Where you stand, and where to start.
Enter your latest results and see each one against its evidence-informed target, where long‑term risk is lowest, not the wide reference range that only flags disease. The Compass then points you to the first moves worth making, in the order that moves your numbers fastest. And you can download the whole thing as a PDF or for your note app of choice (Obsidian, Notion, and more), to keep and act on.
Don't have your numbers yet? Start with The Atlas, our baseline blood panel. Order it, then come back and enter your results here. See The Atlas →Private to your browser. Everything you type stays on this device and is never sent anywhere. It is saved here for next time, but clearing your browser or switching devices will erase it, so download a copy to keep it for good.
Context (optional — sharpens the reading)
| Marker | No-current-flag range | Your result | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Atlas, our baseline panel | |||
| ApoB | < 80 mg/dL How to read this range ApoB counts atherogenic particles and is causal for cardiovascular disease: genetic and trial evidence show lower is better, with no clear floor. Among lipid markers this target has the firmest support. Two numbers get used here for a reason, and they are not in conflict: under 80 mg/dL is the level a result is not flagged for concern, while under 60 is the tighter, evidence-informed level worth aiming for, most of all when overall cardiovascular risk is higher. Evidence: Strong 100 mg/dL is elevated relative to the MeMurton monitoring zone; 130 mg/dL is the guideline-recognized risk-enhancing level. ApoB decisions depend on overall cardiovascular risk, not ApoB alone. ApoB below 80 mg/dL does not trigger a Compass flag. Levels below 60 mg/dL are associated with still lower cardiovascular risk and are used in selected high- or very-high-risk contexts, not as a universal goal for everyone. | | |
| LDL cholesterol | < 100 mg/dL How to read this range LDL is causal for atherosclerosis: lowering it lowers risk in both genetic and drug-trial evidence, and benefit continues well below 100. ApoB counts the particles more precisely, but the direction and the strength of evidence are the same. Two numbers get used here for a reason, and they are not in conflict: under 100 mg/dL is the level a result is not flagged for concern, while under 70 is the tighter treatment goal in higher-risk contexts. Evidence: Strong 130 mg/dL is the historical risk-enhancing level. LDL goals depend on overall cardiovascular risk rather than the number alone. LDL below 100 mg/dL does not trigger a Compass flag. Below 70 mg/dL is a treatment goal used in higher-risk primary prevention and in secondary prevention, guided by overall cardiovascular risk, not a universal target for everyone. | | |
| HDL cholesterol | ≥ 50 mg/dL (women) · ≥ 40 mg/dL (men) How to read this range Higher HDL tracks with lower risk, but it is a marker, not a lever: drugs that raise HDL have not reduced events, and very high HDL associates with higher mortality. Read this as where healthy people tend to land, not a number to push up. Evidence: Limited HDL is a risk marker, not a treatment target; raising it with drugs has not reduced events. Low HDL (below the sex threshold) flags metabolic risk. Very high HDL (about 90 mg/dL or more) is not a follow-up flag but is worth interpreting in context. | | |
| Triglycerides | < 100 mg/dL How to read this range High triglycerides track with cardiovascular risk and are a fingerprint of insulin resistance and diet. Genetic studies suggest triglyceride-lowering pathways do reduce heart disease, so the target is reasonably grounded, and it responds fast to cutting sugar, refined carbs, and alcohol. Evidence: Moderate 100–149 mg/dL is metabolically less favorable rather than clinically high; read it alongside HDL, glucose, insulin, waist, alcohol, and whether the draw was fasting. 150 mg/dL is the fasting hypertriglyceridemia threshold. At 500 mg/dL or higher, triglycerides also raise the risk of pancreatitis and warrant prompt medical attention. | | |
| Fasting glucose | 70 – 99 mg/dL How to read this range The tighter 70 to 85 target comes from large cohorts where vascular and diabetes risk climb across the normal range. Observational, so read it as a direction, not a hard line. Evidence: Moderate Below 70 is a low reading, usually benign but read in context. 100–125 is impaired fasting glucose; 126 or higher meets the diabetes threshold and needs confirmation. 70–85 is a favorable pattern within the no-flag zone, not a hard target. | | |
| ALT (liver) | ≤ 25 U/L (women) · ≤ 33 U/L (men) How to read this range ALT rises with fat in the liver. Standard lab cutoffs (up to about 56) are lax; cohort data link lower-normal ALT to better metabolic and liver health. It is actionable, since ALT falls with weight loss, less sugar and alcohol, and exercise. Lower values within the healthy range are generally more favorable, but no single narrow target applies equally to men and women. Evidence: Moderate Interpretation depends on persistence and on medications, alcohol, exercise, body composition, and AST/GGT/bilirubin context. A single mild elevation matters less than a persistent one. | | |
| HbA1c | < 5.7% How to read this range Below the clinical cutoffs, cohort studies still show risk climbing with higher HbA1c, which is where this tighter target comes from. Observational. Evidence: Moderate 5.5% is not abnormal; below 5.4% is a more favorable observational pattern, not a clinical target. 5.7% reaches the prediabetes threshold and 6.5% the diabetes threshold, each requiring confirmation. | | |
| Fasting insulin | < 8 µIU/mL How to read this range Observational cohort data: higher fasting insulin predicts future type 2 diabetes and tracks with cardiovascular risk in adults. Insulin assays are not standardized between labs, so treat the band as approximate. Evidence: Moderate No universally accepted clinical cutoff exists, and insulin assays are not standardized between labs. Interpret alongside fasting glucose, HbA1c, triglycerides, waist circumference, medications, and HOMA-IR. Very low fasting insulin is not automatically better. | | |
| hs-CRP | < 1.0 mg/L How to read this range hs-CRP grades low-level inflammation, and the under-1, 1-to-3, and over-3 mg/L bands are established cardiovascular-risk tiers. It is a marker of underlying inflammation, so the aim is to address the cause (excess weight, smoking, disease), not the number itself. Evidence: Moderate Read when well: infection, injury, vaccination, or hard exercise can raise hs-CRP transiently, and a cardiovascular reading needs a persistent elevation. 2 mg/L or higher is a recognized risk-enhancing level; above 10 mg/L suggests acute inflammation, so repeat when well. | | |
| Ferritin | Context-dependent How to read this range Not a lower-or-higher-is-better target but a middle band: below it points to iron deficiency (WHO thresholds), while high ferritin reflects inflammation or iron overload and associates with higher mortality in the general population. The band avoids both extremes rather than marking one risk-minimizing point. Evidence: Moderate Ferritin has no single universal green range: it is an acute-phase reactant that rises with inflammation, and it varies with sex, menstrual status, age, liver health, and iron intake. Interpret it with sex, menstrual status, CBC, transferrin saturation, CRP or other inflammatory context, liver markers, and the trend over time. | | |
| Transferrin saturation | 20 – 45% How to read this range Transferrin saturation reads iron supply: low points to deficiency, while high, especially alongside a high ferritin, points to iron overload or hemochromatosis. The 20 to 45% band sits between the two, and the cutoffs for overload are well established. Evidence: Moderate Above about 45%, especially with a high ferritin, is a screening signal for hereditary hemochromatosis: repeat it and read it with ferritin and recent iron intake. Below 20% points toward iron deficiency but needs ferritin, hemoglobin, MCV, and inflammatory context to interpret. Don't act on a single reading. | | |
| TSH | 0.4 – 4.0 mIU/L How to read this range The standard 0.4 to 4.0 is the reference interval. The tighter 0.5 to 2.5 is debated: some cohorts link the upper-normal range to modest risk, but guideline reviews caution it can over-label healthy people. TSH is a thyroid screen for your clinician, not a number to self-optimize. Evidence: Limited The no-flag range is the laboratory reference interval. Interpretation shifts with pregnancy or pregnancy planning, age, thyroid medication, symptoms, free T4, and thyroid antibodies. The tighter 0.5–2.5 range is a debated narrower view used in selected situations, not a universal target. | | |
| Optional add-ons (track if you ordered them) | |||
| Lp(a) | < 75 nmol/L (< 30 mg/dL) How to read this range Lp(a) is genetically set and a causal, independent cardiovascular risk factor, particle-for-particle more atherogenic than LDL. Above roughly 75 nmol/L (some guidelines flag 125) raises risk. You test it once: lifestyle does not move it, so a high value is a reason to manage everything else, especially ApoB, more strictly. Evidence: Strong Lp(a) is genetic; you test it once. The two unit systems are not interchangeable, so we never convert between them. Risk rises continuously: below 75 nmol/L (30 mg/dL) is lower risk, 75–124 (30–49) intermediate, and 125 nmol/L (50 mg/dL) or higher is a risk-enhancing level. 'Follow up' here means review your overall cardiovascular risk and manage modifiable factors, especially ApoB, more intensively, not treat Lp(a) directly. | | |
| Vitamin D | 20 – 50 ng/mL How to read this range Below about 30 ng/mL, correcting deficiency helps bone. Above that, large trials (VITAL) found extra vitamin D did not cut cancer or cardiovascular events, and a low level is often a marker of poor health rather than its cause. Adequate for most people is about 20 ng/mL or higher; 30 is a threshold some labs and clinicians prefer, not the single evidence-based definition of sufficiency. Evidence: Moderate Adequate for most people is about 20 ng/mL or higher (Food and Nutrition Board); 30 ng/mL is a threshold some labs and clinicians prefer, not the single evidence-based definition of sufficiency. Below 12 ng/mL is deficiency. Above 50 ng/mL is worth caution, and markedly elevated levels (roughly above 100 ng/mL) risk hypercalcemia and warrant follow-up. No universal outcome-based preventive target is established for healthy adults. | | |
| Omega-3 Index | ≥ 8% How to read this range The omega-3 index (red-cell EPA and DHA) tracks inversely with cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in cohorts, with about 8% a commonly cited target. Supplement trials are more mixed, so this is a well-grounded association with softer trial backing. Evidence: Moderate These are research-derived categories, not guideline-established treatment targets. Randomized supplementation trials have not shown that moving everyone above 8% delivers the associated benefit. | | |
| Vitamin B12 | ≥ 400 pg/mL How to read this range B12 in the low-normal range can still be functionally deficient, so a target above about 400 pg/mL aims for a comfortable margin, supported by studies pairing B12 with functional markers like MMA. It is about avoiding deficiency; higher is not better. Evidence: Moderate The 200–399 pg/mL range is indeterminate rather than necessarily inadequate; methylmalonic acid (MMA) can clarify when deficiency is suspected. Most labs treat values below about 200–250 pg/mL as subnormal. Higher B12 is not better. | | |
| Folate | ≥ 4 ng/mL How to read this range Folate above the deficiency line supports DNA synthesis and keeps homocysteine down. This is an adequacy target: correcting a shortfall matters, but pushing folate high has not been shown to add benefit. Evidence: Moderate Serum folate reflects recent intake and is assay-sensitive. Above about 3–4 ng/mL generally indicates adequacy, and there is no higher-is-better target once folate is adequate. Always read folate with B12, which it can mask. | | |
| Homocysteine | < 9 µmol/L How to read this range Higher homocysteine associates with cardiovascular, stroke, and cognitive risk. But lowering it with B vitamins has mostly not reduced cardiovascular events in trials, though there is a signal for slower brain atrophy. So treat a high value as a flag, often for low B vitamins, more than a proven lever. Evidence: Limited Homocysteine is a signal, not an established cardiovascular treatment target: B-vitamin trials have mostly not delivered the expected heart benefit. A high value warrants review of B12, folate, B6, kidney function, thyroid status, medications, and lifestyle. Values below about 9–10 µmol/L are generally reassuring. | | |
| Uric acid | < 6.8 mg/dL How to read this range Under 6.0 is a clinical treatment target for people with gout. As a general target the evidence is weaker: uric acid associates with metabolic, kidney, and cardiovascular risk, but trials lowering it in people without gout have largely not improved those outcomes. Evidence: Limited Default interpretation: 6.8–8.9 mg/dL is worth watching and 9.0 or higher warrants follow-up (and raises gout risk). Below 6.0 mg/dL is a treat-to-target goal for people on urate-lowering therapy for gout, not a universal target for an asymptomatic person. Interpret with sex (the women's reference interval runs lower), insulin, and blood pressure. | | |
Each range carries an ⓘ. Tap it to see how to read the range, the evidence behind it, and how firm that evidence is.
Compass zones are interpretation zones, not treatment targets. “No current flag” means this marker does not independently trigger attention based on the information entered. It does not mean the value is ideal, guarantee that no health issue is present, or replace interpretation of symptoms, trends, and related markers.
The Atlas, our recommended baseline panel, also includes a CBC and CMP, which screen your blood counts, kidney and liver function, and electrolytes, dozens of values in all. Most are pass/fail checks your lab flags automatically, so this tool tracks only the ones you can actively move (like fasting glucose and ALT, both from the CMP). Review anything your lab marks out of range with a clinician.
The markers outside their range, in priority order, with what each one is telling you.
Some numbers say the most in pairs. Enter both halves of a pair and we calculate it here; these surface insulin resistance that can hide behind values that each look fine on their own.
These combine markers you entered and are estimates, not a diagnosis. The triglyceride to HDL ratio is less reliable in people of African ancestry, who often run low triglycerides regardless of insulin resistance.
Enter your results above and this becomes your plan, ordered by what will move your flagged numbers the quickest. Add them one at a time.
Make your changes, then retest the markers you are working on around . Twelve weeks is the sweet spot: long enough for diet and lifestyle changes to actually move most lipid and metabolic markers, which shift over 8 to 12 weeks, but soon enough to keep your momentum and adjust.
Ask for these together as one blood draw to keep the cost down, then order them through our biomarker library.
The smallest lever here. No pill replaces the habits. Test, don't guess, and correct measured deficiencies first.
Download a copy with your numbers, your plan, and what to retest, as a PDF or for your note app (Obsidian, Notion, and more). Viewing here is always free. The download is our thank‑you for joining. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
You're in. Download your Compass, with your numbers:
The note‑app file is Markdown, which imports into Obsidian, Notion, and most others.
Compass ranges are interpretation zones, not treatment targets. Green means a value does not currently trigger a flag based on this marker alone, not that it is optimal. Some markers are read as signals or need clinical context rather than a single cutoff, and where the research points to a narrower favorable range, the biomarker guide says so. This tool is educational, not medical advice; review your results with a clinician.