2025 Key results

Trust in and importance of all tested labelling elements increased since 2024, except the trust in and importance of the Health Star Rating (HSR), which remained stable.
Consumers’ perceived confidence in their ability to use food labelling to make informed choices (M = 5.3) has also significantly increased since 2024 (M = 5.0). Most of the small number of participants who lacked confidence (n = 438) reported that it was difficult to use food labelling as they do not trust food label information; that information on a food label is too small/illegible; and that they do not understand what the information on labels means.
Food additives continued to be the most looked for piece of information in the ingredients list (selected by 41.0%), followed by the key ingredients (37.2%), and artificial sweeteners (33.6%).
Respondents’ knowledge of the NIP and HSR were both moderate to high. Australians reported a higher self-reported knowledge of both labelling elements compared to New Zealand respondents.
A smaller proportion of respondents were correct in selecting a product with the most energy when the NIPs displayed different serving sizes (49.3% correct) compared to when they were the same serving size (80.4%). Most participants (77.2%) selected the correct NIP when choosing which NIP displayed the least ‘salt’, or the most energy (80.4%) when the serving size was the same.
Most respondents use the NIP and HSR to some degree. Only 4.8% reported to never using the NIP and 12.5% to never using the HSR. The NIP was reported to be used more frequently. Australians used both labelling elements more than New Zealander respondents.
Overall, NIP and HSR users reported similar motivations for use with both commonly used to compare the nutritional value of similar products (NIP 40%; HSR 34%) and to check the basis of any health/nutrient claims (NIP 30%; HSR 29%). However, the NIP (53%) compared to the HSR (22%) is used more commonly to track nutrient intake. The HSR was also used as a summary of the nutrition information (28%).
More than half of consumers agreed that they would both use (58.0% agree) and trust (57.6% agree) the HSR more if it was on most food and drink products. Again, Australians reported higher results than New Zealanders on these measures.

Download the:

Trust, Use and Understanding of Food Labelling

Trust in Food Labelling

Trust in all labelling elements significantly increased between 2024 and 2025, except for the HSR, which remained steady.

Line chart showing rising importance of food labelling elements from 2023 to 2025, with date marking and allergen information rated highest. — Trust in labelling elements by year, 2023 - 2025. *Q: How much do you feel you can trust the following information on packaged foods and drink? (1 = “Cannot trust at all” and 7 = “Can trust completely”).*

73.7% of consumers trusted FSANZ regulated food labelling (all elements except for the HSR). 2025 trust in FSANZ regulated food labelling was slightly higher with a mean (M) of 5.1 than that in 2024, M = 4.9.

Pie chart showing trust in labelling information, with most respondents expressing trust (74%), followed by neutral views (21%) and low distrust (6%). — Trust in FSANZ regulated food labelling elements.

Importance of food labelling

Reflecting results for trust, the importance of all labelling elements significantly increased between 2024 and 2025, except for the HSR which remained steady.

2025 Modules: The Nutrition Information Panel (NIP) and the Health Star Rating (HSR)

Knowledge of the NIP

Most consumers felt that they had a moderate to high knowledge of the NIP, with 87.4% rating at least a 4 on the seven-point scale (1 = “I know very little” and 7 = “I know a lot”). Australians reported a slight but significantly higher understanding of the NIP (M = 5.0) than New Zealanders (M = 4.9).

Use of the NIP

Of those who had seen or heard of the NIP before (n = 2,204), almost half (47.9%) use the NIP ‘Always’ or ‘Most of the time’, with only 4.8% never using it. Australians reported using the NIP ‘Always’ or ‘most of the time’ more than New Zealand respondents.

Frequency of referring to the NIP when shopping for food by country (n = 2,204). *Q: How often do you look for the Nutrition Information Panel when shopping for food in the supermarket?*
	Australia n (%)	New Zealand n (%)	Total n (%)
Always	196 (15.2)	104 (11.4)	300 (13.6)
Most of the time	455 (35.3)	300 (32.8)	755 (34.3)
Sometimes	425 (32.9)	317 (34.7)	742 (33.7)
Rarely	146 (11.3)	130 (14.1)	276 (12.5)
Never	54 (4.2)	52 (5.6)	106 (4.8)
Unsure	14 (1.1)	11 (1.2)	25 (1.1)

Elements within the NIP

Sugar content was the piece of information most frequently referred to on the NIP. This was followed by energy content, servings per package, total fat content per serving and serving size. Overall, information on nutrients (e.g. sugar and fat) per serve were more commonly referred to than per 100g or the %D).

Bar chart showing which Nutrition Information Panel elements are used when buying food for the first time, with sugar, energy and servings per package used most often. — Use of NIP elements when buying food products for the first time (n = 2,087). *Q: When buying products for the first time, what parts of the Nutrition Information Panel (NIP) do you usually look for? (Please select all that apply).*

Understanding of the NIP

Participants were asked to complete several tasks to measure their understanding of the NIP. A smaller proportion of respondents were correct in selecting a product with the most energy when the NIPs displayed different serving size (49.3% correct) compared to when they were the same serving size (80.4%). Most participants (77.2%) selected the correct NIP when choosing which NIP displayed the least ‘salt’, or the most energy (80.4%) when the serving size was the same.

Respondents understanding of the NIP. *Q: Looking at these two food labels, assuming you were to eat the same amount of each food, which product has the [most energy/least salt]?*
	Correct answer n (%)	Incorrect answer n (%)	Answered that both products have the same amount of energy/salt n (%)	Don’t know n (%)
Different serving size
Most energy	1,100 (49.3)	858 (38.4)	108 (4.8)	166 (7.4)
Same serving size
Most energy	1,794 (80.4)	202 (9.1)	89 (4.3)	128 (6.3)
Least salt	1,723 (77.2)	246 (11.0)	89 (4.0)	174 (7.8)

Knowledge of the HSR

Most consumers felt that they had a moderate to high knowledge of the HSR, with 77.0% rating at least a 4 on the seven-point scale (1 = “I know very little” and 7 = “I know a lot”). Only 1.4% did not know what the HSR was or had never seen it before. Australians reported a significantly higher understanding of the HSR than New Zealanders on average. However, self-reported knowledge may not reflect objective understanding.

Self-reported knowledge of the HSR by country. *Q: How much, if anything, do you feel you know about the Health Star Rating? (1 = “I know very little” and 7 = “I know a lot”).*
	Australia Mean (±SD)	New Zealand Mean (±SD)	Total Mean (±SD)
Self-reported knowledge of the HSR	4.6 (1.4)	4.2 (1.5)	4.5 (1.5)

Use of the HSR

Of those who had seen or heard of the HSR before in 2025 (n = 2,200), 35.3% use the HSR ‘Always’ or ‘Most of the time’, with 11.1% never using it. There was no difference in reported use between 2024 and 2025. Australians reported using the HSR more frequently than New Zealand respondents in 2025.

Grouped bar chart showing how often shoppers refer to the Health Star Rating when buying food in 2024 and 2025, with most respondents saying they use it sometimes or most of the time. — Frequency of referring to the HSR when shopping for food, 2024 (n = 2,115) - 2025 (n = 2,200). *Q: How often do you look for the Health Star Rating when shopping for food in the supermarket?*

Motivations for using the HSR and NIP

Overall, the NIP and HSR are both commonly used to compare the nutritional value of similar products and to check the basis of any health/nutrient claims. However, the NIP compared to the HSR is more commonly used to track nutrient intake and the HSR is used as a summary of nutiriton information found on the back of pack.

Horizontal bar chart comparing reasons for using the Nutrition Information Panel and Health Star Rating, showing that tracking nutrient intake and comparing products are the most common motivations. — Comparison of motivations for using the Nutrition Information Panel (n = 2,087) versus Health Star Rating (n = 1,940). *Note: Some motivations were only asked in relation to the NIP or the HSR.*Percentages may not add up to 100% as multiple responses could be selected.*

Potential Mandating of the HSR

More than half of consumers agreed that they would both use (58.0% agree) and trust (57.6% agree) the HSR more if it was on most food and drink products. Australian use and trust were both higher relative to New Zealand.

Use and trust of the Health Star Rating if it was mandated by country. Q: I would use the Health Star Rating more if it was on most food and drink products (1 = “Strongly disagree” and 7 = “Strongly agree”). Q: I would trust the Health Star Rating more if it was on most food and drink products (1 = “Strongly disagree” and 7 = “Strongly agree").
	Australia Mean (±SD)	New Zealand Mean (±SD)	Total Mean (±SD)
Use the HSR if it was on most products	4.8 (1.7)	4.4 (1.9)	4.6 (1.8)
Trust the HSR more if it was on most food and drink products	4.8 (1.6)	4.4 (1.8)	4.6 (1.7)

Food labelling