ZOE vs Viome

Dr Chad OkayFounder, Suna Health

4 min read. Updated .

Both companies offer microbiome-based personalised nutrition programmes. ZOE is the most clinically validated of the consumer programmes, combining stool sequencing with blood lipid response and CGM data, run from the UK. Viome uses RNA sequencing (claims to measure microbial activity, not just composition) and AI-driven food recommendations. ZOE has stronger trial evidence; Viome has more aggressive marketing claims. For most people, ZOE is the more rigorous choice; Viome is the more aggressive recommendation engine.

Both ZOE and Viome want to tell you what to eat based on your gut. Their methods, their evidence, and their tone differ significantly. If you're spending £200-£300 on a microbiome programme, this is the comparison that matters.

Disclosure: this guide is published by Suna Health, which is building a consumer wellness wearable for gut health (not a stool test or nutrition programme). ZOE and Viome compete for the same gut-health spend. We have kept the comparison to what the published evidence supports and cite it throughout, but read it knowing who wrote it.

What each does

ZOE

Founded by Tim Spector (King's College London professor of genetic epidemiology who directs the TwinsUK registry). Based on the PREDICT studies, large-scale research that measured how individuals respond differently to the same foods. The ZOE test combines a stool microbiome sample with a blood fat response test and 2 weeks of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The output is personalised food scores from 0-100 telling you which foods suit your specific metabolic and microbial profile.

Viome

Based in Washington State, US. Uses metatranscriptomic (RNA) sequencing of stool, claiming to measure what microbes are doing rather than just what's there. Reports include 'gut intelligence', 'cellular wellness', and 'metabolic health' scores. Algorithm produces food and supplement recommendations. Owned by parent company Viome Life Sciences which sells personalised supplements.

Side by side

ZOEViome
Country of originUK (also US)US
Test componentsMicrobiome + blood fats + CGMMicrobiome RNA sequencing only
SequencingShotgun metagenomicsMetatranscriptomics (RNA)
Cost (UK, 2026)~£295 + £25/month subscription$229-399 depending on test depth
Trial evidencePREDICT 1, PREDICT 2, METHOD trialInternal validation studies, fewer independent
OutputPersonalised food scores 0-100Food and supplement scores, plus 'wellness' metrics
Subscription requiredYes, for ongoing app and reportsYes, especially for supplement plans
Best forEvidence-led personalised eatingMaximum data and recommendation volume

What ZOE does well

  • Genuine clinical research backing. The PREDICT studies have been peer-reviewed and published in Nature Medicine.
  • Triple data source (microbiome + blood fats + CGM) makes the personalisation more meaningful than microbiome alone.
  • British dietary defaults familiar to UK users.
  • Strong app coaching and educational content built around the test.
  • Tim Spector's gut-health communication is broadly evidence-led across his books and podcasts.

Where ZOE is limited

  • Day-to-day microbiome variation isn't captured by a single test.
  • Food scores reflect averages from research populations, not your personal cause-and-effect responses.
  • Recommendations can feel generic even with the personalisation. 'Eat more polyphenols' applies to almost everyone.
  • Subscription costs add up if you stay long-term.
  • Some scoring decisions are opinionated rather than settled science.

What Viome does well

  • RNA sequencing technically measures activity not just presence, a real distinction.
  • More granular reports with more individual food recommendations.
  • Useful for people who want a lot of data and recommendations.
  • Includes supplement plans for people who want them.

Where Viome is limited

  • Less independent validation of the AI recommendation engine. Most validation is internal company research.
  • Aggressive supplement upsells. The personalised supplement product is the high-margin piece.
  • Recommendations sometimes contradict mainstream nutrition advice in ways that aren't well-explained (users report examples like 'avoid spinach').
  • RNA degrades fast in stool. Sample handling is unusually critical for valid results.
  • The 'wellness scores' are constructed metrics, not validated health outcomes.

Which to pick

  • Evidence-led, want trial-backed personalisation: ZOE.
  • Already eat well and want to understand your individual response patterns: ZOE (the CGM data is the best part).
  • Want maximum data and don't mind aggressive supplement upselling: Viome.
  • On a tight budget: neither. A session with a registered dietitian and a fibre-tracking habit gets you most of the value.
  • If something actually feels wrong (pain, a changed gut, reactions to food): that is a conversation with your doctor before either test.

What both do poorly

  • Day-to-day variability. Both are snapshots, not trends.
  • Specific clinical conditions. Neither diagnoses anything.
  • Long-term outcomes. There are no long-term studies showing that following either company's recommendations improves hard health outcomes.
  • Replacing food-first basics. The Mediterranean diet plus 30 g fibre plus regular movement and 7+ hours of sleep does more for your gut than any test, ZOE or Viome.

Common questions

Are these microbiome tests worth the money?
ZOE: yes if you want a structured personalisation programme with real research backing, especially if you can use the CGM phase to learn your post-meal glucose patterns. Viome: less so for most people; the recommendations are more aggressive and less validated. Neither is essential for someone already eating well.
How accurate are the food recommendations?
ZOE's recommendations are derived from how individuals in the PREDICT cohorts responded to specific foods. The translation to your individual case is reasonable but imperfect. Viome's recommendations come from a proprietary AI algorithm with less peer-reviewed validation. Neither should be treated as gospel.
Is the CGM in ZOE useful?
Often the most valuable part. Two weeks of CGM data shows your personal post-meal glucose curves. You learn which combinations spike you and which don't. That's directly actionable. Many people find this more useful than the microbiome data.
What about other microbiome tests?
Tiny Health (focused on infants and pregnancy) and BiomeSight (cheaper 16S sequencing, no subscription) are alternatives with their own trade-offs. See our microbiome test glossary entry for the full landscape.

Sources

Written by Dr Chad Okay. Contributor: Dr Parisah Hussain, MBChB, BSc (Hons), DRCOG, MRCGP. Last updated 15 September 2026. From Digests.

Digests explains how the body works in general, everyday terms. It is not medical advice. It is not a substitute for someone who can examine you and knows your history, and we do not tell you what dose of any medicine to take.

Where we describe how something is checked or looked after, we follow UK guidance from NICE and the NHS. If you are reading this outside the UK, the same concerns are worth taking to your own doctor, though the tests and routes where you live may differ.

Suna Health is building a wearable wellness device for gut health, and you will see it advertised alongside these pages. That commercial interest does not decide what the content says.

If you think we have got something wrong, tell us at digests@suna.health. It goes to the editor. Full terms, including our liability position, are at suna.health/terms.