Last October saw the publishing in Nature Aging of Implausibility of radical life extension in humans in the twenty-first century, an article from longevity experts S. Jay Olshansky, Bradley J. Wilcox, Lloyd Demetrius and Hiram Beltran-Sanchez.
In it, the quartet argued that “radical human life extension is implausible in this century”: they used demographic survivorship metrics from national vital statistics in Australia, France, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the US from 1990 to 2019 and found that improvements in life expectancy had slowed down since 1990, ultimately concluding that under the best of conditions, only about 15% of females and 5% of males could survive to 100 years of age in the 21st century.
That is not stopping entrepreneurs and venture capitalists from having a go, however. A recent report from PitchBook, Emerging Space Brief: Longevity Tech provides an update of investment activity in the space, including deal data and notable funding statistics.
The immediate observation is that longevity tech is a small space – at least, in terms of deal activity. The embryonic nature of markets such as these means that large transactions can have an exaggerated impact on the size of the market, something this space observed in 2022 when the aggregate value of deals fell by more than half, but the number of transactions increased from 21 to 22.
Only 25 deals were completed last year, and just four have been inked in 2025 prior to PitchBook publishing its report. Part of the reason can be attributed to the cheque size that VCs need to cut to play in this space.
“Platform-stage longevity companies often require $20-40m just to complete IND-enabling studies, scale manufacturing, and initiate first-in-human trials, far exceeding the $5-15m that many seed and Series A funds are structured to deploy,” said Sergey Jakimov, Co-Founder and Managing Partner of venture capital firm LongeVC.
“This capital‐intensive profile sidelines generalist VCs, leaving room only for deep-tech investors, strategics, and crossover funds willing to support multi-year R&D commitments. In our experience, those who recognize the long lead times seen in therapeutic development are best positioned to underwrite and guide these companies.”
The numbers in the PitchBook report bear that out. The report contains a table showing the top ten longevity tech companies based on the dollar amount raised; notable successes include Altos Labs having raised $5.5bn, Human Longevity raising just north of $1bn and InSilico Medicine closing a Series E round back in March which TechCrunch says made the company a Unicorn.
Still, longevity tech, as a market, is in the early innings of its evolution, which could mean teething troubles.
“Scientific setbacks—such as underwhelming clinical results or safety concerns—could dampen momentum. Regulatory challenges, including the lack of formal pathways for aging therapies, may delay approvals and complicate go-to-market strategies. High costs and payer reluctance to fund prevention-focused treatments might limit early accessibility, while ethical debates around equitable access could shape public perception,” says the report.
Despite the nascent nature of the longevity tech market, tailwinds that could support growth do exist. While the space itself does not have a long history for specific benchmarking purposes, there are some other benchmarks that investors looking at the space can benefit from, even if the ideal scenario calls for specificity.
“It [longevity tech] already leverages established biotech valuation frameworks, focusing on IP defensibility, the strength of preclinical proof-of-concept, and strategic partnerships or pilot programs. However, without long-term clinical readouts or exit precedents, pure longevity lacks its own set of comparables. As more platforms reach late-stage development or secure exits, median pre-money valuations and syndicate structures will become much clearer benchmarks for investors and founders,” said Jakimov.
The space, arguably, needs a win.
“No breakthrough therapy has yet reached the market, fueling investor caution. Funding relies on specialized longevity funds and billionaire backers, as Big Pharma remains focused on single diseases… Near-term successes, even modest ones, could unlock broader investment, while setbacks risk stalling momentum,” the report says.
The road to success will be lengthy, and if – when – said win arrives, the impact could be enormous. Healthcare could be redefined by prioritizing systemic aging intervention over disease-specific treatments, ultimately extending healthy lifespans and alleviating societal burdens.
But what is required for longevity tech to become big enough that it is considered a sector of the VC market on its own?
“For longevity technology to move beyond a niche, it must be integrated into mainstream healthcare rather than viewed as a luxury “anti-aging” pursuit,” said Jakimov.
“This begins with standardizing key biomarkers and clinical protocols – integrating senescence assays and metabolic readouts into medical-education curricula and care pathways so that interventions aimed at extending healthspan are adopted alongside traditional therapies.”