The protein labeling market has seen considerable growth due to a variety of factors.
• The market size for protein labeling has seen a substantial increase in the past few years. From a size of $2.58 billion in 2024, it is projected to reach a value of $2.84 billion in 2025, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.1%.
The notable rise in the historic period could be due to a greater demand for protein-based therapies, increased acceptance of proteomics research, an ever-widening scope of protein labeling applications, an increased understanding of the benefits of protein labeling, an abundant supply of proficient workers, and the rising incidences of chronic illnesses.
The protein labeling market is expected to maintain its strong growth trajectory in upcoming years.
• Anticipations are high for a swift expansion for the protein labeling market size within the upcoming years. It's projected to escalate to $4.36 billion by 2029, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.3%.
The projected surge in the coming period is thought to owe to factors such as personalized medicine, point-of-care (POC) testing, advancements in proteomics, bolstered capital input in life sciences, and increased healthcare spending. Preserving the forecast period's growth, most notable inclinations will revolve around the acceleration in protein labeling technologies, the impact of quantum dots and nanoparticles, multiplexing and high-throughput labeling, biorthogonal labeling, the inclusion of artificial intelligence (AI), sustainable labeling reagents, and drug development.
The protein labeling reagents market is being propelled by an upswing in expenditure on genomics and proteomics research and development. Proteomics, the examination of the entirety of a cell, tissue, or organism's protein content, necessitates the use of protein labeling techniques prior to separation and analysis in proteomic profiling methodologies. For example, the United States' National Institutes of Health (NIH) allocated an impressive $37 billion to support biomedical research. These funds are earmarked for research in life sciences that seek to unravel processes by which diseases develop at a molecular level, to identify biologic markers which signal disease presence or to pinpoint genes or proteins that are the cause of a disease. Furthermore, protein research was boosted by the Novo Nordisk Foundation's grant of up to $1.5 million to the University of Copenhagen for the development of a mass spectrometry facility. Thus, this escalation in proteomics and genomics R&D expenditure spurs on the protein labeling reagents market.
The protein labeling market covered in this report is segmented –
1) By Product: Reagents, Protein, Enzymes, Probes/ Tags, Monoclonal Antibodies
2) By Labeling Method: In-vitro Labeling, In-vivo Labeling
3) By Application: Cell Based-Assay, Fluorescence Microscopy, Immunological Techniques, Mass Spectrometry, Protein Micro Assay
Subsegments:
1) By Reagents: Fluorescent Dyes, Enzyme Labels, Chemiluminescent Reagents, Radioactive Labels
2) By Protein: Recombinant Proteins, Native Proteins, Modified Proteins
3) By Enzymes: Alkaline Phosphatase, Horseradish Peroxidase, Other Enzymatic Labels
4) By Probes Or Tags: Biotin Labels, Antibody Tags, Fluorophore Probes, Affinity Tags
5) By Monoclonal Antibodies: Primary Monoclonal Antibodies, Secondary Monoclonal Antibodies, Conjugated Monoclonal Antibodies
The market is likely to be constrained by the shortcomings of protein labeling techniques. Compared to labeled methods, label-free techniques are favored due to their associated challenges, including the complexities of wet-lab and its flexibility. While label-free samples necessitate modest preparation, all labeling methods need wet lab preprocessing. Labeling samples with metabolic (for instance, SILAC) or chemical (like iTRAQ or TMT) agents is obligatory and the various conditions must be amalgamated. Hence, relative to labeling techniques, label-free methods are less susceptible to wet lab blunders. Label-free strategies are highly adaptable and can incorporate new samples even after the study’s initiation, unlike labeled approaches which need a certain number (n) of each condition. It may not be possible to include new samples in the study if they cannot be mingled and analyzed consonant with the control. Although labeled methods such as Super-SILAC curtail this predicament, they also need scrupulous planning. Given the associated disadvantages, label-free techniques are arguably a better choice. As such, the market is likely to face challenges due to the issues accompanying protein labeling methods.
Major companies operating in the protein labeling market include:
• Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
• Merck KGaA
• PerkinElmer Inc.
• GE HealthCare Technologies Inc.
• F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG
• Agilent Technologies Inc.
• BIO-RAD LABORATORIES
• Kirkegaard & Perry Laboratories
• LI-COR Inc.
• Kaneka Corporation
• Promega Corporation
• Eurogentec S.A.
• Luminex Corporation
• New England Biolabs Inc.
• Seracare Life Sciences Inc.
• Abcam plc.
• ZEDIRA GmbH
• NanoTemper Technologies GmbH
• TriLink BioTechnologies LLC.
• Waters Corporation
• AMETEK Inc.
• HORIBA Ltd.
• Spectris plc.
• METTLER TOLEDO International Inc.
• Shimadzu Corporation
• Hitachi High-Tech Corporation
• Attana AB
• Affinité Instruments
• Biosensing Instruments
North America was the largest region in the protein labeling market in 2024. The regions covered in the protein labeling market report are Asia-Pacific, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, North America, South America, Middle East, and Africa.