L’Oréal Group officially announced its “The Beauty of Longevity” concept; Estée Lauder stated it is conducting full-chain research on longevity-related skin genes; Clarins launched a new face cream targeting the longevity protein FOXO…
In recent years, within the R&D strategies of leading beauty companies, anti-aging seems to have become a thing of the past, while “age-reversing skin” and “longevity science” have emerged as the new directions of scientific research.
For brands, the concept of “skin longevity” is more like an upgraded, higher-level version of “anti-aging”; for consumers, products associated with “longevity” may represent a stronger foundation in research and more tangible efficacy results.
So, why has “skin longevity” become the focal point pursued by top beauty groups? Could this be the clearest future direction for the development of beauty science?
Leading Beauty Groups Position Themselves in “Skin Longevity”
Not long ago, overseas skincare brand OneSkin, dedicated to skin health and longevity, announced that it had secured $20 million in funding led by equity firm Prelude Growth Partners.
It is worth noting that last year, Unilever’s venture capital arm, together with Plus Capital, Able Partners, and other investors, injected $7 million into the brand. While these successive rounds of investment certainly reflect OneSkin’s own strength, the deeper reason lies in the fact that the concept of “skin longevity” is gradually becoming a mainstream market trend.
Today, consumers are no longer satisfied with simple skin maintenance; instead, they increasingly seek scientifically backed solutions to slow skin aging, aiming for long-term skin health and a youthful appearance.
Brands like OneSkin have captured this demand, positioning themselves at the forefront of consumer needs by leveraging the concept of “longevity.” This approach has given them considerable growth potential. For instance, OneSkin has launched products featuring patented peptides and its core ingredient OS-01. According to foreign media reports, the brand’s revenue this year is expected to reach $40–50 million.
In fact, major beauty groups have already turned their attention to the “skin longevity” concept. According to CHAILEEDO’s research, global leaders including L’Oréal Group, LVMH, and Estée Lauder have all laid out strategies in this field, spanning skincare product development to fundamental scientific research.
For example, at the 25th World Congress of Dermatology, Estée Lauder unveiled its patented ingredient Sirtuin. According to the brand, it is the only known ingredient on the market capable of directly activating longevity-related skin genes SIRT1, SIRT2, SIRT3, and SIRT6, making it possible to “reverse” skin age. The ingredient is already being used in products such as the Re-Nutriv Ultimate Diamond Transformative Eye Serum and Ultimate Diamond Transformative Energy Dual Essence.
Estée Lauder’s Global Brand President Justin Boxford said in an interview: “We will continue to push the boundaries of skin age science and see it as the next frontier of beauty.”
This June, during the first longevity-focused event at Le Visionnaire in Paris, L’Oréal Group announced its new concept “The Beauty of Longevity”, positioning beauty as a fundamental pillar of longevity. At the same time, the group officially launched its Integrated Skin Longevity Science™, aiming to empower consumers to shift from reactive skincare (“fixing the damage”) to proactive care (“preventing the problem”).
Earlier in 2024, L’Oréal’s venture capital arm BOLD acquired a minority stake in Timeline, a company focused on “skin longevity.”
According to public data, Timeline has developed the proprietary ingredient Mitopure®, designed to clear out aging mitochondria and restore their vitality. This ingredient is already incorporated into the brand’s day cream, night cream, and serum, while the Timeline team continues to develop additional skincare products.
For most leading beauty groups, a technological race in “skin longevity” is already underway.
Anti-Aging or Longevity?
While the concept of “skin longevity” has become one of the hottest topics in skincare today, just a few years ago “anti-aging” was still the dominant theme. So what exactly differentiates “skin longevity” from “anti-aging”? And why has “longevity” emerged as a frequently cited direction in recent years?
After reviewing how leading beauty groups describe “longevity,” CHAILEEDO observed that the term does not yet have a unified definition. However, it is most often associated with cells, epigenetics, and the skin microbiome, with a greater focus on maintaining skin and body in a youthful and vital state—free from the limitations of chronological age. In essence, it can be seen as a broader and deeper evolution of the traditional “anti-aging” concept.
For example, Vania Lacascade, Chief Innovation Officer of L’Oréal Group, has publicly stated that “biological age is the new standard of measurement.” She emphasized that L’Oréal is moving into an era where skin will be defined beyond chronological age (the number of years one has lived).
In its interpretation of Integrated Skin Longevity Science™, L’Oréal outlined plans to explore the impact of cell activity, cellular communication, and inflammation on skin aging, aiming to address the root causes of biological aging through multi-dimensional approaches that extend the healthy lifespan of skin cells.
Meanwhile, Estée Lauder has focused its “longevity science” research on sirtuins—key “longevity proteins” that function as signal proteins and represent critical targets in skin anti-aging.
At Dior, Virginie Couturaud, Scientific Communication Director for Dior Beauty, noted in an interview: “Science is at an important turning point. We are no longer just trying to slow aging, but beginning to explore how to reverse cellular age. The goal is not to prolong life, but to improve its quality.”
From a research perspective, Dior has placed particular emphasis on nutrient-sensing dysregulation and inflammaging—two critical mechanisms linked to reduced cellular vitality, loss of elastin, diminished repair capacity, and skin inflammation.
In addition, LVMH Recherche, the research arm of LVMH Group, announced a partnership with biotech company Integrated Biosciences, stating: “By combining our expertise in skin research with their strengths in artificial intelligence and aging science, we have taken a decisive step forward in understanding and addressing age-related cellular pathways at the molecular level.”
In summary, the biggest difference between “longevity science” and traditional “anti-aging” lies in their shift of perspective: rather than simply resisting aging, the new focus is on reversing it.
A New Round of Scientific Competition Has Begun
At the root, the R&D directions and product concept claims of leading beauty groups come partly from deep research into human science, and partly from the upgraded demands of consumers.
In China, more and more consumers are beginning to focus on overall physical health. This is also one of the reasons behind the rapid growth of the nutritional supplements market. The concept of “longevity” fits perfectly into this trend, using a stronger emphasis on cellular and systemic health as the entry point to target people’s higher-level needs for skin health.
In Western markets—where celebrities set trends, related concepts are relatively mature, and regulations on claims are looser—terms like “longevity” can even be used as a core brand positioning and product selling point. This helps attract more consumers and makes it easier for brands to advance both their claims and research directions.
This also means that the driving force behind this R&D race is not only the “forward planning” of leading beauty companies, but also the emergence of more consumer demand, which in turn pushes more beauty enterprises to join this “longevity science race.”
In fact, judging from the experimental results released by leading international beauty companies, most claim to have been engaged in the field of “longevity science” for more than 10 years. For example, L’Oréal Group’s “Beauty Longevity Wheel” is said to be based on 15 years of cutting-edge research in longevity; Estée Lauder has been working with top laboratories and experts around the world since 2008 to dive into research on “skin longevity genes.”
For this reason, many of the research results published today have already reached a fairly advanced level. They can be summarized into several points—
First, the focus is on cells.
Second, the regulatory mechanisms are deeper and more microscopic, often tied to human physiological functions.
Third, the mechanisms are more cyclical, emphasizing long-term functional regulation.
A recent paper released by L’Oréal Group in collaboration with dermatologists also outlined six major directions in current longevity science research: regenerative medicine, mitochondrial function, epigenetic regulation, immune modulation, microbiome modulation, and AI-driven innovation.
From this perspective, many Chinese beauty companies have already integrated their research with this concept, though they have not used the more explicit label of “longevity science.”
For example:
Proya’s Energy Series focuses on “cellular energy,” emphasizing “recharging cells” to combat “sudden aging.”
Chando began research into Nobel Prize-winning miRNA technology as early as 2014, and from this identified key miRNAs related to aging in Asian women.
Winona launched its sensitive-skin anti-aging series this year, turning its attention to cellular inflammation. Through RNA sequencing, it identified HMGB1 and CLDN5 as key factors in sensitive skin aging.
From “anti-aging” to “skin longevity,” this shift led by global beauty giants is by no means just a repackaging of concepts. It is a scientific revolution at the cellular and molecular level. It signifies a deeper understanding of “aging”—from passive resistance to active intervention—pursuing longer-lasting vitality and homeostasis for both skin and the body.
However, whether “skin longevity” can truly become the most definitive direction for the future of beauty will depend on whether researchers can go beyond concept upgrades and provide products that genuinely align with the principles of longevity science.
