The rising prevalence rates of age-related cognitive impairment are a worldwide public concern, bringing about a surge in the number of "brain training" programs commercially available to the general public. Numerous companies advertise that their products improve memory and protect against cognitive decline, though researchers have voiced concerns regarding the validity of such claims. To address this issue, the current meta-analytic investigation examined evidence from 43 studies (encompassing 2,636 participants) to evaluate the efficacy of commercial training programs within two separate populations: healthy older adults and older adults with mild cognitive-impairment (MCI). Seven programs were identified: BrainGymmer, BrainHQ, CogMed, CogniFit, Dakim, Lumosity, and MyBrainTrainer. Analyses yielded small, significant near-transfer effects for both healthy and MCI samples. Far-transfer was not observed for the MCI sample, whereas a small, significant effect was found for subjective but not objective measures of far-transfer in the healthy sample. Analyses of individual domains (combining near-and far-transfer outcomes) yielded significant transfer to executive-functioning, memory, and processing-speed in healthy older adults. After adjusting for publication bias, only the effect size for processing speed remained significant. Transfer to attention, objective everyday functioning, fluid-intelligence, and visuospatial domains was not significant. Thus, whilst "brain training" may be suitable for enjoyment and entertainment purposes, there is currently insufficient empirical evidence to support that such training can improve memory, general cognition, or everyday functioning. This area of research is still in its infancy and warrants further investigation to provide more substantial evidence regarding the efficacy of this rapidly expanding industry.