Skip to main content

Table 4 The correlations calculated between the commitments within the domains ‘Product formulation’ and ‘Product and brand promotion’ and the respective performance indicators (% Nutri-Score A + B; % Nutri-Score D + E; % Ultra-Processed and % Not-permitted to be marketed to children according to WHO)

From: Benchmarking the nutrition-related commitments and practices of major French food companies

Correlation 𝝆 (Spearman’s Rank Correlation Coefficient) P-value
Food and beverage manufacturers
 Product formulation and % Nutri-Score A + B −0.150 0.529
 Product formulation and % Nutri-Score D + E −0.043 0.858
 Product formulation and % ultra-processed 0.123 0.605
 Product formulation and % not-permitted 0.023 0.922
 Product and brand promotion and % not-permitted 0.252 0.285
Supermarkets
 Product formulation and % Nutri-Score A + B 0.143 0.787
 Product formulation and % Nutri-Score D + E −0.086 0.872
 Product formulation and % ultra-processed −0.029 0.957
 Product formulation and % not-permitted 0.429 0.397
Quick-service restaurants
 Product formulation and % Nutri-Score A + B −0.564 0.322
 Product formulation and % Nutri-Score D + E 0.051 0.935
 Product formulation and % not-permitted −0.410 0.493
  1. Visualizing the results shown in Table 4, it can be observed in Table 3 that food companies within the top third for commitments within the domain of ‘Product formulation’ don’t necessarily have the healthiest portfolios as determined by the Nutri-Score and NOVA-classification. On the contrary, there are companies within the lowest third for commitments that still have among the heathiest portfolios. The same can be observed for commitments and practices within the domain ‘Product and brand promotion’