Purpose first
NIPT, ancestry testing, a rare-disease exome and a companion diagnostic answer different questions. A universal ‘best genetic test’ table is scientifically invalid.
DOCUMENTS · 30 AUG 2026
Genetic test assessment methodology
Products are compared only within the same purpose, population, market and clinical context.
Evidence
We examine analytical validity, reproducibility, clinical validity and the presence of clinical utility or an exact regulatory indication.
Transparency
We assess disclosure of laboratory, method, panel version, specimen, variants, validation metrics, ancestry limits, sample report, conflicts and change history.
Fit-for-purpose coverage
Gene count is not a quality score. The issue is whether the assay detects relevant SNVs/indels, CNVs, SVs, repeats, HLA, mosaicism or other classes at a stated limit of detection.
Privacy
We assess specimen and file retention, deletion, sharing, research opt-in, secondary use, export and granular controls.
Actionability
We separately report whether a result informs only, supports discussion/confirmation, or leads to a guideline-supported step after clinical review.
No single average
The five axes are not averaged into one star. Strong privacy does not offset weak evidence, and broad coverage does not offset the wrong intended use.
Popularity
No usage ranking is currently calculated. Local product selection is not a vote, review, purchase claim or prevalence measure. Any future community signal will state its purpose, period, response count and non-representative nature.
The website controller is ООО «НПО НТ». This page forms part of GENES ≠ FATE’s own document set and reflects the site’s current functions.
Ethical principles →Found an error? →