All reviews
Home / Reviews / LifeVantage
Dietary supplements and skincare · Nasdaq-listed direct selling · nine-level plus seven-generation plan

LifeVantage Corporation

The rarest thing on this site: a direct seller whose commission line is an audited, filed number. It paid 44.75% of revenue into the field in FY2025 - and its own income disclosure says 64.48% of 54,531 US consultants earned nothing at all.

Reviewed August 1, 2026 Founded Incorporated June 1988 in Colorado as Andraplex Corporation; renamed Yaak River Resources in January 1992, Lifeline Therapeutics in October 2004 on acquiring Lifeline Nutraceuticals, and LifeVantage Corporation in November 2006 Confidence: High
CGRADE
6.4/10
Weighted composite

AUDITED, TRANSPARENT, SHRINKING

Almost every number in this report comes from a filed SEC document rather than a marketing page - which is why the good marks are unusually secure and the bad ones are unusually hard to argue with.

The question you came with

Can you actually make money with LifeVantage?

GO, WITH CONDITIONS Only under conditions, and they are specific

Yes, under conditions, and this is the one file on the site where you can check the company's homework against an audited filing. Commissions and incentives were 44.75% of revenue in FY2025, which is $102.260 million on the face of the income statement rather than an estimate. A plan funded at that rate out of margin is being paid from product sales, not from money arriving behind you.

Two controls in the plan are rarer than they should be. Personal purchases count toward rank qualification only up to 150 Sales Volume, which is a hard cap on buying your own way up the ladder. And the monthly 150 SV activity requirement can, in the plan's own words, be fulfilled solely through customer orders. The 10-K states plainly that the company does not pay commissions for enrolling independent consultants.

Now the disclosure, which publishes a median at every one of fifteen ranks and states its own denominator. Of 54,531 US consultants, 64.48% earned no commission at all in calendar 2024. Among those who did, the median across twelve months was $186 and the average for a typical consultant was $683, both gross of everything. The modal rank holds 43.19% of paid consultants at a median of $18 a month.

The direction of travel is the part to weigh hardest. Active accounts stood at 109,000 on 31 March 2026, down 22.1% year on year, and revenue fell 19.15% across the first nine months of FY2026 to $140.209 million. The customer-to-consultant ratio has slid from 1.80:1 in FY2019 to 1.42:1 in March 2026, so customers are leaving twice as fast as consultants are.

What it costs to be in
Start Kit - price not published

a Start Kit is required by Policies §3.1; its price does not appear on any server-rendered page this review could retrieve. A 250 SV Enrollment Pack is the promoted alternative. The first year’s renewal is free, with an unstated "small fee" thereafter. Staying Active requires 150 Sales Volume a month, and the plan does not publish what 150 SV costs in dollars anywhere.

What has to be true for this to work for you
  • You would rather sell to customers than recruit, because the plan is built for that and the numbers reward it. The main working bonus keys off customer sales volume only, and from rank C3 upward half your volume has to be customer volume.
  • You can establish what 150 Sales Volume costs you in dollars before you commit. The company does not publish it anywhere, and it is the recurring figure that decides whether a month leaves you ahead or behind.
  • You are joining a business whose account base is shrinking and you are willing to be part of why it stops. Down 22.1% in a year is the environment you would be selling into, not a footnote to it.
  • You never want to advertise on paid search and can accept a two-year bar on recruiting any consultant after you leave. Paid search is banned outright, the trademarks cannot sit in a domain, and the genealogy belongs to the company.

That call is computed, not chosen - the rule reads three of the nine published dimension scores and is printed on the methodology page. It describes this company's plan and the figures it publishes about the people already in it. It is not a prediction about you, and nothing on this site is advice.

64.48%
US consultants who earned no commission in CY2024
of a stated population of 54,531; the median among those who did earn was $186 for the year
44.75%
Commissions and incentives as a share of FY2025 revenue
$102.260M - an audited line on the face of the income statement, not an estimate
−19.15%
Revenue, first nine months of FY2026
$140.209M against $173.416M; the watchlist premise said −19.1% and was right
109,000
Active accounts at 31 March 2026
down 22.1% year on year - 45,000 consultants and 64,000 customers

Legal status

LEGAL - no court or regulator has ever found LifeVantage to be a pyramid scheme, and the government file, as retrievable, is close to empty: no FTC complaint, consent order or civil penalty action; no SEC enforcement matter, litigation release or administrative proceeding; no state attorney general action located; no restatement and no disclosed material weakness; and the FY2025 Form 10-K states in terms that there were "no open letters from the FDA to us as of June 30, 2025." The one substantial matter is Smith et al. v. LifeVantage Corp. et al., filed January 2018 in the District of Connecticut (No. 18-cv-135) and transferred to the District of Utah (No. 18-cv-621), pleading an illegal pyramid scheme, illegal health claims, unlicensed sale of securities, antitrust violations and fraud on the patent office. In December 2019 the court denied the motion to dismiss as to the pyramid-scheme claims only, finding "enough plausible facts to state a claim" - that is a ruling that the allegations, taken as true for the purpose of the motion, state a legal claim, which is the lowest judicial threshold and is not a finding of fact. The securities, antitrust, patent-fraud and unjust-enrichment counts were dismissed. The class was putative and never certified, and the action was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice in December 2022 - a plaintiff-initiated termination that bars re-filing and is not a vindication either. There is no judgment for or against the company on the pyramid allegation. The October 2021 FTC Notice of Penalty Offenses was a mass mailing to roughly 1,100 companies and is not an allegation, charge or finding against any recipient. Three TINA.org letters (November 2016 on health claims, December 2017 and February 2024 on income claims) are a watchdog nonprofit’s analysis, not regulatory action; the company responded on the record to each.

Confidence: High

Primary sources fetched directly where possible. Everything we could not verify is listed at the bottom of this page by name.

What this actually is

Follow the money

A Nasdaq-listed dietary supplement and skincare company selling in seventeen markets through US independent consultants on a plan called Evolve, combining a retail markup, a customer-volume bonus, a capped sharing bonus, up to nine levels of team commission and a seven-generation leadership match.

The transparency should be stated first because it is the most unusual thing about this file and it is not a marketing claim. LifeVantage is an SEC reporting company audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, with no restatement, no disclosed material weakness, no probable loss contingencies and zero debt. Its commission line is a filed number: $102.260M in FY2025, 44.75% of revenue, funded out of a gross margin of roughly 80%, with the company still earning $12.199M of operating income. Its income disclosure publishes a median as well as an average at every rank, states the full US consultant population of 54,531, and states outright that 64.48% of them earned nothing. It reports active customers and active consultants separately, quarterly, with definitions in the footnote. Almost nothing else graded on this site can be tested this way, and the good marks on the scorecard are secure precisely because they are audited rather than asserted.

The plan has real customer machinery in it. The monthly 150 SV activity requirement is one "which can be fulfilled solely through Customer orders," and personal purchases are capped at 150 SV toward rank qualification no matter what rank you are chasing. The 10-K states "we do not pay commissions for enrolling independent consultants," and the Sharing Bonus that does exist is 10% of a new enrollee’s sales volume capped at $100 per consultant. The Personal Sales Bonus, at 5% to 20%, triggers only on Customer Sales Volume, starting at 500 CSV a month. From rank C3 upward, at least 150 SV a month must be genuine customer volume. Those are not cosmetic provisions.

Then the numbers the company itself publishes. Of 54,531 US consultants in calendar 2024, 64.48% earned no commission at all. Among those who did, the median for the year was $186 and the average for a "typical Consultant" was $683 - both gross, before the cost of holding 150 SV a month, which the company does not price in any document this review could retrieve. The modal rank holds 43.19% of paid consultants at a median of $18 a month. Roughly one participant in eighteen reaches a rank whose median plausibly covers the cost of staying qualified. About 130 people nationally sit at Executive Consultant 1 or above.

And the business is contracting. Revenue for the first nine months of FY2026 was $140.209M against $173.416M, down 19.15%. The MindBody GLP-1 System - launched October 2024, $15.7M in FY2024, $56.2M in FY2025 - fell to $6.3M in the third quarter of FY2026, down 61.2% year on year, and accounted for 64% of the entire nine-month decline. Active accounts stand at 109,000, down 22.1% year on year, and the customer-to-consultant ratio has slipped from 1.80:1 in FY2019 to 1.42:1. Revenue is flat across seven years on an account base 41% smaller: $1,221 per active account in FY2019 against $1,731 in FY2025. Fewer people are being asked to spend more.

Where each dollar of consumer spend went in FY2025

Taken directly from the audited consolidated statement of operations in the FY2025 Form 10-K. This is a filed income statement, not a model - which makes it the strongest payout-split evidence available for any company graded on this site.

45% 30% 20%
Commissions and incentives paid into the field (44.75%)Corporate SG&A - salaries, facilities, marketing, IT, events, legal (30.28%)Cost of the physical product (19.63%)Operating profit to shareholders (5.34%)
ProductPricePays
Protandim® Nrf2 Synergizer®
The founding product and still the largest line: $95.3M in FY2025 and $62.9M over nine months of FY2026. A 675 mg proprietary blend of milk thistle, bacopa, ashwagandha, green tea and turmeric extracts plus 77 mg calcium. Its US patents expired in March 2025. The storefront renders prices client-side and returned "Loading…" on every fetch, so no retail price is asserted here.
not published
per unit - 30 caplets
CV-based, all mechanisms
LifeVantage® MindBody GLP-1 System™ (MB Core™ + MB Enhance™)
Launched October 2024. Berberine, lemon bioflavonoids, chromium picolinate, yerba mate, matcha and hesperidin. US patent-pending - an application filed, not a granted patent. $15.7M in FY2024, $56.2M in FY2025, $6.3M in Q3 FY2026 alone, down 61.2% year on year. Carries a 30-day money-back guarantee.
not published
per unit - 60 capsules, 2 daily
CV-based, all mechanisms
TrueScience® skincare and Liquid Collagen
$48.7M in FY2025, $28.8M over nine months of FY2026. The firming complex is described by the company as validated through a third-party clinical trial; the Liquid Collagen is the subject of a filed US patent application.
not published
per unit
CV-based, all mechanisms
AXIO® nootropic energy drink mix
$15.3M in FY2025. Regular and decaf. Competes directly with mainstream ready-to-drink and powder energy products sold at ordinary grocery and warehouse prices.
not published
per unit
CV-based, all mechanisms
Petandim® for dogs
$2.1M in FY2025. Carries the National Animal Supplement Council Quality Seal - a real third-party quality mark, and worth naming as a credit in a category that mostly has none.
not published
per unit
CV-based, all mechanisms
Start Kit (required to enrol)
Policies & Procedures §3.1 requires an applicant to "Purchase a LifeVantage Start Kit," and the enrollment page says "all it takes is a Start Kit." Its price does not appear on any server-rendered page this review could retrieve. That is a real disclosure gap: a prospective participant cannot compute their own entry cost from any published company document.
not published
one-time
Enrollment Pack (promoted alternative)
The Evolve page references an Enrollment Pack valued at 250 SV. The SV-to-dollar conversion is not published anywhere in the plan, the perks PDF or the enrollment page.
not published - 250 SV
one-time
150 SV monthly activity requirement
Required to be an Active Consultant. It can be met entirely from customer orders, which is the plan’s genuine strength - but if it is not, it is met from your own account. The dollar value of 150 SV is the single most consequential unpublished figure in this file.
not published
monthly
Background check

Who runs it, and what they ran before

JM
Joe M. McCord, PhD
Co-inventor of the flagship formulation; later the company’s chief science officer

A genuine redox-biology figure - co-discoverer of superoxide dismutase - and that matters, because it is rare in this category for the science principal to be a real scientist. It also creates the central problem with the evidence base. He is the senior author of the 2006 open-label study that produced the "40% in 30 days" figure still used on the product page today, and he appears as an author on several of the supportive mechanistic papers. The 10-K describes the product as "the subject of numerous independent scientific studies"; a substantial share of that supportive literature has the product’s own scientific principal on the author line, which is legitimate but is not the same thing as independent. No regulatory action, fraud judgment or criminal proceeding against him could be located.

PM
Paul Myhill
Co-founder associated with the product’s origination

A named co-author on the same 2006 Free Radical Biology & Medicine paper (PMID 16413416) that supplies the flagship efficacy figure. No conflict-of-interest or funding statement appears in the PubMed record for that paper, which is notable given the author composition. No regulatory action, fraud judgment or criminal proceeding against him could be located in any source reviewed.

SR
Steven R. Fife
President and Chief Executive Officer, February 2021 – 30 April 2026; previously the company’s CFO

Ran the company through the launch and collapse of the MindBody GLP-1 System. His retirement was announced on 4 February 2026 in the same Form 8-K that carried the guidance cut - the filing contains both the Q2 FY2026 earnings release, taking FY2026 revenue guidance from $225–240M down to $185–200M, and the retirement release. Whatever the internal sequence, the market received both on the same day. His filed "compensation actually paid" for FY2025 was $7.473M against a Summary Compensation Table total of $2.816M, the gap being mark-to-market on unvested equity as the share price tripled on the back of the GLP-1 launch. His realized pay peaked on exactly the product cycle that then reversed. Transition terms: 18 months of medical premium coverage, a prorated bonus, and continued vesting of certain equity awards through 11 September 2026.

Gn
Governance note
Four chief executives since 2011, an interim on a consulting contract, and a fifth arriving

The seat has turned over repeatedly: David Brown to about 2011, Douglas Robinson to 2015, Darren Jensen to early 2021, Fife to April 2026 (dates before February 2021 are not re-verified against filings). When Fife left, the board had no successor. Michael A. Beindorff - age 73, a sitting director since January 2012 - ran the company as interim CEO from 1 May 2026 on a consulting agreement at $45,833 a month in cash, an annualised $550,000, while the company was missing its own reduced guidance. He stepped off the Compensation and Nominating committees on taking the role, which is the right mitigation but does not cure a 14-year-tenured director being paid by the company he oversees. Terrence O. Moorehead took over as President and CEO on 5 August 2026 on a package of roughly $8.35M - $850,000 base, a bonus of up to 100% of salary with FY2027 guaranteed at $425,000, $2.8M of RSUs and $4.7M of PSUs, and 18 months of severance enhanced by 50% on a change of control. The equity grant alone is 1.7 times the company’s entire nine-month FY2026 operating income of $4.433M. He brings a genuine 25-year operating record in this business rather than a promoter’s CV - but the two employers where he spent the bulk of it are a Nasdaq-listed direct-selling supplement company graded elsewhere on this site and a legacy global beauty direct seller graded elsewhere on this site, so the answer to a collapsing franchise was hired from inside the same industry rather than from outside it.

Registered address

Lehi, Utah, USA
A Nasdaq-listed SEC reporting company (LFVN, CIK 0000849146, SIC 2834), audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, with quarterly reviewed financials and product-line revenue disaggregated in XBRL. That is the reason this report reads differently from most on this site: the commission percentage, the gross margin, the account counts and the customer-versus-consultant split are filed figures rather than company statements or trade-press estimates. The corporate provenance is worth recording without overweighting it - the listed vehicle began as a Colorado mineral-exploration shell renamed twice before a supplement business was reversed into it in 2004. It has been a genuine operating business with audited accounts throughout the period examined. It carries zero debt at every reporting date checked, ended FY2025 with $20.201M of cash against $37.317M of total liabilities, and holds an accumulated deficit of $104.147M against $139.962M of paid-in capital - currently profitable and reducing that deficit, but with a long-run history of cumulative losses. Markets: the United States, Mexico, Japan, Australia, Hong Kong, Canada, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, Taiwan, Austria, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, New Zealand and Singapore. Philippines operations closed on 30 June 2025.

Compensation plan

What has to be true for you to get paid

To coverYou need
Stay Active for one month 150 SV
meetable entirely from customer orders under the plan’s own definition, or entirely from your own account; the company does not publish what 150 SV costs in dollars
Trigger the first customer-volume bonus tier 500 CSV in a month
3.3 times the activity requirement, in genuine third-party sales, for a 5% Personal Sales Bonus; the top 20% tier needs 4,000 CSV a month
Earn enough to cover the cost of staying qualified Senior Consultant 1 or above
15.86% of paid consultants, 5.63% of all 54,531 - roughly one participant in eighteen, on a median of $257 a month
Replace a $60,000 salary, gross of everything Managing Consultant 3 or above
median $5,236 a month at MC3; 1.32% of paid consultants and 0.469% of all, about 256 people nationally, with a median 20 months to reach it

Read this twice

This arithmetic is unusual for two opposite reasons, and both belong in the same paragraph. The earnings side is exceptionally well documented: the company publishes a median as well as an average at all fifteen ranks, states its full US consultant population of 54,531, and states that 64.48% of them earned no commission at all in calendar 2024. Among the 35.52% who earned anything, the median for the year was $186. The modal rank is Consultant 1, holding 43.19% of paid consultants at a median of $18 a month, which is $216 for a year. Those figures are the company’s own and they are gross, before any expense. The cost side, by contrast, cannot be computed at all. Being Active requires 150 SV a month, every month; holding rank from C3 upward requires 300 SV of which at most 150 may be personal; a Start Kit is required to enrol; and an annual renewal is free in year one and a "small fee" thereafter. Not one of those has a published dollar figure. The only price relationship the company states in retrievable text is the plan’s worked example of $100 retail against $80 to the consultant. An audited cross-check gives some sense of scale - FY2025 revenue of $228.530M across roughly 132,000 active accounts is $1,731 per account per year, about $144 a month blended across customers and consultants - but that is a derived average, not a price. So the honest statement is this: on the company’s own disclosure, roughly one participant in eighteen reaches a rank whose median monthly commission is in the range that a monthly qualification order plausibly costs, and about 130 people nationally sit at Executive Consultant 1 or above. Two things cut in the company’s favor and should not be buried. The 150 SV can be satisfied entirely by genuine customer orders, in which case the participant is not spending that money at all. And the Personal Sales Bonus, which is where the real money starts for a working seller, keys off customer volume only - so someone with an actual customer base sits materially better than the medians describe.

Run your own numbers

Drag the sliders. Nothing here is stored or sent.

-
Cumulative net, after costs
Retained retail customers -
Commission that month -
Total commissions earned -
Total you paid in -
Net -

Twenty dollars is the 20% retail margin taken from the company’s own worked example - $100 retail against $80 to the consultant - applied to a customer spending $100 a month. The cost line is the 150 Sales Volume a month required to stay Active, modeled at approximately one dollar a point, and that modeling is the weakest number on this page: the company does not publish what 150 SV costs in dollars anywhere, and no server-rendered price for any product could be retrieved, so treat the cost slider as an estimate and not as a company figure. The structural point in this plan’s favor, and it is a real one, is that personal purchases are capped at 150 SV for rank qualification and the 150 SV requirement can be met entirely from customer orders - that is unusual and it is why the unit here can honestly be a customer. Level and generational commissions running nine levels deep with seven generations of depth are excluded, because they are earned from other people’s customers. For calibration, use the audited and disclosed figures rather than this slider: 64.48% of 54,531 United States consultants earned no commission at all in 2024, and the median was $186 for the year. Your own subscription cost of $150/mo is included.

Your money

What it costs to replace this yourself

This exercise cannot be priced, and saying so is more useful than guessing. The LifeVantage storefront renders every price client-side and returned the literal string "Loading…" on every fetch; the Wayback Machine rejected the request with HTTP 403; and third-party retailer pages were either 404 or JavaScript-gated. No retail price on either side of this table is asserted. What can be asserted is structural and it comes from the audited accounts: cost of sales was 19.6% of revenue in FY2025, so roughly one dollar in five of what a customer pays is the physical product. The other four buy the distribution model. And since the flagship’s US patents expired in March 2025, there is no longer any legal barrier to any manufacturer selling the identical blend.

What they sell youWhat you'd use insteadYour cost
Protandim Nrf2 Synergizer - 675 mg five-botanical blend, 30 capletsThe same five extracts bought singly: milk thistle, bacopa, ashwagandha, green tea and turmeric from NOW Foods, Nature’s Bounty, Swanson, Nature Made, Sports Research, Himalaya or Nature’s Wayoff-patent since March 2025; shelf prices not verified
The same, if you want one bottle rather than fiveA combined Nrf2-activator formula from Life Extension, Thorne or Jarrow Formulas - legal to sell in the identical composition since the patent lapsednot verified
Any of the above, at the cheapest possible entryPharmacy and grocery own-brands: CVS Health, Walgreens, Target Up&Up, Costco Kirkland Signature, Trader Joe’s, Amazon Basic Carenot verified
MB Core - berberine, chromium picolinate, yerba mate, matcha, hesperidinBerberine-led formulas from Thorne (Berberine-500), NOW Foods (Berberine Glucose Support), Sports Research, Swanson, Life Extension or GNC, plus chromium picolinate from Nature Made or NOW Foodsnot verified
AXIO nootropic energy drink mixCelsius, Alani Nu, C4, Ghost Energy, or own-brand energy powders from Costco, Walmart and Trader Joe’snot verified
TrueScience TrueRenew "retinol alternative" firming complexCeraVe Skin Renewing Retinol Serum, The Ordinary Granactive Retinoid, RoC Retinol Correxion, Neutrogena Rapid Wrinkle Repair or Olay Regenerist Retinol 24, all sold in ordinary pharmaciesnot verified
TrueScience Liquid CollagenVital Proteins, Sports Research or Costco Kirkland Signature marine and bovine collagennot verified
The curated monthly "system" experienceA direct-to-consumer subscription from Ritual, Care/of, Seed, Persona or AG1 - no rank, no volume requirement, cancel any timenot verified
150 SV a month to stay Active, every month, indefinitelyBuying what you actually take, when you actually run out$0 of obligation
Total as sold
Not published - the storefront renders every price client-side and no company document states the SV-to-dollar ratio
Total, built yourself
Openly priced on any shelf, from six named mainstream brands, four own-brands and five direct-to-consumer subscriptions

Price-to-value

The honest verdict is that the price comparison could not be completed, and that this is itself the finding. A prospective participant cannot compute what 150 SV a month costs them, cannot find the Start Kit price on a server-rendered page, and cannot learn the renewal fee - while every comparator above prints its price on the shelf. What the audited accounts do establish is that 19.6% of revenue is cost of goods, so the product itself is roughly a fifth of what is paid; that the flagship has been off-patent in the United States since March 2025, removing the last defensible exclusivity argument for a premium; and that a buyer purchasing the identical botanical actives from a named mainstream retailer or an own-brand pays a manufacturer’s margin and a retailer’s margin and nothing else. The 30-day 100% refund and the 12-month buyback are genuine and mean a dissatisfied buyer is not stuck - which is more than most of this category offers.

Odds of profit

Three operators, five horizons

Probability of cumulative net profit

Hover any point for median, top decile and bottom quartile.

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%3 mo6 mo1 yr3 yr5 yr 3% 63% 19%
The friend who signed up - joins to support someone, holds 150 SV a month, a handful of customers at mostThe one who actually sells - builds real customer volume, reaches Senior Consultant 2 - 5.22% of paid consultants, 1.85% of allFull-time builder - 30+ hrs/wk aiming at the executive ranks; 0.238% of all US consultants, about 130 people nationally, ever reach EC1

The friend who signed up

joins to support someone, holds 150 SV a month, a handful of customers at most

HorizonP(profit)Median
3 mo 4% −$470
6 mo 4% −$940
1 yr 4% −$1,880
3 yr 3% −$5,600
5 yr 3% −$9,400

The one who actually sells

builds real customer volume, reaches Senior Consultant 2 - 5.22% of paid consultants, 1.85% of all

HorizonP(profit)Median
3 mo 22% −$120
6 mo 45% +$700
1 yr 58% +$3,200
3 yr 62% +$9,600
5 yr 63% +$16,000

Full-time builder

30+ hrs/wk aiming at the executive ranks; 0.238% of all US consultants, about 130 people nationally, ever reach EC1

HorizonP(profit)Median
3 mo 6% −$2,200
6 mo 10% −$4,300
1 yr 14% −$8,000
3 yr 18% −$18,000
5 yr 19% −$24,000

Methodology note. These are modeled outcome ranges, not claims and not predictions, and the modeling is unusually lopsided here - so it is worth being precise about which half is anchored and which half is not. ANCHORED to the company’s own US Income Disclosure Statement for calendar 2024: that 64.48% of 54,531 US consultants earned no commission at all; that the median among earners was $186 for the year and the average for a "typical Consultant" was $683; that 43.19% of paid consultants sit at rank Consultant 1 with a median of $18 a month; that Senior Consultant 2 has a median of $444 a month and is 5.22% of paid consultants; that Executive Consultant 1 has a median of $11,449 a month, is 0.36% of paid consultants and 0.238% of all, and takes a median 30 months to reach. Anchored also to the published plan: the 150 SV activity requirement, the 300 SV rank requirement above C3 with a 150 SV personal cap, the 500 CSV floor on the Personal Sales Bonus, the 20% consultant discount implied by the $100/$80 worked example, and the nine-level and seven-generation structure. MODELED by us, and flagged: the entire cost side. The company does not publish the dollar value of 150 SV, the Start Kit price or the renewal fee, so the expense line in every row above is a modeled band derived from the only two anchors available - a $190 free-gift threshold on subscription orders and an audited $1,731 of revenue per active account per year. Treat the dollar amounts as orders of magnitude, not as figures. Also modeled: the share of each cohort in cumulative profit, and the cohort definitions, which the company does not segment. One calibration that cuts the company’s way and must not be lost: the 150 SV can be met entirely from genuine customer orders, and the Personal Sales Bonus keys off customer volume only - so a participant with a real customer base is not carrying the cost line at all, and the second profile above is what that looks like.

Go-to-market

Where you are actually allowed to promote this

Platform policy reads, not verifications. Check every one before you spend a dollar - enforcement changes faster than the written policy does.

Channel
Status
Notes
Paid search and pay-per-click advertising
PROHIBITED OUTRIGHT
Policies §8.5.17: consultants "are not permitted to purchase, arrange for, or otherwise use Paid Search Sponsored links or pay-per-click ads (PPC)." This cuts both ways and both should be said. For the company it is brand protection, stopping thousands of contractors bidding against each other and against the corporate account. For the participant it closes the single most scalable customer-acquisition channel available to a small operator and forces every consultant back onto warm-market recruiting and organic social - which is precisely the mechanism that turns a sales opportunity into a friends-and-family opportunity.
Trademark and domain use
PROHIBITED
Policies §8.2: consultants "may not use or attempt to register ‘LifeVantage,’ ‘Protandim’" in domain names or in internet and search-engine keywords. Combined with the PPC ban, a consultant cannot own a branded domain, cannot bid on the brand they are selling, and cannot build a marketing asset that has any resale value.
Income claims
RESTRICTED, WITH A MANDATORY DISCLOSURE
Policies §8.3.3 bars "inappropriate, false, deceptive or misleading claims regarding the income opportunity," and the Income Disclosure Statement itself carries the rule that "a copy of this Income Disclosure Statement must accompany any representations of potential compensation, income, or earnings." That is the correct rule and it is stated in the right place. TINA.org’s 2017 and 2023 income-claim databases indicate it is not universally followed in the field.
Product and health claims, including personal testimonials
PROHIBITED OUTSIDE OFFICIAL MATERIALS
Policies §8.3.2 bars "no claims, which include personal testimonials, as to therapeutic, curative or beneficial properties" except those in official company materials, and consultants may not claim the products treat or prevent disease. Sweeping personal testimonials into the ban is the stricter and legally correct reading, since a testimonial is a claim. For a supplement company whose flagship has circulated in patient communities as a putative treatment, this is exactly the right rule.
Cross-recruiting while under agreement
PROHIBITED
Policies §6.1.1: consultants "may not directly or indirectly Recruit other LifeVantage Consultants for any other Network Marketing Venture." Standard for the category and defensible on its own terms.
Recruiting after you leave
BARRED FOR TWO YEARS
Policies §6.1.2: following cancellation or termination, "for a period of two (2) years thereafter, a former Consultant may not Recruit any LifeVantage Consultant." Two years is at the long end of the range for this category and it is the single most restrictive term in the document. Someone who leaves cannot, for two years, invite anyone they met through the business to join anything else.
Your downline genealogy data
OWNED EXCLUSIVELY BY THE COMPANY
Policies §7.1: Marketing Organization Activity Reports are "owned exclusively by LifeVantage." The organization a long-tenured consultant spends years assembling is the company’s property. Whether the consultant owns their own customer list is not addressed anywhere in the retrievable policy text.
Buying leads
NOT ADDRESSED IN THE POLICIES
No lead-purchasing rule could be located in the retrievable text of the Policies & Procedures. Given that paid search is banned outright, whether bought leads are permitted is a question a prospective participant should get answered in writing before spending anything.
Organic social and personal network
THE ONLY CHANNEL LEFT
With paid search banned, trademarks unusable and no branded domain permitted, the permitted acquisition surface is the consultant’s own network and unpaid social posting. That is a legitimate way to sell, and plenty of people do it - but it is a channel that does not compound, cannot be bought into, and cannot be sold on when you stop.
The evidence

Red flags and green flags

Red flags

15
1The customer-to-consultant ratio is deteriorating
From 1.80:1 in FY2019 to 1.59:1 in FY2025 to 1.42:1 at 31 March 2026. Active customers are falling more than twice as fast as active consultants - down 27.3% against 13.5% year on year. This is the single most structurally relevant trend in the file and it points the wrong way: a direct seller whose customer base shrinks faster than its distributor base is becoming more internally consumed over time.
264.48% of US consultants earned no commission at all in calendar 2024
Of a stated population of 54,531, roughly 35,161 people earned nothing. Among the 35.52% who earned anything, the median was $186 for the year. Both figures come from the company’s own disclosure, and both are gross before any cost.
3Revenue is flat across seven years on an account base 41% smaller
FY2019: $225.958M on roughly 185,000 active accounts, $1,221 per account. FY2025: $228.530M on roughly 132,000, $1,731 per account - up 42%. The business has been sustained by extracting more from fewer people.
4A one-product growth spike that reversed inside five quarters
The MindBody GLP-1 System line ran $15.7M in FY2024 to $56.2M in FY2025 to $22.6M over nine months of FY2026 and $6.3M in the third quarter alone, down 61.2% year on year. It accounted for 64% of the entire $33.2M nine-month revenue decline. FY2025’s headline 14.2% growth was almost entirely one weight-management product launched into a news cycle.
5Active accounts down 22.1% year on year
109,000 at 31 March 2026 - 45,000 consultants and 64,000 customers - against 140,000 a year earlier. The company’s own risk factor, written in September 2025, uses the phrase "may decline further."
6A monthly volume requirement with no published dollar value
150 SV a month to be Active, 300 SV to hold rank above C3. The plan document, the perks PDF and the enrollment page all state the volume; none states the price. A participant cannot compute their own cost of participation from any published company document, and neither can this review.
7Up to 13% of global commissionable volume is reserved by rule for the top of the plan
The Leadership Match can pay out up to 9% of monthly global CV and the Leadership Pool is funded at 4%, both restricted to Managing Consultant 2 and above - 2.32% of paid consultants and 0.82% of all US consultants. Roughly one dollar in eight of the global bonus budget is ring-fenced for fewer than one in a hundred participants, before level commissions are counted.
8A leg-balance rule that structurally forces recruiting width
The Maximum Volume Rule caps any single leg at 45% of the group volume requirement from Managing Consultant 3 upward - 67,500 against 150,000, and 135,000 against 300,000 at EC1. You cannot advance by finding one very productive seller; you must build at least three independent branches.
9The 70% rule counts personal and family consumption toward the 70%
The plan states a consultant "may not place a new order in any given month unless 70% of all orders from previous months have been sold or consumed through personal/family use." A 70% rule that counts self-consumption prevents warehouse-loading; it does not establish retail demand.
10The flagship efficacy claim rests on a 2006 uncontrolled study
"Reduces oxidative stress by 40% in just 30 days" traces to a single open-label, single-arm, before-and-after paper co-authored by the formulation’s co-inventor and a co-founder, with no placebo arm and no randomisation described, using an assay known to be non-specific and drift-prone. It is twenty years old and it is still the load-bearing human study for the headline number.
11The only double-blind placebo-controlled human trial was company-funded and null
PLOS ONE 2016, n=38 runners over 90 days, funded by LifeVantage: the supplement "did not (1) alter 5-km running time, (2) lower TBARS at rest." The one positive was a subgroup finding in those aged 35 and over. A 2026 controlled study in 40 horses at up to six times the human dose likewise found it "did not impact antioxidant status or plasma cytokines."
12US patents on the flagship expired in March 2025
Stated in the FY2025 Form 10-K. The five-botanical blend is now generic in the United States and anyone may make and sell it, which removes the last defensible exclusivity argument for the price difference against ordinary shelf products.
13A supplement named after a prescription drug class
The MindBody GLP-1 System contains berberine, chromium picolinate, yerba mate, matcha and hesperidin. It contains no GLP-1 receptor agonist. To a general audience in 2026, "GLP-1" is the name of a pharmaceutical category, and a product name is a claim.
14A chief executive retiring in the same 8-K as a guidance cut
The Form 8-K filed 4 February 2026 carried both the Q2 FY2026 earnings release, cutting FY2026 revenue guidance from $225–240M to $185–200M - a 17.2% reduction at the midpoint - and the retirement release. Three months of interim leadership followed, run by a sitting director of 14 years’ standing at $45,833 a month, while the company was still tracking below the reduced range.
15An incoming package of roughly $8.35M against nine-month operating income of $4.4M
$850,000 base, a bonus of up to 100% of salary with FY2027 guaranteed at $425,000, $2.8M of RSUs and $4.7M of PSUs, and 18 months of severance enhanced by 50% on a change of control. The equity grant alone is 1.7 times the company’s entire nine-month FY2026 operating income. A guaranteed bonus at a company that has just cut guidance is a governance point worth making.

Green flags

10
1The plan is demonstrably funded out of margin, not out of recruit inflow
And this is audited rather than modeled. FY2025: $228.530M of revenue at an 80.4% gross margin, $102.260M - 44.75% - paid into the field, $69.207M of SG&A, and still $12.199M of operating income and $9.805M of net income. Nine months of FY2026 on a 19% smaller base: 42.50% paid into the field, $4.433M of operating income, $5.5M of operating cash flow, zero debt at every reporting date checked.
2The income disclosure publishes a median as well as an average, and states the denominator
A median and an average at every one of fifteen ranks, monthly and annual; the total US consultant population of 54,531; and an explicit statement that 64.48% earned no commissions during the period, with a warning that the rank table "does not reflect those who earned zero commissions." Most graded companies publish an average only, silently exclude non-earners, and never state the denominator. This one does all three of the right things.
3Personal purchases are capped at 150 SV toward rank qualification
The plan is explicit: "For qualification purposes only, you can count up to 150 Personal Sales Volume toward your monthly Rank qualifications." A hard ceiling on how much of your own buying can count toward advancement is a genuine anti-inventory-loading control and it is rarer in this category than it should be.
4The activity requirement can be met entirely from customer orders
The plan defines an Active Consultant as one who "met the 150 Sales Volume Requirement in that month, which can be fulfilled solely through Customer orders." From rank C3 upward, the 300 SV requirement with a 150 SV personal cap means at least 150 SV a month must be genuine third-party customer volume to hold rank.
5No commission is paid for enrolling anyone
The 10-K states it plainly: "we do not pay commissions for enrolling independent consultants." The Sharing Bonus pays 10% of a new enrollee’s sales volume, capped at $100 per consultant, with a Doubler capped at a further $100 - a volume payment rather than a headhunting fee. The cap is a real constraint on what a sponsor can extract from a single recruit.
6The main working bonus keys off customer volume only
The Personal Sales Bonus pays 5%, 10%, 15% or 20% on Commissionable Volume at thresholds of 500, 1,000, 2,000 and 4,000 monthly Customer Sales Volume. Personal purchases do not trigger it at any tier. You have to sell to non-participants at real volume before this part of the plan pays anything.
7Customers are counted, defined and reported quarterly - and they outnumber consultants
45,000 active consultants against 64,000 active customers at 31 March 2026, with the definitions in the release footnote: consultants have "purchased product in the prior three months for retail or personal consumption," customers "for personal consumption only." Very few graded companies publish this split at all, let alone every quarter with a stated definition.
8Return and buyback terms above the category norm
Thirty days, 100% refund less shipping. Between 30 days and 12 months, unopened resalable stock with six or more months of shelf life left is refunded at 100% less a 10% restocking fee. Subscriptions cancel self-service from the account area. The first year’s renewal is free. All published, all checkable.
9A near-empty government-regulatory file, across sixteen years as a public filer
No FTC complaint, consent order or civil penalty action. No SEC enforcement matter. No outstanding FDA letter, per an affirmative statement in the FY2025 10-K. No state attorney general action located. No restatement, no disclosed material weakness, no probable loss contingencies. The one pyramid-scheme class action was putative, never certified, and ended in voluntary dismissal with prejudice with no findings either way.
10One genuinely independent positive scientific result
The National Institute on Aging Interventions Testing Program - a three-site, blinded, NIH-run protocol in genetically heterogeneous mice, explicitly designed to resist sponsor influence - found the formulation extended male median lifespan (Aging Cell, 2016). It is a mouse result and it says nothing about the human marketing claim, but it is a real independent positive from the highest-quality protocol in the field, and it is why the product score is not lower.
What would move this grade

We would like to be wrong about this

Upward

  • Publication of the SV-to-dollar conversion, the Start Kit price and the annual renewal fee, so that a prospective participant can compute their own cost of qualification from a company document rather than from a sponsor’s estimate.
  • The customer-to-consultant ratio turning back up and holding above roughly 1.6:1, with active accounts stabilising - the single most structurally meaningful improvement available, and one the company already measures and publishes quarterly.
  • Retirement of the quantified "40% in 30 days" claim unless an independent, adequately powered, double-blind human trial reproduces it; retirement or renaming of the GLP-1 product designation; and removal of the two-year post-termination non-recruit covenant.

Downward

  • The customer-to-consultant ratio falling below roughly 1.2:1, at which point the customer defense becomes arithmetically thin, or a further fall in the zero-earner or median figures in the next income disclosure.
  • Any FTC, state attorney general or self-regulatory action on income or health claims, an FDA warning letter, or a restatement or material-weakness disclosure in the pending FY2026 Form 10-K.
  • Loss of profitability, or debt taken on to fund the plan - the moment commissions stop being covered by product margin, the strongest number on this card collapses and the whole grade moves with it.
The better trade

Grade is C at 6.37 - the second-highest score published on this site, and the reason is transparency rather than opportunity.

Lead with what is real, because here it is unusually real. LifeVantage is a Nasdaq-listed SEC reporting company audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, with no restatement, no disclosed material weakness, no probable loss contingencies and zero debt. That matters for a specific reason: the hardest number in this entire category - what share of revenue actually reaches the field - is a filed, audited line item here rather than an estimate. It was $102.260M, or 44.75% of revenue, in FY2025, and 42.50% across the first nine months of FY2026, funded out of a gross margin of roughly 80%, with the company still profitable and generating cash after paying it. The plan is not being paid for out of new-recruit money. Alongside that, the income disclosure publishes a median as well as an average at all fifteen ranks, states the full US consultant population of 54,531, and says outright that 64.48% of them earned nothing. And the plan itself contains two structural provisions that are genuinely uncommon: personal purchases are capped at 150 SV toward rank qualification no matter what rank you are chasing, and the 150 SV monthly activity requirement is one "which can be fulfilled solely through Customer orders." There is no per-head enrollment commission at all. In sixteen years as a public filer there has been no FTC action, no SEC enforcement, no state attorney general matter located and no outstanding FDA letter.

Now the numbers that same company publishes. Of 54,531 US consultants in calendar 2024, roughly 35,161 earned no commission. Among those who did, the median for the year was $186 and the average for a "typical Consultant" was $683 - both gross, before the cost of holding 150 SV of volume a month, which the company does not price in any document this review could retrieve. Forty-three percent of paid consultants sit at the second rank with a median of $18 a month. Roughly one participant in eighteen reaches a rank whose median plausibly covers the cost of staying qualified, and about 130 people nationally sit at Executive Consultant 1 or above. Meanwhile the business is contracting: revenue for nine months of FY2026 was $140.209M against $173.416M, down 19.15%; active accounts are 109,000, down 22.1% year on year; and the customer-to-consultant ratio has fallen from 1.80:1 in FY2019 to 1.42:1, with customers leaving twice as fast as consultants.

The product file is the third element and it has to be read carefully, because it is neither the fraud some readers expect nor the science the marketing implies. These are real manufactured goods, shipped and returnable, and there is one genuinely independent positive result of real weight - the NIH Interventions Testing Program found the formulation extended male median lifespan in mice under a blinded three-site protocol built to resist sponsor influence. Against that, the flagship claim that the product "reduces oxidative stress by 40% in just 30 days" rests on a single 2006 open-label, single-arm study co-authored by the formulation’s co-inventor. The only double-blind placebo-controlled human trial in the literature was funded by LifeVantage itself and was null on its primary endpoints, finding no change in 5-km running time and no reduction in resting TBARS. A 2026 controlled study in horses at six times the human dose found nothing. And the US patents expired in March 2025, so the identical blend can now be made and sold by anybody. Add the weight-management line named after a prescription drug class, which fell 61.2% in a single quarter and took 64% of the nine-month revenue decline with it, and three watchdog-nonprofit letters over eight years. None of that is a regulatory finding. All of it is a claim that outran its evidence.

1

Read the income disclosure before the compensation plan

The plan document tells you what is possible. The disclosure tells you what happened. It is published, it is not long, and it says 64.48% of 54,531 people earned nothing, the median earner made $186, and 43.19% of those who were paid sit at a rank whose median is $18 a month. The company deserves credit for printing all three of those numbers. Read them before you read anything about rank advancement.

2

Ask what 150 SV costs, in dollars, in writing

It is the single most consequential figure in the file and it is not published anywhere - not in the plan, not in the perks PDF, not on the enrollment page. Neither is the Start Kit price, nor the renewal fee beyond "a small fee." Ask your sponsor for all three in writing before signing anything, and treat a vague answer as the answer. You cannot underwrite a business whose recurring cost you cannot compute.

3

If you want the product, buy the product

The customer route needs no Start Kit, no monthly volume, no rank and no two-year post-termination restriction, and it carries a 30-day 100% refund and a 12-month buyback that are genuinely better than most of this category offers. And since the flagship’s US patents expired in March 2025, the identical five-botanical composition can legally be sold by any manufacturer - so a buyer who simply wants milk thistle, bacopa, ashwagandha, green tea and turmeric can also compare what NOW Foods, Nature Made, Swanson, Thorne, Life Extension or a pharmacy own-brand charge for the same actives.

4

Sell into the category without the plan

Supplement search intent is enormous and almost entirely un-served by honest, sourced comparison - which is precisely what a consultant here is contractually prevented from producing, because paid search is banned outright, the trademarks cannot be used in a domain, and product claims outside official materials including personal testimonials are prohibited. A merchant business built on ingredient comparison, price transparency and citation of the actual trial literature needs no kit, no monthly volume, no rank and no permission, and it produces an asset you own and can sell.

The commission percentage is audited and the median is published - which is why the good marks here are secure, and why 64.48% earning nothing is not an allegation but a filed fact.
Scorecard

Nine dimensions, weighted

Comp structure & KoscotDoes the plan pay for recruitment or for sales to real customers?
20%
6.5
Two structural rules earn this number and they should be stated plainly, because they are unusual. First, the plan caps how much of your own buying can count toward advancement: "For qualification purposes only, you can count up to 150 Personal Sales Volume toward your monthly Rank qualifications." Second, the monthly 150 SV activity requirement is, in the plan’s own words, one "which can be fulfilled solely through Customer orders." A hard cap on self-purchase for rank, combined with an activity test meetable entirely from third-party sales, is a genuine anti-inventory-loading control and it is rarer than it should be. Add that the 10-K states "we do not pay commissions for enrolling independent consultants" - the Sharing Bonus pays 10% of a new enrollee’s sales volume capped at $100 per consultant, which is a volume payment, not a per-head fee - and that the Personal Sales Bonus (5% to 20%) triggers on Customer Sales Volume only. From rank C3 upward the 300 SV requirement means at least 150 SV a month must be genuine customer volume. That is real retail machinery. It is bolted onto a conventional nine-level plus seven-generation depth structure whose Maximum Volume Rule caps any single leg at 45% of the group requirement at the executive ranks - a rule that forces recruiting width rather than selling depth - and which reserves up to 13% of global commissionable volume by rule for MC2 and above (Leadership Match up to 9%, Leadership Pool 4%), a group that is 0.82% of all US consultants. What holds this below 7 is the direction of travel: the customer-to-consultant ratio has fallen from 1.80:1 in FY2019 to 1.59:1 in FY2025 to 1.42:1 in March 2026, with customers leaving twice as fast as consultants. A direct seller whose customer base shrinks faster than its distributor base is becoming more internally consumed over time, whatever the plan document says.
Securities exposureAny passive return on capital? Howey, staking, tokens, withdrawal friction.
15%
10.0
This needs saying in terms because a reader who sees "SEC filer" will expect the opposite conclusion. Being a Nasdaq-listed SEC reporting company is a transparency fact, not a securities-exposure fact, and it moves this dimension in neither direction. What this dimension asks is a single question: is capital taken in from the participant against a promised return? Here it is not. There is no token, no staking, no pool, no revenue share on capital, no managed account, no withdrawal gate and no passive-return promise of any kind. A consultant buys product at roughly a 20% discount and is paid on sales volume. The unlicensed-securities count pleaded in the 2018 class action was dismissed in December 2019 and was in any event a pleading, not a finding. Listing status belongs to the owner and partecon dimensions - audited accounts, an independent board, a published income disclosure - and it is treated there. It is not evidence about this line, in either direction, and a 10 here says nothing about whether the opportunity is a good one.
Ownership & track recordWho runs it, what did they run before, and what happened to it.
15%
7.0
The transparency is real and it is the reason this is the second-highest score on the card. Audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP; the FY2025 Form 10-K cover page carries both the error-correction and clawback-recovery checkboxes unchecked, meaning no restatement in the period examined; the commitments and contingencies note states there were "no probable loss contingencies requiring accrual or disclosures" at 30 June 2025; zero debt at every reporting date checked; and a majority-independent board with genuine consumer-products depth (a retired SC Johnson executive), listed-supplement-industry depth (the CEO of FitLife Brands, a Nasdaq-listed mainstream supplement company) and private-equity discipline (an operating partner at Welsh Carson). Against that: four chief executives since 2011 and a fifth arriving in August 2026; a retirement announced in the same 8-K that carried a 17.2% cut to the revenue guidance midpoint; three months during which a director of 14 years’ standing ran the company at $45,833 a month while it was missing that reduced range; a $104.1M accumulated deficit across the company’s life; and an incoming package of roughly $8.35M, including a guaranteed $425,000 FY2027 bonus, at a company that earned $4.433M of operating income in nine months. Governance disclosure of this quality is worth a lot in this category. Governance stability is what is missing.
Product reality & demandWould a rational buyer purchase this if no income offer existed?
12%
5.5
These are real manufactured goods, shipped, returnable and re-purchased, with a genuine 30-record scientific literature behind the flagship and one independent positive result of real weight: the National Institute on Aging Interventions Testing Program - a three-site, blinded, NIH-run protocol explicitly designed to resist sponsor influence - found the formulation extended median lifespan in male mice (Aging Cell, 2016). The dog product carries the National Animal Supplement Council Quality Seal, a real third-party mark in a category that mostly has none. Now the deductions, which are heavy. The only double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled human trial in the set was funded by LifeVantage itself (PLOS ONE 2016, n=38 runners, 90 days) and it was null on its primary endpoints: it "did not (1) alter 5-km running time, (2) lower TBARS at rest." The flagship claim that the product "reduces oxidative stress by 40% in just 30 days" traces to a single 2006 paper that was open-label, single-arm and before-and-after with no placebo group, co-authored by the formulation’s co-inventor and a co-founder. A 2026 controlled study in 40 horses at up to six times the human dose found the supplement "did not impact antioxidant status or plasma cytokines." And the US patents on the flagship expired in March 2025, so nothing now prevents any manufacturer from selling the same five-botanical blend. No therapeutic claim is made or endorsed anywhere in this report.
Participant economicsReal cost in, realistic money out, and whether they publish the numbers.
10%
4.0
Start with the credit, because it is genuinely earned and almost nothing else on this site does it. The income disclosure publishes a median alongside an average, at every one of fifteen ranks, monthly and annual; it states the total US consultant population, 54,531; and it says in its own words that 64.48% of them earned no commissions at all during calendar 2024. It also warns explicitly that the rank table "does not reflect those who earned zero commissions during the Period." Three separate disclosure choices most graded companies do not make. Now the figures, without softening. Of 54,531 US consultants, roughly 35,161 earned nothing. Among those who did earn, the median twelve-month figure was $186 and the average for a "typical Consultant" - defined by the company as ranks Consultant through Managing Consultant 3 - was $683. Both are gross, before any cost. The modal rank is Consultant 1, holding 43.19% of all paid consultants, with a median of $18 a month. Restoring the full denominator, Senior Consultant 1 and above is 5.63% of all consultants, Executive Consultant 1 and above is 0.238% - about 130 people nationally - and Presidential Consultant is roughly eight people. Against that, the participant must hold 150 SV of volume every month, and the company does not publish what 150 SV costs in dollars in any document this review could retrieve. The active account base is 109,000, down 22.1% year on year: 45,000 consultants and 64,000 customers.
Price-to-valueWhat the same capability costs on the open market.
8%
3.0
The company’s own audited accounts settle this. Cost of sales was 19.6% of revenue in FY2025 - roughly one dollar in five of what a customer pays is the physical product, with the other four buying the distribution model, the field payout and the corporate overhead. The only price relationship the company publishes in server-rendered text is the compensation plan’s worked example of a product at $100 retail and $80 to the consultant, a 20% consultant discount. And the exclusivity argument is gone: the FY2025 Form 10-K states that "U.S. patents related to Protandim Nrf2 Synergizer expired in March 2025," so the identical 675 mg blend of milk thistle, bacopa, ashwagandha, green tea and turmeric extracts can now be made and sold by anyone. Equivalent single-ingredient and combination formulations sit on ordinary shelves from NOW Foods, Nature’s Bounty, Swanson, Nature Made, Sports Research, Life Extension, Thorne and Jarrow Formulas, and in pharmacy and grocery own-brands from CVS Health, Walgreens, Target Up&Up and Costco Kirkland Signature. This review could not verify any current retail price on either side of that comparison - the storefront renders every price client-side and returned "Loading…" - so no price claim is made here, and the point rests on the audited cost ratio and the patent expiry instead. Held above 2 only because the goods are real, shipped, and refundable at 100% for 30 days.
Payout sustainabilityCan the company fund the plan out of margin, or only out of inflow?
8%
8.0
This is the strongest number on the card and the evidence behind it is better than anything else on this site. Commissions and incentives are a filed, audited line item on the face of the consolidated statement of operations, signed under Sections 302 and 906 and audited annually by Deloitte: $102.260M in FY2025, or 44.75% of revenue, and $59.591M or 42.50% across the first nine months of FY2026. It is not an estimate, not reverse-engineered from a plan document, and not a company marketing statement. That payout is funded out of a gross margin of roughly 80% - 80.4% in FY2025, 77.4% over nine months of FY2026 - and after paying it the company still produced $12.199M of operating income and $9.805M of net income in FY2025, and $4.433M and $3.793M respectively over nine months of FY2026. It carries zero debt, generated $5.5M of operating cash flow in nine months, raised its quarterly dividend 11.1% to $0.05 and repurchased about 250,000 shares. Whatever else is wrong here, the compensation plan is not being paid for out of new-recruit money; it is paid for out of product margin. The deductions that keep this off a 9: the payout ratio fell 2.25 points as revenue fell 19%, operating margin compressed from 5.34% to 3.16%, and up to 13% of global commissionable volume is reserved by rule for people who are 0.82% of the field.
Marketing conductIncome claims, regulator run-ins, hype, deadline stacking.
7%
4.5
The claims are the problem, and the loudest one is quantified. "Reduces oxidative stress by 40% in just 30 days" is a specific efficacy claim with a magnitude and a timeframe - not a structure/function claim - and its only support is the uncontrolled 2006 study, which the company’s own funded double-blind trial failed to reproduce on resting TBARS. Alongside it, "produces enzymes capable of neutralizing more than 1,000,000 free radicals" is derived from laboratory enzyme turnover constants rather than any measured outcome in a person, and an SEC filing states that another product "has been shown to double sirtuin activity in just 24 hours" with no citation and no corresponding paper in the 30-record literature. Separately, the weight-management line is called the MindBody GLP-1 System - naming a berberine, chromium, matcha and hesperidin supplement after a prescription drug class. A product name is a claim. And TINA.org, a watchdog nonprofit, has written three times: November 2016 on health claims, December 2017 on income claims, and February 2024 conveying 2023 income-claim findings from a sweep of 100 direct sellers in which 98 were found to be in the same posture. Those letters are a nonprofit’s analysis, not a government action, and the company responded on the record each time. The offsets are real: policies ban disease claims and testimonials outright, require the income disclosure to accompany any earnings representation, and prohibit paid search entirely. And in sixteen years as a public filer there has been no government action of any kind - no FTC complaint, consent order or civil penalty action, no state attorney general matter located, no SEC enforcement, no outstanding FDA letter. Say that plainly; it is a real credibility point.
Operator terms & exitWho owns the customer, what you forfeit, how hard it is to leave.
5%
5.5
The consumer-facing exit terms are genuinely above the category baseline and they are published rather than buried. Returns within 30 days receive "a 100% refund, minus any shipping and handling costs." Between 30 days and 12 months, unopened resalable product with six or more months of shelf life left is refunded at 100% less a 10% handling and restocking fee. Subscriptions cancel self-service from the account area. The first year’s renewal is free. Those are real, checkable protections and most of this category does worse. The participant-facing terms are where it turns. A former consultant "may not Recruit any LifeVantage Consultant" for two years after cancellation or termination - a two-year post-termination non-recruit covenant is at the long end of the range for this category and is the single most restrictive clause in the document. Marketing Organization Activity Reports, the genealogy a consultant spends years building, are "owned exclusively by LifeVantage." Paid search and pay-per-click are banned outright and the trademarks cannot be used in a domain, so no marketing asset can be built or sold. The renewal fee amount is not published. Reward credits expire 180 days after issue and cap at $50 a transaction. Neither an arbitration clause nor a class-action waiver could be located in the retrievable policy text, which is recorded as a retrieval gap rather than as an absence.
Weighted composite
6.37
C

Dimension profile

Further from center is better. Hover any point.

Comp structure& Koscot 6.5 Securitiesexposure 10.0 Ownership &track record 7.0 Product reality& demand 5.5 Participanteconomics 4.0 Price-to-value 3.0 Payoutsustainability 8.0 Marketingconduct 4.5 Operator terms& exit 5.5

Hard caps that bind here

Non-binding ceiling at C nothing in this file binds. The weighted arithmetic on the nine dimensions lands at 6.38 on its own, squarely in the C band, and the published grade is set by those nine numbers alone - the ceiling describes where the arithmetic already sits rather than pulling it down. It is worth being explicit about what this grade does NOT rest on, because a reader arriving from a search engine will assume otherwise. There is no FTC action of any kind - no complaint, no consent order, no civil penalty action, no administrative proceeding. There is no FDA warning letter located, and the FY2025 Form 10-K affirmatively states there were no open FDA letters at 30 June 2025. There is no SEC enforcement matter, no litigation release and no investigation located, despite sixteen years of public filings. There is no state attorney general action, no assurance of voluntary compliance and no consent order. There is no restatement and no disclosed material weakness. There is no class-action finding: the one pyramid-scheme class action was putative, never certified, and ended in a voluntary dismissal with prejudice with no judgment either way. And there is no adjudicated pyramid claim of any kind, anywhere, ever. What would have to be true for a cap to bite here is specific and testable: the customer-to-consultant ratio falling below roughly 1.2:1, at which point the customer defense becomes arithmetically thin; a regulator opening a formal action on income or health claims; or the plan ceasing to be funded out of gross margin. At 1.42:1 and 42.50% of revenue paid from an ~80% margin, none of those has happened.

The lowest binding cap wins, regardless of the weighted arithmetic.

Sources consulted

What we read

Every source below links to the document itself. Tier 1 is a primary record - the company’s own plan, policy or disclosure, a court filing, a regulator’s decision or an SEC filing. Tier 2 is a self-regulatory or secondary regulator record, tier 3 reporting or academic work, tier 4 an open-market price comparison. Where a document can be moved or withdrawn, an archived copy is linked beside it. If a link is dead when you try it, that is a correction we want.

  1. LifeVantage Corporation Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended 30 June 2025, filed 4 September 2025 (accession 0000849146-25-000068)
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2025-09-04archived copy

    LifeVantage Corporation Form 10-K, fiscal year ended 30 June 2025, filed 4 September 2025 (accession 0000849146-25-000068) - consolidated statements of operations (revenue $228.530M, cost of sales $44.864M, commissions and incentives $102.260M, operating income $12.199M, net income $9.805M), balance sheet (zero debt, $20.201M cash, $104.147M accumulated deficit), commitments and contingencies note ("no probable loss contingencies"), revenue by product line and by market, corporate history, the March 2025 Protandim patent expiry, the FDA statement "there were no open letters from the FDA to us as of June 30, 2025," and Exhibit 23.1 (Deloitte & Touche LLP consent)

  2. EDGAR filing index for the LifeVantage FY2025 Form 10-K, including Exhibit 23.1 (Deloitte & Touche LLP consent) and Exhibit 21.1 (subsidiaries)
    SEC filingTier 1U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, EDGAR · 2025-09-04archived copy
  3. LifeVantage Corporation Form 10-Q for the quarter ended 31 March 2026, filed 6 May 2026 (accession 0001193125-26-208922)
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-05-06archived copy

    LifeVantage Form 10-Q for the quarter ended 31 March 2026, filed 6 May 2026 (accession 0001193125-26-208922) - nine-month revenue $140.209M against $173.416M (−19.15%), commissions and incentives $59.591M (42.50%), operating income $4.433M, net income $3.793M, revenue by product line, and the LoveBiome acquisitions note ($4.243M consideration, $2.2M allocated to a "consultant sales force" intangible, earnout written down $0.4M)

  4. LifeVantage Q4 and fiscal 2025 earnings release, Exhibit 99.1 to Form 8-K of 4 September 2025 - initial FY2026 revenue guidance of $225–240M and the quarterly active account counts with their stated definitions
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2025-09-04archived copy

    LifeVantage Forms 8-K of 4 September 2025, 4 November 2025, 4 February 2026 and 6 May 2026 - initial FY2026 guidance of $225–240M, its reiteration, the single formal cut to $185–200M on 4 February 2026 alongside the CEO retirement release, and the 6 May 2026 steer to "close to the lower end of our previously issued guidance range"; quarterly active-account counts with the stated definitions of Active Independent Consultant and Active Customer

  5. LifeVantage Q1 fiscal 2026 earnings release, Exhibit 99.1 to Form 8-K of 4 November 2025 - reiteration of FY2026 guidance and active account counts
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2025-11-04archived copy
  6. LifeVantage Q2 fiscal 2026 earnings release, Exhibit 99.1 to Form 8-K of 4 February 2026 - the single formal guidance cut to $185–200M
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-02-04archived copy
  7. LifeVantage press release announcing the CEO retirement, Exhibit 99.2 to the same Form 8-K of 4 February 2026 (Items 2.02, 5.02 and 9.01, accession 0001628280-26-005431)
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-02-04archived copy
  8. LifeVantage Q3 fiscal 2026 earnings release, Exhibit 99.1 to Form 8-K of 6 May 2026 - the steer to "close to the lower end of our previously issued guidance range" (accession 0001193125-26-208934)
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-05-06archived copy
  9. LifeVantage Corporation Form 8-K of 6 May 2026 (cover filing for the Q3 FY2026 results)
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-05-06archived copy
  10. LifeVantage U.S. Income Disclosure Statement for 1 January – 31 December 2024 (revised 3 February 2025) - 54,531 U.S. Consultants, 64.48% earning no commissions, $186 median and $683 typical-Consultant average, and the fifteen-rank table
    Income disclosureTier 1LifeVantage Corporation · 2024archived copy

    LifeVantage US Income Disclosure Statement for 1 January – 31 December 2024, at lifevantage.com/legal/us-en/income-disclosure-statement - 54,531 US consultants, 64.48% earning no commissions, a $186 median and $683 "typical Consultant" average for the twelve months, and the full fifteen-rank table of monthly averages, medians and median months to achieve

  11. LifeVantage Evolve Compensation Plan Guide for Independent LifeVantage Consultants, USA (company legal page)
    Compensation planTier 1LifeVantage Corporation · 2024-11-01archived copy

    LifeVantage Evolve compensation plan (lifevantage.com/legal/us-en/compensation-plan) and the Evolve Perks PDF - the 150 SV activity definition "which can be fulfilled solely through Customer orders," the 150 Personal Sales Volume rank-qualification cap, the fifteen-rank GSV and Maximum Volume Rule ladder, the Personal Sales Bonus tiers at 500/1,000/2,000/4,000 CSV, the $100-capped Sharing Bonus and Doubler, nine levels of level commission, the seven-generation Leadership Match capped at 9% of global CV, the 4% Leadership Pool, the 70% rule, and the $100 retail / $80 consultant worked example

  12. Evolve Compensation Plan Guide, USA, effective 1 November 2024 - filed as an exhibit with the SEC: the 150 SV Active definition "which can be fulfilled solely through Customer orders," the 150 Personal Purchase Cap, the fifteen-rank GSV and Maximum Volume Rule ladder, the $100-capped Sharing Bonus and Doubler, the seven-generation Leadership Match with per-match caps, and the 4% global-CV Leadership Pool
    Compensation planTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2024-11-01archived copy
  13. LifeVantage Evolve Perks booklet, US English, May 2026 revision (PDF)
    Compensation planTier 1LifeVantage Corporation · 2026-05archived copy
  14. LifeVantage Evolve program overview page, including the Evolve Perks booklet link and the Launch Period bonuses
    Compensation planTier 1LifeVantage Corporationarchived copy
  15. LifeVantage Policies and Procedures, United States (revised 25 February 2026, effective 1 April 2026) - §3.1 Start Kit requirement, §6.1.1 concurrent recruiting prohibited, §6.1.2 post-termination non-recruit, §7.1 ownership of Marketing Organization Activity Reports, §8.2 trademark and domain restrictions, §8.3.2 product and testimonial claims, §8.3.3 income claims, §8.5.17 the outright pay-per-click and paid-search ban, and the returns and buyback terms
    Policies & proceduresTier 1LifeVantage Corporation · 2026-04-01archived copy

    LifeVantage Policies & Procedures (lifevantage.com/legal/us-en/policies-and-procedures) - §3.1 Start Kit requirement, §6.1.1 and §6.1.2 cross-recruiting and the two-year post-termination non-recruit, §7.1 company ownership of Marketing Organization Activity Reports, §8.2 trademark and domain restrictions, §8.3.2 product and testimonial claims, §8.3.3 income claims, §8.5.17 the outright PPC ban, and the returns and buyback terms

  16. LifeVantage Corporation definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A, filed 19 September 2025 (accession 0001628280-25-042171) - board composition and tenure and the Pay versus Performance table
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2025-09-19archived copy

    LifeVantage DEF 14A filed 19 September 2025 (accession 0001628280-25-042171) - board composition and tenure, and the Pay versus Performance table showing FY2025 PEO compensation actually paid of $7.473M against a $2.816M Summary Compensation Table total; Form 8-K of 16 April 2026 (accession 0001193125-26-159324) with the incoming CEO employment agreement and the interim CEO consulting agreement at $45,833 per month

  17. LifeVantage Corporation Form 8-K of 16 April 2026 (accession 0001193125-26-159324) - the incoming CEO appointment
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-04-16archived copy
  18. Exhibit 10.1 to the LifeVantage Form 8-K of 16 April 2026 - incoming CEO employment agreement
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-04-16archived copy
  19. Exhibit 10.2 to the LifeVantage Form 8-K of 16 April 2026 - interim CEO consulting agreement
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2026-04-16archived copy
  20. Nelson SK, Bose SK, Grunwald GK, Myhill P, McCord JM - "The induction of human superoxide dismutase and catalase in vivo: a fundamentally new approach to antioxidant therapy," Free Radical Biology & Medicine, 2006 (PMID 16413416)
    AcademicTier 3U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed · 2006archived copy

    Peer-reviewed literature: Nelson, Bose, Grunwald, Myhill and McCord, Free Radical Biology & Medicine 2006 (PMID 16413416 - the open-label single-arm source of the 40% figure); Ueberschlag et al., PLOS ONE 2016 (PMID 27513339, correction 33096544 - the LifeVantage-funded double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial, n=38, null on 5-km time and resting TBARS); Strong et al., Aging Cell 2016 (PMID 27312235 - NIA Interventions Testing Program, male mouse median lifespan); Semanchik et al., Journal of Animal Science 2026 (PMID 41397914 - n=40 horses, null); ALSUntangled No. 31 (PMID 26414415)

  21. Ueberschlag SL et al. - "The Effect of Protandim Supplementation on Athletic Performance and Oxidative Blood Markers in Runners," PLOS ONE, 2016, n=38 double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial (PMID 27513339)
    AcademicTier 3U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed · 2016archived copy
  22. Correction: The Effect of Protandim Supplementation on Athletic Performance and Oxidative Blood Markers in Runners, PLOS ONE, 23 October 2020 (PMID 33096544)
    AcademicTier 3U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed · 2020-10-23archived copy
  23. Strong R et al. - "Longer lifespan in male mice treated with a weakly estrogenic agonist, an antioxidant, an α-glucosidase inhibitor or a Nrf2-inducer," Aging Cell, 2016, NIA Interventions Testing Program (PMID 27312235)
    AcademicTier 3U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed · 2016archived copy
  24. Semanchik et al. - Journal of Animal Science, 2026, n=40 horses (PMID 41397914)
    AcademicTier 3U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed · 2026archived copy
  25. ALSUntangled No. 31: Protandim, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration, 2015 (PMID 26414415)
    AcademicTier 3U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed · 2015archived copy
  26. Truth in Advertising, Inc. brand file: LifeVantage - the 2016 health-claims and 2017 and 2024 income-claims timeline with the company's responses
    ReportingTier 3Truth in Advertising, Inc. (TINA.org)archived copy

    TruthInAdvertising.org company file at truthinadvertising.org/companies/lifevantage/ - the November 2016 health-claims letter, the December 2017 and 14 February 2024 income-claims letters and databases, and the company responses of 2 December 2016, 3 January 2018 and 29 February 2024; the February 2024 letter formed part of a sweep of 100 direct sellers in which 98 were found in the same posture, and carried no statement of referral to the FTC

  27. TINA.org letter to LifeVantage Corporation re deceptive and illegal health claims, 22 November 2016 (PDF, within the compiled DSA notification letters)
    ReportingTier 3Truth in Advertising, Inc. (TINA.org) · 2016-11-22archived copy
  28. LifeVantage Health Claims Database (TINA.org), with the note that the company responded on 2 December 2016
    ReportingTier 3Truth in Advertising, Inc. (TINA.org) · 2016-11archived copy
  29. LifeVantage response to TINA.org's 2016 health-claims findings, 2 December 2016 (PDF, redacted)
    ReportingTier 3LifeVantage Corporation (posted by Truth in Advertising, Inc.) · 2016-12-02archived copy
  30. 2017 LifeVantage Income Claims Database (TINA.org), noting the company response of 3 January 2018
    ReportingTier 3Truth in Advertising, Inc. (TINA.org) · 2017archived copy
  31. TINA.org letter to LifeVantage re the 2023 income-claims investigation, 14 February 2024
    ReportingTier 3Truth in Advertising, Inc. (TINA.org) · 2024-02-14archived copy
  32. 2023 LifeVantage Income Claims Database (TINA.org), noting the company response of 29 February 2024
    ReportingTier 3Truth in Advertising, Inc. (TINA.org) · 2024-02-14archived copy
  33. "MLMs Continue to Recruit with Deceptive Earnings Claims" - the 100-company sweep in which 98% were found in the same posture, 26 February 2024
    ReportingTier 3Truth in Advertising, Inc. (TINA.org) · 2024-02-26archived copy
  34. SEC EDGAR company submissions index for LifeVantage Corporation, CIK 0000849146 (full filing history in JSON)
    SEC filingTier 1U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, EDGARarchived copy

    SEC EDGAR company submissions and the XBRL company-concept API for CIK 0000849146 - used to cross-check the nine-month revenue figures independently of the filed narrative, together with the FY2019 Form 10-K for the FY2018 and FY2019 active-account counts and revenue

    Not established by this document: The XBRL company-concept endpoint for a specific LifeVantage revenue tag was not fetched and is therefore not asserted; the submissions index above is the verified EDGAR machine-readable entry point for CIK 0000849146.

  35. SEC EDGAR annual-report filing index for LifeVantage Corporation, CIK 0000849146 (Forms 10-K)
    SEC filingTier 1U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, EDGARarchived copy
  36. LifeVantage Corporation Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended 30 June 2019, filed 14 August 2019 (accession 0000849146-19-000063) - the FY2018 and FY2019 active-account counts and revenue
    SEC filingTier 1LifeVantage Corporation, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission · 2019-08-14archived copy
Unable to verify

What we could not get

  • PREMISE CONFIRMED, and worth publishing as such: the watchlist said revenue was down 19.1% for the first nine months of FY2026 and that the GLP-1 bump had already reversed. The filed figures are −19.15% ($140.209M against $173.416M), and the MindBody GLP-1 line ran $15.7M in FY2024 to $56.2M in FY2025 to $6.3M in the third quarter of FY2026 - down 61.2% year on year and accounting for 64% of the entire nine-month decline. If anything the premise understated it.
  • PREMISE CORRECTED - the wrong figure and the right one, side by side. The watchlist said guidance had been "cut twice." The filed record shows one formal cut: on 4 February 2026 the FY2026 revenue range went from $225–240M to $185–200M, a 17.2% reduction at the midpoint. On 6 May 2026 the company issued no new range and instead steered to "close to the lower end of our previously issued guidance range." That is one range revision plus one downward steer, not two cuts.
  • Every current retail price, on both sides of the comparison. The LifeVantage storefront renders prices client-side and returned the literal string "Loading…" on every fetch; the Wayback Machine rejected the request with HTTP 403 and its CDX endpoint likewise; third-party retailer pages were 404 or JavaScript-gated. This is a retrieval failure, not an absence of prices, and no price claim is made anywhere in this report as a result.
  • The SV-to-dollar conversion ratio - the single most consequential unpublished figure in the file. It does not appear in the compensation plan, the Evolve Perks PDF, the enrollment page or any other company document retrieved. Without it, neither a participant nor this review can price the 150 SV monthly activity requirement.
  • The Start Kit price, which Policies §3.1 makes a condition of enrollment, and the annual renewal fee, described only as free in year one and "a small fee" thereafter with requirements that "vary by market." The 250 SV Enrollment Pack is stated in volume only.
  • Any FDA warning-letter history. The FY2025 Form 10-K affirmatively states there were "no open letters from the FDA to us as of June 30, 2025," but the wording does not foreclose closed-out letters historically, and the FDA warning-letter database is a JavaScript-driven view whose full-text query returned only the search shell. Searched, none located - but that is "could not retrieve," not established absence.
  • The self-regulatory file. No DSSRC case involving LifeVantage was located, but the BBB National Programs decision-search URL returned HTTP 404 and full decision texts sit behind a subscription archive. Trustpilot returned HTTP 403 to every fetch and no BBB rating could be obtained. All three are retrieval failures rather than findings.
  • A 2023 proxy contest. EDGAR full-text search surfaced an 8-K/A dated 13 November 2023 described as reporting the outcome of a proxy fight, but the underlying filing could not be retrieved. The identity of the dissident, the slate and the outcome are all unverified, and nothing about it is asserted here. Also unverified: whether the Consultant Agreement contains an arbitration clause or class-action waiver, which could not be located in the retrievable policy text, and whether any non-US income disclosure exists for Japan, Australia, Canada, the UK or the EU.

Not advice

This is independent analysis for decision-making, not legal, financial or investment advice. Allegations reported by third parties should be verified against primary court and regulatory records before any decision.

Who writes this

Researched by Claude. Reviewed by an editor.

Every report is researched and written by Claude, Anthropic’s AI assistant, from the company’s own plan documents, policies, terms and regulatory file - then reviewed before publication by Rob Fore, who checks the sources and the stage-label on every allegation.

  • Nine weighted dimensions, published with their weights
  • The editor checks the evidence and cannot change the number - the build rejects any page whose grade does not reconcile to its own arithmetic
  • Every affiliate position we hold is disclosed on the report it touches
  • No company has paid for a grade, and no report carries an affiliate link
Read the About page

Looking at something else?

Enter any company name or website. If a report exists it opens instantly; if not, we start one.

Try:
Common questions

LifeVantage - frequently asked

QIs LifeVantage a pyramid scheme?
No court or regulator has ever found it to be one, and there is no FTC action, no SEC enforcement matter, no state attorney general action and no consent order in sixteen years as a public filer. A putative class action alleging it was filed in January 2018 and transferred to Utah; in December 2019 the court declined to dismiss the pyramid count, which is a ruling that the allegations state a legal claim - the lowest judicial threshold, not a finding of fact - while the securities, antitrust and patent-fraud counts were dismissed. The class was never certified and the case was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice in December 2022, which bars re-filing but is not a vindication either. On the structure itself: the plan caps personal purchases at 150 SV toward rank qualification, the 150 SV monthly activity requirement can be met entirely from customer orders, the 10-K states "we do not pay commissions for enrolling independent consultants," and the company publicly reports 64,000 active customers against 45,000 active consultants. Those are real anti-pyramid features. Against them, rank advancement runs on group volume up to 1,000,000 GSV, up to 13% of global commissionable volume is reserved by rule for the top 0.82% of consultants, and the customer-to-consultant ratio has fallen from 1.80:1 in FY2019 to 1.42:1 in March 2026.
QHow much do LifeVantage consultants actually earn?
The company publishes this itself, which is worth crediting before the figures are stated. In calendar 2024, of 54,531 US consultants, 64.48% earned no commission at all - roughly 35,161 people. Among the 35.52% who did earn something, the median for the twelve months was $186 and the average for what the company defines as a "typical Consultant," meaning ranks Consultant through Managing Consultant 3, was $683. The modal rank is Consultant 1, holding 43.19% of all paid consultants, with a median of $18 a month. Restoring the full denominator, Senior Consultant 1 and above is 5.63% of all consultants, Executive Consultant 1 and above is 0.238% - about 130 people nationally - and Presidential Consultant is roughly eight people. All of these are gross figures before any cost, and the disclosure says so. The company publishes a median as well as an average at every rank, states its total consultant population and states its zero-earner rate, which is three disclosure choices most of this category does not make.
QHow much does it cost to join LifeVantage?
This cannot be answered from any published company document, and that is itself the finding. A Start Kit is required to enrol under Policies §3.1 and its price does not appear on any server-rendered page this review could retrieve. A 250 SV Enrollment Pack is the promoted alternative, stated in volume rather than dollars. The first year of renewal is free with an unstated "small fee" thereafter, varying by market. Staying an Active Consultant requires 150 Sales Volume a month, and holding rank above Consultant 3 requires 300 SV of which at most 150 may be your own purchases - but the plan does not state what SV converts to in dollars anywhere. The only price relationship the company publishes in retrievable text is the compensation plan’s worked example of a product at $100 retail and $80 to the consultant, a 20% consultant discount. An audited cross-check gives some scale: FY2025 revenue of $228.530M across roughly 132,000 active accounts is $1,731 per account per year, blended across customers and consultants.
QDoes Protandim actually work?
No therapeutic claim is made or endorsed here, and the honest answer is that the evidence does not support the marketing claim. The flagship statement that the product "reduces oxidative stress by 40% in just 30 days" traces to a single 2006 paper in Free Radical Biology & Medicine that was open-label and single-arm - a before-and-after study with no placebo group and no randomisation described - co-authored by the formulation’s co-inventor and a co-founder. The only double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled human trial in the literature was funded by LifeVantage itself: PLOS ONE 2016, 38 runners over 90 days, which found the supplement "did not (1) alter 5-km running time, (2) lower TBARS at rest." A 2026 controlled study in 40 horses at up to six times the human dose found it "did not impact antioxidant status or plasma cytokines." There is one genuinely independent positive result: the National Institute on Aging Interventions Testing Program, a blinded three-site NIH protocol built to resist sponsor influence, found the formulation extended median lifespan in male mice (Aging Cell, 2016). Separately, the FY2025 Form 10-K states that the US patents on the product expired in March 2025, so the identical blend may now legally be made and sold by anyone.
QIs LifeVantage itself in financial trouble?
Not yet, and the distinction matters. Revenue for the first nine months of FY2026 was $140.209M against $173.416M, down 19.15%, and active accounts stand at 109,000, down 22.1% year on year. The MindBody GLP-1 System, launched in October 2024, went from $15.7M in FY2024 to $56.2M in FY2025 to $6.3M in the third quarter of FY2026 alone - down 61.2% - and accounted for 64% of the whole nine-month decline. Guidance was formally cut once, on 4 February 2026, from $225–240M to $185–200M, and then steered to "close to the lower end" of that reduced range on 6 May 2026. But the company remains profitable, carries zero debt at every reporting date checked, generated $5.5M of operating cash flow in nine months, raised its dividend 11.1% and repurchased stock. Its commission plan is funded out of a gross margin of roughly 80%, not out of new-recruit inflow. A shrinking base, a collapsed flagship launch and four chief executives since 2011 are the risks; insolvency is not one of them today.
Who wrote this report

Author, editor and publisher

C
Written by Claude AI
Reviewed by Rob Fore · Published by Listech Inc · August 1, 2026

This report was researched and written by Claude, Anthropic’s AI assistant, working from primary documents - LifeVantage’s own compensation plan, its policies and procedures, its terms of service, its income disclosure statement where one exists, and its regulatory and self-regulatory file. It was scored against nine weighted dimensions that are published in full, with their weights, on the methodology page.

Before publication it was reviewed by Rob Fore, who checks every source link, every figure against the document it came from, and every allegation against its stage-label - an investigation is not a finding, a warning letter is not an enforcement action, and a filed claim is not a verdict.

The editor does not set the grade. The published score is the weighted composite of the nine dimension scores, and the build refuses to emit a page where the two disagree by more than 0.06. A grade moves when the evidence moves it and not otherwise.

Rob Fore has marketed online since 1996, wrote Online MLM Marketing (2014), and is CEO of Listech Inc, the Nevada corporation that publishes this site. He holds affiliate positions in companies graded here - including LiveGood, which this site grades D, SendOutCards, which it grades C−, and the Home Business Academy, which it grades B−. Those positions are disclosed on the reports they touch, and changed nothing on this page.

About the author and our conflicts  ·  Contact the editor  ·  Corrections: corrections@opportunitygrade.com

Stay with it

Tell me if this grade changes

LifeVantage is graded C as of August 1, 2026. Grades move when the evidence moves - a new income disclosure, a regulatory action, a rewritten compensation plan. Leave your address and you will get one email if this one does.

One email when the grade moves, and nothing else. We will never use your address to promote an income opportunity of any kind, we do not sell, rent or share the list, and it is stored on our own infrastructure rather than with any company graded here. Unsubscribe removes everything.

Right of reply

Corrections

Every factual claim on this page is sourced, and the ones we could not stand up are named in the unable to verify list above. If something here is wrong, we want to know, and we would rather hear it from LifeVantage than from a reader.

Write to corrections@opportunitygrade.com. Point at the specific sentence and send the document that contradicts it - a plan document, a filing, an income disclosure, a policy page. We will check it against the primary source, correct the page if it is wrong, and say in the report that it was corrected and when. A grade moves if the evidence moves it.

This address reaches a person, not a form. We do not require a takedown demand, an NDA or a lawyer to accept a correction, and we do not remove a report because a company disputes its conclusion - only because the underlying facts turn out to be wrong.

Other published reports

Every report is written to stand alone. Graded on the same nine weighted dimensions and the same six legal tests. Twelve of 107, spread across the grade bands.

See all 107 published reports →