |
| Where AMORTAL fits | Dense baseline in | → ranked decision, watchlist, and outcome loop out |
Provider rows describe what Function publicly advertises as of June 2026 — pricing, marker count and partner network change often, so confirm the current details on Function's own pages before buying. Sources are listed at the foot of this page.
Which one fits what you actually want
| What you want | Reach for |
|---|---|
| The widest annual baseline panel, clinician-reviewed | Function Health |
| I already have results — tell me what to do next | AMORTAL |
| To know whether a protocol actually worked | AMORTAL (then retest via Function) |
| To know whether I should retest yet | AMORTAL |
| A clinician-ready question, not a treatment directive | AMORTAL |
| To avoid changing five things at once | AMORTAL |
| To connect a blood result to my wearable trends | AMORTAL |
| One dense data pull I can react to | Function Health |
How AMORTAL complements Function Health
The model is simple: let Function do the testing it does well, then run the result through a decision process instead of a dashboard.
- Bring the result in. Upload your Function report or enter the key markers — there's no direct integration, so you carry the data over.
- Normalise into memory. AMORTAL files each biomarker into a longitudinal record, not a one-off screen.
- Connect the context. Results are linked to your goals, symptoms, wearables, medications and constraints.
- Activate the standards. The guidelines and decision rules that actually apply to your situation switch on.
- Produce a Decision Contract. One change at a time, with the expected signal and the window written down in advance.
- Rank one Next Best Action. Not ten. The single highest-value move — which may be "do nothing yet."
- Set the watchlist. Markers worth re-checking get an expected direction and a recheck window.
- Close the loop. When the next Function panel or outcome signal arrives, AMORTAL checks whether the action worked — and keeps or discards it.
A decision loop, end to end
Here’s the same flow on a single example — illustrative numbers only, not a target or a reference range.
From a Function result to a tracked outcome
Your Function panel returns an elevated ApoB (say, in a range your clinician flags as worth attention). On a dashboard, that's a red number and a vague nudge.
AMORTAL files it next to your prior lipids, your goals, your current medications and your wearable trends — so it's read as a trajectory, not a single dot.
One lever, not five. The expected signal (ApoB direction) and the window to see it are written down before anything changes.
Framed as a clinician-ready question — "given this trend, is [one specific lever] the right first move?" — not a treatment directive AMORTAL has no authority to give.
The marker goes on watch with an expected direction and a recheck window — so you retest when it's informative, not on a guess.
At the next Function draw, AMORTAL checks: did it move as expected? If yes, the change earns its place. If not, it's dropped — no story told over noise.
AMORTAL doesn't diagnose and isn't a substitute for your clinician — anything urgent goes to a professional, now.
Should you act on a Function result right now?
More testing isn’t more action. Walk a single flagged marker through this before you change anything.
Act, watch, or wait?
Has Function or your clinician flagged this marker as urgent or critical?
Is this the first time you've seen this marker move, or a confirmed trend across panels?
Are you already changing something else right now?
An urgent flag isn't a self-experiment. Contact a professional today. AMORTAL routes critical results to a clinician; it never sits between you and care.
A single value is a data point, not a signal. Note it, set a recheck window, and change nothing yet. This is exactly the "do nothing now" call AMORTAL is built to make explicit.
Change two things at once and you'll never know which worked. Let the lever already in flight run its window, then revisit this one.
This is a fair place to act. Define the expected signal and the window before you start — that's a Decision Contract, and it's what turns a guess into a result you can read.
Where Function is strongest — and where it isn’t
In fairness to both tools:
- Function is strongest when you want a broad, clinician-reviewed annual baseline without assembling a panel yourself, and you’ll actually engage with a structured report.
- Function may be less ideal if your real bottleneck isn’t getting data but deciding on the data you already have, or if you’re prone to over-reacting to every borderline marker.
- Verify before you buy. Marker count, price, promotions and the lab-location network all change — confirm the current details on Function’s own pages.
- A broad panel is a beginning, not an answer. Some results will need a clinician; AMORTAL should never be read as a diagnosis.
Bring your results into a decision, not a dashboard
AMORTAL doesn’t need to be where you buy every blood test. The stronger model is to let a high-quality provider like Function do the testing, then use AMORTAL as the longitudinal decision system around those results. Upload a Function report, or enter the markers that matter. AMORTAL turns the result into memory, evaluates what’s still missing, ranks the next best action, sets a watchlist for the signals to expect, and later checks whether the action actually worked.
Already have results from Function? Bring them into AMORTAL and ask the only question that matters: “What should I do next?”
Sources
Provider claims describe what each company publicly advertised when this page was last fact-checked (26 June 2026). Pricing, marker counts and partner networks are volatile — verify on the official pages before purchase.
Function Health — membership, what's tested, and clinician-reviewed panels.
Function Health pricing — annual membership and any promotional offers.
Function Health — the current biomarker list and panel detail.
Educational only — this is not medical advice or a diagnosis. Talk to a licensed clinician about your own numbers, targets, and any treatment decisions.
Frequently asked
Can I use AMORTAL with my Function Health results?
Yes — that's the intended use. Function gives you a dense annual panel; you bring those results into AMORTAL by uploading the report or entering the key markers. AMORTAL normalises them into a longitudinal memory, connects them to your goals, wearables and any protocols, and returns one ranked next action rather than a wall of numbers. AMORTAL does not have a direct Function integration; you bring the data in.
Does AMORTAL replace Function Health?
No. They do different jobs. Function is a data source — it runs the blood draw and produces the panel. AMORTAL is a decision layer that sits on top of whatever lab data you have. Most people who use both keep Function for the dense annual baseline and use AMORTAL to decide what each result should change, what to ignore, and when to retest.
Does AMORTAL order the lab tests for me?
No. AMORTAL is not a blood-draw network and does not order or sell tests. It works from results you already have — from Function, a clinician, or any other lab. If a decision genuinely needs a test you don't have yet, AMORTAL will say so and tell you which one would actually change the decision, rather than encouraging you to test everything.
What does AMORTAL do after my Function results come in?
It files them into your health memory, activates the standards that apply to you, and produces a Decision Contract: one next best action, the single signal you'd expect it to move, and the window to watch. It also creates watchlist items for markers worth re-checking later — and, importantly, will tell you when the right move is to change nothing yet.
Is a bigger biomarker panel always better?
Not automatically. A broad panel like Function's is genuinely useful for a baseline, but more markers also mean more borderline results that tempt over-reaction. AMORTAL evaluates whether a marker actually changes a realistic decision, whether the result is timely, whether a clinician should weigh in, and what downstream signal to watch — so breadth becomes useful instead of noisy.
When should I retest with Function?
That depends on what you changed and how long that change needs to show up in blood — not on the calendar. AMORTAL sets an expected window per marker and tells you when a retest would be informative versus premature. Retesting too early is one of the most common ways people waste a panel and misread normal variation as a result.