Abstract Study question To determine the pregnancy rates with embryo diagnosed as euploid by non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing (niPGT-A) and trophectoderm based pre-implantation genetic testing (cPGT-A) Summary answer Biochemical pregnancy rates are comparable in couples undergoing transfer with embryos diagnosed as euploid as judged by niPGT-A or cPGT-A What is known already NiPGT-A utilizes cell-free DNA in culture media to assess the chromosomal status of embryos. Several studies have shown that the niPGT-A and cPGT-A have a reasonable concordance rate and niPGT-A can be considered as an alternative in predicting the ploidy status of the embryos. However, limited information exist on the clinical outcomes of embryos deemed euploid by niPGT-A. Study design, size, duration Data of 1209 participants between June 2022 and Dec 2022 was collected from 46 centers of Indira IVF Hospital. These were couples who had experienced recurrent implantation failures (>3 failed ET), recurrent miscarriages (>2 miscarriages) or had advanced maternal age (>35 years) and opting either for niPGT-A or cPGT-A at our centres for euploid embryo transfers. Women with anatomical uterine defects and Asherman syndrome were excluded. Participants/materials, setting, methods Trophectoderm biopsy was done in 1383 Day 5 grade A embryos and PGT-A was done using NGS. Culture media of 3083 Grade A embryos were collected on D5 or D6 and frozen. NGS was done at an external facility. Embryos deemed euploid in either of the groups were transferred. Biochemical pregnancy was determined by measurements of beta hCG. Main results and the role of chance There were 906 patients in the niPGT-A group and 303 in the cPGT-A group. The clinical characteristics of the participants were comparable in both groups. Biochemical pregnancy rates were 60% and 69%, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (p < 0.6). The euploidy rates were comparable in the niPGT-A and cPGT-A groups (40% and 46%) respectively. The aneuploidy rates were lower in the niPGT-A group as compared to the cPGT-A group (15% vs 26%). The mosaicism rates were higher in the niPGT-A group as compared to the cPGT-A group. Limitations, reasons for caution This is a preliminary data analysis of only the biochemical pregnancy rates. Clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth outcomes are subject to further investigation. Wider implications of the findings The study will aid IVF specialist to consider niPGT-A as a possible alternative to cPGT-A in clinical practice. Trial registration number ’not applicable’