7. Product development
The UK Nutrient Profiling Model (NPM)
Introduction
If you’ve worked in UK food compliance for a while, you’ve probably heard of the Nutrient Profiling Model — usually shortened to NPM.
It’s not new, but it’s suddenly very relevant again. With the UK tightening rules around HFSS foods (that’s foods high in fat, salt and sugar), the updated version of the model is moving from theory into real-world impact.
The new model called Nutrient profiling model 2018 was published on 27th Jan 2026. At present, we’re currently waiting for the UK Government to open the public consultation – which is expected later this year.
Here’s what you need to know — where it came from, how it works, and what the new model will mean in practice.
Where the Nutrient Profiling Model came from
The original Nutrient Profiling Model was developed by the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) in 2004–2005.
At the time, the goal was simple:
The government needed a consistent way to decide which foods were “less healthy” for the purposes of advertising to children.
Before that, there wasn’t a clear scientific system. Decisions were often subjective. The NPM created a scoring model based on nutritional composition — essentially turning nutrition data into a number that determines whether a product is classified as HFSS.
Originally, the model was used mainly to control TV advertising of foods to children.
How the model has developed since then
The original 2004/5 model stayed largely unchanged for many years. It became the backbone of multiple UK public health policies, including:
- Advertising restrictions.
- Reformulation targets.
- Public health reporting.
However, nutrition science and public health priorities evolved. There were concerns that the original model:
- Didn’t reflect updated dietary advice.
- Could be manipulated through formulation tweaks.
- Didn’t align fully with newer policies like the Soft Drinks Industry Levy.
In response, Public Health England (now part of the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities) reviewed the model and proposed an updated version — often referred to as NPM 2018.
This updated model is what’s now being rolled into newer HFSS regulations.
The new Nutrient Profiling Model – what’s changed?
The updated model keeps the same core structure but refines how foods are scored.
The NPM is still a points-based scoring system, applied per 100g of product.
Step 1 – “A points” (negative nutrients)
Foods score points for nutrients we’re encouraged to limit:
- Energy (kJ)
- Saturated fat
- Total sugar
- Sodium
Higher amounts = more points.
| Points | Energy (kJ per 100g) | Saturated fats (g per 100g) | Free sugars (g per 100g) | Salt (g per 100g) |
| 0 | ≤ 315 | ≤ 0.9 | ≤ 0.9 | ≤ 0.2 |
| 1 | > 315 | > 0.9 | > 0.9 | > 0.2 |
| 2 | > 630 | > 1.9 | > 1.9 | > 0.5 |
| 3 | > 945 | > 2.8 | > 2.8 | > 0.7 |
| 4 | > 1,260 | > 3.7 | > 3.7 | > 0.9 |
| 5 | > 1,575 | > 4.7 | > 4.6 | > 1.1 |
| 6 | > 1,890 | > 5.6 | > 5.6 | > 1.4 |
| 7 | > 2,205 | > 6.6 | > 6.5 | > 1.6 |
| 8 | > 2,520 | > 7.5 | > 7.4 | > 1.8 |
| 9 | > 2,835 | > 8.4 | > 8.3 | > 2.0 |
| 10 | > 3,150 | > 9.4 | > 9.3 | > 2.3 |
Points are given for each of the nutrients (energy, saturated fat, sugar and salt). These are added together.
Example – fresh coconut
Nutrition information
| Typical Values | Per 100g | A Points |
| Energy | 1528kJ / 371kcal | 1 |
| Fat | 36.0g | |
| Saturates | 31.4g | 10 |
| Carbohydrate | 3.5g | |
| Sugars | 3.5g | 0* |
| Fibre | 9.0g | |
| Protein | 3.8g | |
| Salt | 0.10g | 4 |
| Total | 15 |
* Sugars naturally present in fresh, frozen, dried, stewed and canned fruit and vegetables do not count. Definition of free sugars.
Step 2 – “C points” (positive nutrients)
Foods can offset those points by scoring for beneficial components:
- Fruit, veg and nut content (%).
- Fibre.
- Protein.
These reduce the overall score.
| Points | Protein (g per 100g) | Fruit, vegetables, nuts and seeds (g per 100g) | Fibre (as measured by AOAC method) (g per 100g) |
| 0 | ≤ 1.7 | ≤ 40 | ≤ 0.6 |
| 1 | > 1.7 | > 40 | > 0.6 |
| 2 | > 3.4 | > 60 | > 1.2 |
| 3 | > 5.1 | Not applicable | > 1.8 |
| 4 | > 6.8 | Not applicable | > 2.4 |
| 5 | > 8.5 | > 80 | > 3.0 |
| 6 | Not applicable | Not applicable | > 3.6 |
| 7 | Not applicable | Not applicable | > 4.2 |
| 8 | Not applicable | Not applicable | > 4.8 |
| 9 | Not applicable | Not applicable | > 5.4 |
| 10 | Not applicable | Not applicable | > 6.0 |
If a product scores 11 or more ‘A’ points, then it can’t score points for protein – unless it also scores 5 points for fruit, vegetables, nuts and seeds (see ‘Calculating ‘C’ points’ below).
The definition of fruit, vegetable, nuts and seeds can be found here: Nutrient profiling model 2018: fruit, vegetables, nuts and seeds definitions – GOV.UK
Example – fresh coconut
Nutrition information
| Typical Values | Per 100g | A Points | C Points |
| Energy | 1528kJ / 371kcal | 1 | |
| Fat | 36.0g | ||
| Saturates | 31.4g | 10 | |
| Carbohydrate | 3.5g | ||
| Sugars | 3.5g | 3 | |
| Fibre | 9.0g | 10 | |
| Protein | 3.8g | 2 | |
| Salt | 0.10g | 4 | |
| Fruit, vegetable, nuts and seeds | 5 | ||
| Total | 15 | 17 | |
| Calculation | 15-17=-1 | ||
Step 3 – Final score determines classification
The final score = A points minus C points.
You might be wondering at this stage what happened to the B points. A middle “B” category was considered during development but didn’t survive into the final operational model. Therefore, we were left with just A points and C points.
A product is classified as HFSS if it exceeds the threshold:
- Foods: 4 or more points.
- Drinks: 1 or more points.
This basic scoring logic hasn’t changed — but how the points are awarded has.
Example – fresh coconut
This means, for the example of fresh coconut, which scored 15 A points and 17 C points – the overall points are 15-17 = -1. This means that the fresh coconut would not be classed ‘less healthy’.
What this means for manufacturers
This is where the impact becomes very real.
Reformulation risk
Products that passed under the original model may fail under the updated scoring — especially borderline products.
Commercial restrictions
If a product is classified as HFSS under the new model, it may face:
- Promotion restrictions (e.g. multibuy bans).
- Placement restrictions (e.g. front-of-store displays).
- Advertising restrictions (including online).
Increased technical scrutiny
Expect more requests from retailers and brand owners for:
- Confirmed NPM scores.
- Reformulation feasibility assessments.
- HFSS classification evidence.
Practical next steps for food businesses
If you haven’t already, now is the time to:
- Recalculate NPM scores using the updated model.
- Identify borderline products.
- Assess reformulation opportunities.
- Map HFSS exposure commercially (not just nutritionally).
This means that when the public consultation opens, you’ll be ready to submit your feedback, based on what it will mean to your business.
Smart Knowledge Plus
If you want to be the first to hear when NPM 2018 becomes legislation, and be kept up to date with other legislation, you need to join Smart Knowledge Plus.
Your membership will give you access to our legislation database, and you’ll receive monthly updates to notify you when there are changes.
Links
Nutrient profiling model 2018 – GOV.UK
Have your say…