Comparison of the efficacy of five front-of-pack nutrition labels in helping the Brazilian consumer make a healthier choice

Background: We tested, in an online survey, how well five different front-of-pack (FOP) labels helped Brazilian consumers make a healthier choice between two food or beverage products as compared to a no FOP label control. Methods: All 1072 respondents were randomly assigned to one of six groups 1) no FOP label (control), 2) ABIA label, 3) GGALIii Nutrient Profile label, 4) IdeC label, 5) Hybrid label or 6) Nutri-Score label and were all shown 9 food stimuli consisting of two products. The nutrient profile of the ABIA and Hybrid labels take into account the serving size of the food, while the other three labels score per 100 g. Respondents were asked which of the two products they thought was the healthier choice. Results: Overall, the Hybrid and ABIA labels performed best, resulting in a statistically significantly higher percentage of correct answers compared to the control for 9/9 and 8/9 of the food stimuli, respectively. Nutri-Score performed reasonably well and outperformed the control in 6/9 cases. The IdeC and GGALIii NP warning labels were the least useful, performing only one and two times better, respectively, than the control group. Conclusion: The Hybrid and the ABIA FOP labels, two interpretative traffic light labels that use colours and provide nutritional information per serving, were best suited to help Brazilian consumers choose the healthier product. They especially outperformed the other FOP labels when serving sizes differed significantly or when deeper consideration of nutritional information was needed to make an informed decision.