Atlas of Proteomic Technologies

Ignition Scientific

Platform Comparison

Side-by-side comparison across 6 platforms and 10 scored dimensions.

Filter:

Olink Explore HT

Olink (Thermo Fisher)

Affinity

5,400

Proteins†

Moderate, variable

Cost

PEA · Dual Antibody

Technology

Composite score30/45

SomaSeq

Illumina acquired SomaLogic in Jan 2026

Affinity

9,500

Proteins†

Moderate, variable

Cost

Aptamer (SOMAmer)

Technology

Evidence mostly from array-based SomaScan readout; NGS validation still emerging
Composite score30/45

NULISA

Alamar Biosciences

Affinity

470

Proteins†

Low

Cost

Dual Capture & Release

Technology

Targeted panel: CNS & inflammation only
Composite score30/45

nELISA / Omni 1000

Nomic Bio

Affinity
Lower-confidence scores. Evidence depth is 1/5. Most supporting data are unpublished, vendor-supplied or semi-quantitative, so these scores are provisional.

1,058

Proteins†

Ultra-low

Cost

Sandwich ELISA · Bead

Technology

Targeted panel: not designed for broad discovery
Composite score32/45

Proteograph XT

Seer

MS-DIA

10,698

Proteins†

Moderate, variable

Cost

Nanoparticle · MS-DIA

Technology

10,698 is the protein groups Seer lists; they map to 10,065 distinct human proteins, the number Protein Coverage counts.

Composite score32/45

TrueDiscovery

Biognosys (recently acquired by Bruker)

MS-DIA

7,000*

Proteins†

Moderate, variable

Cost

Depletion · MS-DIA

Technology

* Protein count is study-dependent: varies by MS workflow and sample type
Composite score31/45

† Counts differ in kind by technology: Olink reports assays; SomaScan reports unique protein targets; Seer and Biognosys report MS protein groups; NULISA reports panel targets. Cross-platform comparisons in this atlas map all content to UniProt identifiers; see Methods.