If you’re researching San Francisco IVF success rates, you might find the data difficult to interpret. Clinics measure and report outcomes differently, the terminology can feel like a maze, and the number that catches your eye on a website may not be the one that actually reflects your odds.
In this report, we compiled IVF success data from SART, the most comprehensive standardized source for IVF outcomes in the U.S., covering 425,869 cycles from SART-member clinics nationwide. We compared that to clinic-level outcome data reported by RMA Northern California, a SART-member fertility center serving the Bay Area.
San Francisco IVF Success Rates by Age Group
For anyone researching San Francisco IVF success rates, age-stratified SART data is the most reliable starting point. The table below shows live births per intended egg retrieval, including all embryo transfers (fresh and frozen), using data from RMA Northern California.
This metric is what SART recommends as the most complete and honest measure of IVF success, because it counts from the very start of a cycle rather than only from the point of transfer.
| Age Group | SART National Live Birth Rate (per Retrieval) | RMA Northern California Live Birth Rate (per Retrieval) |
|---|---|---|
| Under 35 | 53.2% | 52.1% |
| 35–37 | 39.9% | 49.4% |
| 38–40 | 26.2% | 28.8% |
| 41–42 | 13.2% | 14.7% |
| Over 42 | 4.1% | 7.9% |
Three patterns stand out in this dataset:
- Across all age groups, both the national benchmark and RMA Northern California’s reported outcomes tell the same fundamental story: age is the dominant factor in IVF success. Live birth rates decline steadily with each age bracket, and that pattern holds regardless of which clinic or dataset you’re looking at.
- The steepest decline happens between the 35–37 and 38–40 brackets. Nationally, live birth rates drop from 39.9% to 26.2% over just three years, a 34% relative decline. This reflects how quickly egg quality changes with age, which makes earlier action (and potentially egg freezing) important for patients on the fence about timing.
- For patients 38 and older, the gap between national averages and those reported by a high-volume, PGT-A-focused clinic tends to widen. RMA Northern California’s SART data shows live birth rates higher than the national average in women over 35. As we’ll explain shortly, the use of genetic testing prior to transfer is one of the main clinical drivers behind this pattern in older age groups.
How to Read IVF Success Rates Correctly
Not all clinics report success the same way. Some advertise a “pregnancy rate,” while others show “live birth per transfer,” and a few show cumulative rates across multiple cycles. These are not interchangeable, and the differences can be significant.
| Metric | What It Measures | Where It Falls in the Process |
|---|---|---|
| Positive pregnancy test rate | Positive blood hCG ÷ embryo transfers | Earliest measurement; includes chemical pregnancies |
| Clinical pregnancy rate | Confirmed fetal heartbeat ÷ embryo transfers | After ultrasound; does not account for miscarriage |
| Live birth rate per transfer | Live births ÷ completed transfers only | Skips cancelled cycles; can look inflated |
| Live birth rate per intended retrieval | Live births ÷ all retrieval cycle starts | Most complete; SART’s recommended benchmark |
| Cumulative live birth rate | Live births ÷ patients completing all planned cycles | Best estimate of success across a full treatment course |
Usually, live birth rate per intended retrieval is the most important figure. It counts from the very beginning of a cycle, including patients whose cycles were canceled before egg retrieval. Rates “per transfer” always look higher because they only count cycles that reached the embryo transfer stage.
SART’s “final year” data is more complete than “preliminary year” data. Because some embryos are frozen and transferred months later, preliminary data can undercount a clinic’s true outcomes. Always look for final-year results when comparing clinics on SART’s website.
Cumulative rates paint a fuller picture for patients planning multiple rounds. A single-cycle success rate reflects one attempt, whereas the cumulative rate shows what happens when a patient sees a full treatment plan through. That number is typically higher.
We know this can be complicated, and we’re happy to walk you through our IVF success rates. Schedule a consultation to speak to a fertility specialist.
Live Birth Rate vs Clinical Pregnancy Rate
The gap between a “positive pregnancy” and a live birth can span 15–20 percentage points, depending on age. A clinic advertising a 70% pregnancy rate and one advertising a 53% live birth rate may be describing almost identical actual outcomes, measured at different moments. When comparing clinics, always ask for live birth data specifically.
| Stage in the IVF Process | What’s Being Measured | Approximate National Rate (Under 35, Per Transfer) |
|---|---|---|
| Positive pregnancy test | Blood hCG above threshold | ~72% |
| Clinical pregnancy | Fetal heartbeat confirmed on ultrasound | ~62–63% |
| Live birth | Baby born and delivered | ~61.5% |
| Live birth per retrieval | Baby born, counting from cycle start | 53.2% |
Positive pregnancy test and clinical pregnancy rates are national estimates based on SART data; live birth rates are sourced directly from SART’s national final-year report.
For patients 38 and older, early pregnancy loss becomes a more significant factor. Chromosomal abnormalities in embryos increase with age, raising miscarriage rates. This is one reason preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) has become a standard part of care for many patients in this age range. It allows the clinic to identify chromosomally normal embryos before transfer, thereby improving per-transfer success rates and reducing loss.
How PGT-A Testing Impacts IVF Success Rates
With PGT-A testing, a small number of embryonic cells are biopsied and sent to a genetics lab for analysis. The lab checks each embryo’s chromosomes to identify which ones are euploid (meaning they have the correct number of chromosomes) and which are aneuploid, meaning they carry an abnormality that would likely prevent a successful pregnancy or result in miscarriage. Only euploid embryos are cleared for transfer.
For patients in their early 40s, this step matters a great deal: chromosomal abnormalities become significantly more common with age, and without testing, it can be difficult to distinguish a viable embryo from one that isn’t, even under a microscope. PGT-A removes much of that uncertainty.
PGT-A San Francisco IVF Success Rates
The table below presents SART clinic-level data from RMA Northern California, specifically for frozen embryo transfers where embryos underwent PGT-A genetic screening before transfer. These figures reflect outcomes for embryos that were biopsied, tested, and confirmed chromosomally normal prior to transfer.
| Age at Retrieval | SART National Avg. (PGT-A, Single Embryo Transfer) | RMA Northern California (PGT-A, Single Embryo Transfer) |
|---|---|---|
| Under 35 | 55.0% | 63.8% |
| 35–37 | 53.4% | 59.3% |
| 38–40 | 52.1% | 53.3% |
| 41–42 | 49.4% | 51.5% |
This data highlights how PGT-A dramatically improves per-transfer success across all age groups, with the effect becoming more pronounced as patient age increases. For patients weighing their options, choosing a clinic with an established PGT-A program and an experienced embryology lab is one of the most crucial factors.
The key caveat with PGT-A rates is that they measure per-transfer outcomes, not per-retrieval. A retrieval cycle must first produce viable embryos, then survive the biopsy and genetic testing process, and finally yield at least one euploid embryo. Patients should ask their clinic what percentage of their retrieval cycles typically result in at least one transferable, PGT-A normal embryo, as that number completes the picture.
Learn More About San Francisco IVF Success Rates
Understanding how San Francisco IVF success rates are reported is one thing, but your individual chances depend on your ovarian reserve, cycle history, partner fertility, and which treatment approach fits your goals.
RMA Northern California’s care team begins with a thorough fertility evaluation before recommending any path forward. Their approach is built around SART-reported outcomes, evidence-based protocols, and individualized treatment plans designed around each patient.
If you’d like to learn more or discuss your own numbers with a specialist, schedule a consultation with RMA Northern California.
