Biological Age Clock Comparison: NOVOS Age Vs. Others

Biological age clocks help you understand how your body is really aging. While your chronological age simply counts the years, your biological age reflects your rate of aging based on molecular and physiological markers.

The problem is that most biological age clocks only measure a narrow slice of the aging process, often using limited biomarkers or incomplete data. That makes it hard to track real progress or make meaningful lifestyle changes. NOVOS Age takes a different approach.

What Makes NOVOS Age Different

Built on science from Columbia, Duke, and Yale, NOVOS Age gives you a deeper view of your aging across 11 organ systems.

Here’s what sets NOVOS Age apart from other biological clocks:

Tracks over 150 biomarkers from a single at-home blood test
Uses the DunedinPACE and Organ Age epigenetic algorithms, validated in peer-reviewed studies
Measures biological aging speed, not just biological age alone
Detects meaningful changes after lifestyle or supplement interventions
Provides four detailed reports with personalized guidance through the NOVOS Life app

While most tests show you a number, NOVOS Age gives you insights and a plan. It shows how your diet, sleep, exercise, and supplements affect your aging trajectory, so you can take steps to improve it.

The comparison chart below breaks down how NOVOS Age compares to other biological age clocks, from accuracy and validation to actionability and test reliability.

If you’re serious about slowing down aging, start by measuring it the right way.

Attribute	NOVOS Age Clock	Saliva-based Clock by Celebrity Scientist's New Startup	Other tests
Tissue Collection	Blood from a small poke of a finger, a method that is more accurate than via saliva	Saliva from a cheek swab, a method that is generally not very accurate	Blood collection methods that are invasive and far more uncomfortable that via small pokes of fingers
Sample Size	Samples from more than 20,000 humans	Samples from more than 8,000 humans	Samples typically from fewer than 2,500 humans
DNA Methylation Technology	Built using the modern MethylationEPIC array that measures 850,000 DNA sites and tests your sample on that same technology	Built using the modern MethylationEPIC array that measures 850,000 DNA sites but does not test your sample on that same technology	Built using older arrays that only capture 27,000-450,000 DNA sites
Chronological Age Range	8-102 years	18-100 years	Less expansive age range often lacking individuals 90+ years of age
Diversity	Significant diversity across ethnicity, race, and sex, all supported by many peer reviewed publications	Diversity across ethnicity, race, and sex, but without support of peer reviewed publications	Insufficient representation across ethnicity, race, and sex and without support of peer reviewed publications
Test Reliability	Optimized to be reliable across repeat measurements, with published and peer reviewed best-in-class ICC values (accuracy) >.96 for all three algorithms	Claims of being optimized to be reliable across repeat measurements without disclosing ICC values	Exhibit high test-retest error rates
Model Type	3rd generation (latest) clock, the only one trained on longitudinal analysis (people across their lifetimes), the best way to track biological age as shown in publications and tested via peer review	Self-claimed "novel" method-based model that lacks publications, peer review, and head-to-head comparisons against other clocks	1st generation (oldest) model trained to simply estimate chronological age instead of biological aging
Outputs and Analysis	Three: 1) 3rd generation Pace of Aging via DunedinPACE, 2) Biological Age, and 3) Telomere Length	One: A less accurate output of biological age	A single, less accurate output of biological age
Creators of Clock	A top team of Duke University and Columbia University scientists with peer reviewed publications	A start up company without publication of the algorithms, thus lacking scientific scrutiny
Number of Studies	45+ published studies by 30+ longevity scientists' labs across the world	Zero published studies
Immune Cell Controls	Published and Patented Advanced 12-cell immune deconvolution methods (cell changes won't impact accuracy, which is common in saliva and makes blood samples better)	No controls	No controls
Studies that prove accuracy in different ethnic groups	Algorithms validated in the Family and Community Health Study of African American Families study, MESA (Multi-ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), Cebu Longitudinal Health and Nutrition Survey (CLHNS Phillipines), Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 Study, Health and Retirement Study, the Normative Aging Study, the Framington Heart cohort, TILDA (the Irish Longitudinal Study of Aging), and many more.	No studies	No studies
Studies that show relatonship to outcomes	Algorithms have been validated in the Health and Retirement Study, the Normative Aging Study, the Framington Heart cohort and more.	No studies	No studies
Studies that show change with validated anti-aging interventions	The only algorithm proven to respond in a significant way to validated anti-aging interventions such as caloric restriction (Published in Nature)	No studies	No studies
Include Clinical Covariates	21 clinical covariates and telomere length	No clinical covariates	No clinical covariates
Comparisons to other algorithms	Comparisons in the FHS study and in the Health and Retirement Study show superior results	No published comparisons	No published comparisons
Shares actual data on precision (ICC values)	See ICC values with comparisons in the FHS study.	No data	No data

The Most Advanced Biological Aging Test Available.

Shop Now

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product/information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.