An assessment of chocolate spreads available in leading UK supermarkets has found that 99% meet the Government’s definition of “less healthy” foods. Despite this classification, the products remain outside existing restrictions on advertising and promotional activity.
The study, Spreading the Problem, was released by Action on Salt & Sugar during Sugar Awareness Week. Researchers reviewed 78 chocolate spreads and established that 86% contained high levels of sugar, 91% were high in saturated fat and 92% qualified as ultra-processed. A typical 15g portion provided 6.3g of sugar. Serving the spread on two slices of bread can therefore deliver more than 12g of sugar—around half of the recommended maximum daily free sugar intake for a child aged seven to ten.
Several products recorded substantially higher levels. M&S Whipped Chocolate Spread provided 9.2g of sugar per serving, equivalent to almost 40% of the daily maximum recommended for a child in that age group. That amount is also comparable to more than two teaspoons of sugar spread across one slice of toast. Hazella Choco Swirl Spread and Nutella Hazelnut Spread with Cocoa were among the next highest-sugar products.
According to the researchers, the results highlight a significant gap in public health policy. Other categories of foods high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) face controls on advertising and retail promotions, while sweet spreads are excluded from those measures. As a result, products linked to well-known confectionery brands, including Maltesers Spread and Cadbury Milk Chocolate Spread, can continue to receive unrestricted promotional support. In some cases, they contain more sugar per 100g than comparable confectionery products that are subject to the rules.
The wider review covered 834 spreads, including jam, honey, syrup and nut butter. It found that 78% were high in sugar and 86% did not meet the current Nutrient Profiling Model (NPM). Voluntary industry action has also produced limited progress. Among products included in government sugar reduction guidelines, 84% exceeded the recommended thresholds, while 60% of chocolate spreads remained above target levels.
Action on Salt & Sugar is calling on the Government to remove the exemption and apply HFSS advertising and promotion controls to chocolate and other sweet spreads. The organisation is also seeking consultation on mandatory Healthier Food Targets and Reporting requirements for major manufacturers.
These findings contribute to wider discussions about food and beverage industry trends, food manufacturing trends and the role of food processing technology in improving product formulations. They also reflect growing scrutiny of food distribution trends, food and drink industry innovation, food and drink sustainability, food and drink regulations, food and drink packaging and food and drink marketing in response to changing food and drink consumer trends.
Dr Kawther Hashem, head of research & impact at Action on Salt & Sugar, based at Queen Mary University of London, said: “This loophole is increasingly difficult to defend. You cannot have a system designed to restrict the advertising and promotion of less healthy food, then leave out a category where virtually every chocolate spread fails the Government’s own healthiness assessment. These products are overwhelmingly high in sugars and saturated fat, yet companies are still being given greater freedom to promote them. That is completely at odds with the direction of public health policy. Sugar Awareness Week is about holding businesses to account for the food environment they help create, but Government has a responsibility too. Ministers should close this exemption and make sure chocolate spreads and other sweet spreads are covered by the same rules as comparable less healthy products.”
Dr Jizhao Niu, a postdoctoral research associate at Queen Mary University of London who carried out the analysis, said: “What stood out most from our analysis was just how widespread high sugar levels were across everyday spreads. This was not limited to a handful of products or brands. We found substantial differences in sugar content between products within the same category, showing that lower-sugar options are already available. Consumers should be able to make informed choices, but it is not always easy to identify these differences from product packaging. Our findings highlight the need for clearer nutritional information and further efforts to reduce sugar across these products.”
