Hims's Cancer Test Costs $699, Not the $250 We Printed in February. WHOOP Now Sells the Same Test for $799 With No Subscription at All.

On February 5 we published HIMS Enters Cancer Diagnostics with $250 Galleri Test. The headline number in it is wrong, and the error is the kind this site exists to avoid: we read a discount as a price.

Hims & Hers announced that customers "can add the Multi-Cancer Test by Galleri® onto existing Labs plans at a $250 discount to the Galleri list price." List is $949. So the customer pays $699, and the discount is 26% — not the 74% we printed, which is what you get if you treat $250 as the price. The correction matters beyond the arithmetic, because the whole February thesis was that Hims was buying a diagnostics market by undercutting list price. A 26% discount is a promotion. A 74% discount would have been a strategy.

Two weeks ago that error was ours alone. On August 18 it became a competitive fact.

What WHOOP did

WHOOP made Advanced Labs available without a WHOOP membership, and added Galleri to it. The test is $799, a one-time cost recommended annually, HSA/FSA eligible, and — the part that does the damage — no subscription and no other Advanced Labs test is required first. US blood draws are handled by Quest Diagnostics.

Hims's Galleri offer runs through Quest as well, and the test is GRAIL's in both cases. Same test, same supplier, same phlebotomist. What differs is what you must buy to reach it.

The price of the same test, both ways

Hims's $699 is available only to Labs subscribers, and Labs by Hims is now a single plan at $349 a year — consolidated from the $199 and $499 tiers it launched with — covering 130+ biomarkers across two draws a year.

Getting the test through Hims costs $249 more in the first year than getting it through WHOOP — 31% more — and $99 more than simply paying GRAIL's list price. That is the finding, and it is the exact inverse of the framing our February piece carried.

Three qualifications, because the table is a comparison of first-year cash and not of value. The $349 buys a real product — two biomarker panels a year that WHOOP's $799 does not include, and a treatment funnel Hims can route a positive result into, which is the strategic logic that made the February piece worth writing in the first place. A subscriber who already pays for Labs for its own sake faces a marginal cost of $699, below WHOOP's $799. And Galleri is recommended for adults 50 and over, while Hims's subscriber base skews millennial and Gen Z — a mismatch our February piece flagged and which has not changed.

What has changed is that the cancer test is no longer a reason to subscribe to anything. A Hims subscription was the way in; now there is a way in that costs less and requires nothing.

The relationship was a supply agreement, not a moat

Our February piece treated the GRAIL connection as strategic — Hims had invested in GRAIL's $325M round, GRAIL's president called Hims a "natural partner," and the piece read that as privileged access to a screening layer.

Six months later GRAIL is selling the same test through a wrist-strap company, with Quest drawing the blood in both cases and no exclusivity of any kind in evidence. This is the correction inside the correction: nothing about the distribution changed in August, because there was never anything exclusive to lose. The February piece should have said so at the time. Hims's advantage in diagnostics was always the funnel it attaches to — the ability to sell treatment after a result — and that is still the only part a competitor cannot copy by writing a cheque to GRAIL.

The equity stake is a separate matter and is unaffected. If Galleri succeeds, Hims owns a piece of the supplier; it simply owns it alongside everyone else who can now sell the test.

The five-name price table that is not a ranking

The post that prompted this piece — from an openly Hims-friendly account, which is worth stating because the table does not flatter Hims — ranks five consumer-diagnostics subscriptions:

Read as a league table, Hims is third of five and the story is that it lost its price advantage. We do not think that is a fair reading, and we are not going to print it as one. These are five different products: one annual draw is not two, 78 biomarkers is not 160, and a tier that excludes the cancer test is not comparable to one that discounts it. A $349 plan with two draws against a $199 plan with one is not obviously the more expensive product — it is roughly the same price per draw.

The comparable that is like-for-like is the one in the section above: the identical GRAIL test, from the identical lab network, at $1,048 versus $799. That comparison needed no table from anybody.

Does any of this move the company?

Hims does not break out Labs revenue, so the honest answer has to be bounded rather than estimated. Against Q2 2026 revenue of $753.2M — annualising to about $3.01B — a $349 subscription needs a lot of subscribers to register:

Those attach rates are ours as illustration — Hims has never published one, and nothing here should be read as an estimate of where it sits. The base they run against is disclosed: 2,891K subscribers, up 19% year over year, at $92 of monthly revenue per average subscriber, from the Q2 capture. Note what that implies: Labs at $349 a year is about 32% of what the average subscriber already pays Hims annually, so it is a meaningful basket increase per attach and still needs a tenth of the base to reach 3% of revenue.

Set against the quarter Hims actually reported, the diagnostics line is not where the argument about this company is. Q2 gross margin was 63.83%, down 12.6 points year over year, and the company posted a $97.2M loss from operations against $26.7M of income a year earlier. A product line that reaches 3% of revenue at a 10% attach rate does not move either number. Competitive pricing in diagnostics is a story about Hims's ambition, not yet about its P&L — and the February piece would have been more useful if it had said that instead of sizing a $110B TAM.

What to watch

1. Whether Hims changes the Galleri price now that WHOOP is $799 gate-free. The $699-plus-$349 structure is the thing under pressure, and a response would show up as a price cut or as the subscription requirement being dropped.
2. Any Labs revenue disclosure or attach-rate figure. Until one exists, every valuation argument about diagnostics at this company — including ours in February — is unbounded.
3. The FDA decision on Galleri, still expected in 2026. An approval changes the category for every distributor at once, which is precisely why distribution is not the durable part.
4. Whether the GRAIL relationship is ever described as exclusive by either party. Six months of evidence says it is not, and a third distributor would settle it.
5. Gross margin. At 63.83% and falling, the question for Hims is what a low-margin, hardware-and-lab-heavy layer does to the blended number, not what its TAM is.

Corrections and provenance. This piece corrects our own article of February 5, 2026, which stated the Galleri test was priced at $250, a 74% discount; Hims's press release says customers may add the test "at a $250 discount to the Galleri list price," and the list price is $949, so the customer price is $699 and the discount is 26%. Both figures are disclosed — the discount language is Hims's own, the $949 list is GRAIL's published price, and the $699 result is derived arithmetic on the two. Labs by Hims at $349 a year for 130+ biomarkers across two annual draws, consolidated from the original $199/$499 tiers, is Hims's published pricing. WHOOP's August 18, 2026 announcement — Advanced Labs available without a WHOOP membership, Galleri at $799 as a one-time cost with no subscription or prior test required, US draws by Quest Diagnostics, other tests from about $150 — is disclosed in WHOOP's own release and corroborated by Yahoo Finance, Engadget and Android Authority coverage. Competitor pricing for Superpower (~$199/yr), Function Health ($365/yr, 160 biomarkers) and OneTwenty ($499/yr beta, quarterly panels) is claimed — taken from published pricing pages and third-party comparisons, not from filings, and none of these companies is tracked on this site. The five-name price table originates with the @himshouse account on X, a partisan Hims investor account; we reproduce it only to explain why it is not a like-for-like ranking. Hims's Q2 2026 figures — 2,891K subscribers (+19%), $92 monthly revenue per average subscriber, $753.2M revenue, 63.83% gross margin, $97.2M loss from operations — are disclosed in the company's Q2 2026 release and stored in our capture. The attach-rate table is ours, an illustration and not an estimate: Hims does not disclose Labs revenue or attach rate, and the annualised $3.01B denominator is four times the June quarter rather than a forecast. HIMS has no published R40 model, so there is no model reconciliation in this piece.