Latent Labs vs Profluent
A side-by-side comparison of Latent Labs and Profluent, two Science tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Latent Labs | Profluent |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Science | Science |
| Pricing (differs) | FREE | PAID |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms (differs) | Web, API | Web |
| Model support | — | — |
| Vendor (differs) | Latent Labs | Profluent Bio |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Latent Labs
Puts frontier protein-binder design in a no-code browser app — lab-validated hit rates without the HPC setup most de novo design tools require.
- Upload a target, generate candidates
- Lab-validated binders
- AlphaFold-pedigree team
- Free early access
- Early access only
- Narrow to protein design
- Pricing unconfirmed
- Requires waitlist
Profluent
Pairs frontier protein LLMs with openly released designs like OpenCRISPR-1, while most peers keep AI-designed molecules proprietary.
- ProGen protein-LLM lineage
- Open-released gene editor
- Nature-published work
- Eli Lilly and IDT partnerships
- Partnership/licensing only
- No self-serve platform
- Open releases are sequences, not a service
- Opaque pricing
When to pick which
Both cover Protein design and Antibody design.
Pick Profluent if you need Molecular design.
- Molecular design (secondary capability)
They also differ on:
- Pricing
- FREE · PAID
- Platforms
- Web, API · Web