Three years ago, the DNA-testing firm 23andMe was a massive achievement, with a distribute worth higher than Apple’s.

But, from those heady days of millions of people rushing to send it saliva samples in gain for detailed reports about their ancestry, household connections and genetic make-up, it now finds itself fighting for its survival.

Its distribute worth has plummeted and this week it narrowly avoided being delisted from the stake trade.

And of course this is a corporation that holds the most sensitive data imaginable about its customers, raising troubling questions about what might happen to its huge – and extremely valuable – database of person human DNA.

When contacted by the BBC, 23andMe was bullish about its prospects – and insistent it remained “committed to protecting customer data and consistently concentrated on maintaining the privacy of our customers.”

But how did what was once one of the most talked-about tech firms get to the position where it has to respond questions about its very survival?

Not so long ago, 23andMe was in the community eye for all the correct reasons.

Its famous customers included Snoop Dogg, Oprah Winfrey, Eva Longoria and Warren Buffet – and millions of users were getting unexpected and life-changing results.

Some people discovered that their parents were not who they thought they were, or that they had a genetic pre-disposition to solemn health conditions. Its distribute worth rocketed to $321.

quick forward three years and that worth has slumped to just under $5 – and the corporation is worth 2% of what it once was.

What went incorrect?

According to Professor Dimitris Andriosopoulos, founder of the Responsible Business Unit at Strathclyde University, the issue for 23andMe was twofold.

Firstly, it didn’t really have a continuing operating schedule – once you’d paid for your DNA update, there was very little for you to gain for.

Secondly, plans to use an anonymised version of the gathered DNA database for drug research took too long to become profitable, because the drug advancement procedure takes so many years.

That leads him to a blunt conclusion: “If I had a crystal ball, I’d declare they will maybe last for a bit longer,” he told the BBC.

“But as it currently is, in my view, 23andMe is highly unlikely to survive.”

The problems at 23andMe are reflected in the turmoil in its leadership.

The board resigned in the summer and only the CEO and co-founder Anne Wojcicki – sister of the late YouTube boss Susan Wojcicki and ex-wife of Google co-founder Sergei Brin – remains from the original line-up.

Rumours have swirled that the firm will shortly either fold or be sold – claims that it rejects.

“23andMe’s co-founder and CEO Anne Wojcicki has publicly shared she intends to receive the corporation private, and is not open to considering third event takeover proposals,” the corporation said in a statement.

But that hasn’t stopped the hazard-taking, with rival firm Ancestry calling for US competition regulators to get involved if 23andMe does complete up for sale.

Companies rising and falling is nothing recent – especially in tech. But 23andMe is different.

“It’s worrying because of the sensitivity of the data,” says Carissa Veliz, author of Privacy is Power.

And that is not just for the individuals who have used the firm.

“If you gave your data to 23andMe, you also gave the genetic data of your parents, your siblings, your children, and even distant kin who did not consent to that,” she told the BBC.

David Stillwell, professor of computational social science at Cambridge Judge Business School, agrees the stakes are high.

“DNA data is different. If your lender account details are hacked, it will be disruptive but you can get a recent lender account,” he explained.

“If your (non-identical) sibling has used it, they distribute 50% of your DNA, so their data can still be used to make health predictions about you.”

The corporation is adamant these kinds of concerns are without foundation.

“Any corporation that handles buyer information, including the type of data we collect, there are applicable data protections set out in law required to be followed as part of any upcoming ownership transformation,” it said in its statement.

“The 23andMe terms of service and privacy statement would remain in place unless and until customers are presented with, and consent to, recent terms and statements.”

There are also legal protections which apply in the UK under its version of the data protection law, GDPR, whether the firm goes bust or changes hands.

Even so, all companies can be hacked – as 23andMe was 12 months ago.

And Carissa Veliz remains uneasy – and says ultimately a much robust way is needed if we desire to keep our most personal information secure.

“The terms and conditions of these companies are typically incredibly inclusive; when you provide out your personal data to them, you allow them to do pretty much anything they desire with it,” she said.

“Until we ban the trade in personal data, we are not well protected enough.”

Additional reporting by Tom Gerken