How does Forkin score a product?

The Forkin Score starts from the Nutri-Score 2023 v2 base published by Santé publique France, then applies transparent, documented adjustments: NOVA processing group, per-additive risk (capped at 49% when a significant-concern additive is present), and IARC indicators for processed and red meat. Environmental impact is scored separately, not folded into the Forkin Score. Every formula and source is on this page.

Is the Forkin Score the same as the official Nutri-Score?

No. The Forkin Score uses the official Nutri-Score 2023 v2 as its base but layers additional, openly documented adjustments on top, and it preserves the unadjusted grade as a separate field. Forkin is independent of Santé publique France and is not the official Nutri-Score.

Is Forkin's environmental score the same as Eco-Score?

No. It is built on ADEME Agribalyse 3.1 and aligned with the EU Product Environmental Footprint method, covering agriculture and processing stages only. Forkin does not use the names "Eco-Score", "EcoScore", or "Green-Score" — those are trademarks held by ADEME and others. The score is a comparative signal between products in the same category, not a certified carbon-footprint claim.

Why might Forkin's score differ from another food app's?

Different apps use different formulas, source datasets, and processing or additive adjustments. Forkin documents its exact method and public sources here, uses label data read from product photos where available, and keeps the unadjusted Nutri-Score grade as a separate field for transparency.

Can I rely on the allergen and dietary flags for safety?

They are an informational aid, not a guarantee. Packaging changes by country, batch, and retailer, and cross-contact may not be declared. Always read the physical label, and rely on recognised certification marks for strict medical, allergy, vegan, halal, or kosher requirements.

Methodology

How we score products

Last updated: June 2026

Every score we display is computed from public, peer-reviewed or regulator-published methodologies. This page documents each one, the source we use, and what it cannot tell you. Forkin scores are informational only — they do not replace medical, dietary, or veterinary advice.

In short

We base every Forkin score on public frameworks and disclose where Forkin adds its own weighting — Santé publique France, ADEME / Agribalyse, FEDIAF, the EU Cosmetics Regulation, the IARC, the Monash University FODMAP team, the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and Monteiro et al.'s NOVA classification.
Every score is informational. Forkin does not advise you to eat or avoid any specific product, prescribe a diet, or replace a clinician.
Where the underlying science is contested or evolving, we say so.

Food · Nutrition

Forkin Score (food)

What it is: A 0–100 Forkin Score and an A–E letter grade summarising the nutritional quality of food and beverages, starting from the Nutri-Score 2023 v2 nutrient-profile algorithm and then applying Forkin's disclosed processing, additive, and IARC classification-group adjustments.
Source: The nutritional base implements the Nutri-Score 2023 v2 algorithm published by Santé publique France together with the European Scientific Committee, with the official protein, fibre, and FVL inclusion rules.
How Forkin extends it: Forkin applies additional, transparent editorial adjustments on top of the Santé publique France base score: a NOVA processing-group adjustment (−4 / −10), per-additive concern adjustments based on published toxicological and regulatory assessments (−5 / −10 / −20 / −30, with duplicate E-number variants collapsed; capped at 49% when any additive of significant or severe concern is present), and adjustments that reflect public IARC classifications. The IARC classifies processed meat as a Group 1 agent and red meat as a Group 2A agent; Forkin reflects those public classifications at the food-category level (processed meat −25, capped at 30%; red meat −15). These are category-level signals derived from a public classification — not a statement that any specific branded product causes harm. Environmental impact is calculated separately and is not part of the Forkin Score. The pre-adjustment Nutri-Score base is preserved separately for transparency.
Why these weights: The magnitudes Forkin chooses for these adjustments are editorial calibrations, not values published by any standards body — so we disclose them and the reasoning behind them. The NOVA adjustment is sized to reflect the association between ultra-processed-food intake and adverse health outcomes reported in large prospective cohorts (e.g. Srour et al., BMJ 2019; Lane et al., BMJ 2024), kept deliberately modest because that evidence is population-level and observational. The per-additive adjustment scales with each substance's concern level in the regulatory record and is hard-capped so additives alone cannot dominate the score. The processed-meat and red-meat adjustments are calibrated to mirror the relative strength of the underlying IARC classification (Group 1 vs Group 2A) and are capped so a single category signal cannot, on its own, force a product to the bottom of the scale. We welcome challenges to any of these calibrations.
Alcoholic beverages: Alcoholic beverages above 1.2% ABV are excluded from the official Nutri-Score 2023 v2 algorithm, and Forkin does not display a Forkin Score or Nutri-Score on them. For transparency, alcoholic products show an informational panel with ABV, grams of pure alcohol per container, equivalent WHO standard drinks (10 g pure alcohol each), and IARC / WHO source citations. Inside France this aligns with Code de la santé publique L.3323-2 (Loi Évin).
What this score is not: The Forkin Score is a comparative product signal, not a personalised recommendation. It cannot account for portion sizes, individual nutrient needs, allergies, medical conditions, or how a product fits in your overall diet. It is not advice. Talk to a registered dietitian for clinical nutrition guidance.

Food · Environment

Environmental score (food)

What it is: A 0–100 score and an A–E letter grade representing the cradle-to-processing environmental impact of a product per kilogram, log-normalised against the observed distribution of base-ingredient impacts.
Source: Built on ADEME Agribalyse 3.1 — the French national life-cycle inventory for food, published under Open Licence 2.0 — and aligned with the EU Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) single-score methodology. Percentile anchors (P5/P95) come from more than 1,300 base-ingredient entries.
Scope: We compute agriculture and processing stages only. Across the Agribalyse base-ingredient rows used by Forkin, those stages account for about 90% of the EF single score in aggregate, so they are the strongest product signal. We do not include transport, distribution, retail, consumption, or end-of-life — those depend on the user's actual supply chain and are not estimable from the label. Packaging emissions are tracked separately and shown alongside but are not part of the food environmental score.
What this score is not: The environmental score is a comparative signal between products in the same category, not a certified carbon footprint claim. Packaging improvements matter, but a recycled or lighter pack should not be used to distract from a high-impact food-production footprint. We do not use the names "Eco-Score", "EcoScore", or "Green-Score" — those are trademarks held by ADEME and other parties. Forkin does not certify any product as low-impact.

Food · Processing

NOVA processing group

What it is: A 1–4 classification of how processed a food is, based on the type and purpose of industrial transformation rather than nutrient content.
Source: Based on the NOVA framework developed by Monteiro et al. at the University of São Paulo, adopted as a reference by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO 2019) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO/WHO 2019), and used in national dietary guidelines in Brazil, France (PNNS 4), Belgium, and Israel.
How we interpret it: We compute NOVA from the enriched ingredient list, taking the maximum group across all leaf ingredients (per Monteiro 2019 section 4: any ultra-processed ingredient promotes the whole product to NOVA 4). The Forkin Score adjustment for ultra-processed foods is grounded in published population-level epidemiology; it is not a verdict on any single product.
What this score is not: NOVA classifies processing, not healthiness. A NOVA 4 product is not automatically unhealthy and a NOVA 1 product is not automatically healthy. Population-level epidemiology is not a verdict on any single product.

Pet food

FEDIAF pet-food adequacy

What it is: A 0–100 percentage representing how many of the FEDIAF-published minimum nutrient thresholds a complete pet food meets, computed per kilogram of dry matter for the detected species (dog or cat) and life stage (growth / adult / senior).
Source: Based on the FEDIAF Nutritional Guidelines for Complete and Complementary Pet Food for Cats and Dogs (September 2021, reviewed 2024), published by the European Pet Food Industry Federation. FEDIAF's nutrient minimums are the de facto reference used by EU member-state regulators under Regulation (EC) No 767/2009.
Why a separate score: Human Nutri-Score is meaningless for cats and dogs — different macro profiles, species-specific essential nutrients (e.g. taurine for cats). For pet food we replace the human pathway entirely.
What this score is not: Adequacy is a floor, not a prescription. A score of 100 means a product meets every label-readable FEDIAF minimum. It is not veterinary advice. Specific clinical needs (renal, allergen avoidance, joint support, weight control) require professional input from your vet.

Food · IBS

Low-FODMAP classification

What it is: A four-state classification (yes / no / maybe / unknown) of whether a product is suitable for someone following a low-FODMAP diet for IBS management, based on the dose-dependent presence of six FODMAP subtypes per 100 g of finished product.
Source: Thresholds are derived from Varney et al., "FODMAPs: food composition, defining cutoff values and international application" (Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2017), and from the Monash University FODMAP database (the team that originated the low-FODMAP diet). Each composition entry carries a traceable source identifier.
What this score is not: Not medical advice. Not a clinical recommendation. The low-FODMAP diet is a diagnostic and therapeutic tool that should be supervised by a registered dietitian, especially the reintroduction phase. Individual tolerance varies widely — a product flagged "low-FODMAP" may still trigger symptoms in some people. For IBS management, consult a dietitian.

Food · Dietary fit

Dietary compatibility flags

What it is: Four-state product flags for vegan, vegetarian, gluten-free, keto, palm-oil-free, low-FODMAP, halal, and kosher compatibility. Values are unknown, yes, no, maybe, or certified where a recognised label is detected.
Source: Ingredient-origin and allergen signals come from Forkin's enriched ingredient taxonomy, VLM/OCR label extraction, additive metadata, and recognised certification marks detected on the package. Keto uses net carbohydrates per 100 g. Gluten-free and allergen-derived flags use the EU-14 allergen taxonomy.
How we interpret it: Clear disqualifiers are shown as negative signals. Recognised labels can upgrade a compatible flag to certified unless ingredient evidence contradicts it. For halal and kosher, Forkin does not infer a positive claim from ingredients alone: clear haram/treif signals are negative, recognised certification marks are certified, and ambiguous animal-origin cases stay unverified.
What this score is not: Dietary compatibility is informational. It cannot verify processing aids, manufacturing lines, slaughter methods, religious supervision, cross-contact, or every supplier-level derivative. For strict medical, allergy, vegan, halal, or kosher requirements, rely on the physical label and recognised certification.

Food · Allergens

Food allergen handling

What it is: EU-14 allergen tags and per-allergen confidence statuses for gluten, crustaceans, eggs, fish, peanuts, soy, milk, tree nuts, celery, mustard, sesame, sulphites, lupins, and molluscs.
Source: Signals come from declared allergens, ingredient taxonomy matches, OCR/VLM label reading, precautionary trace statements, certification labels, and Open Food Facts fallback data when Forkin enrichment is incomplete. Synonyms and language-prefixed tags are normalised into the EU-14 canonical set.
How we interpret it: Confirmed ingredient allergens are treated as contains. Precautionary statements are treated as may contain. When ingredient coverage is incomplete, missing allergen tags are not treated as a clean result. Umbrella terms such as spices or flavourings suppress some free-from assertions because they can legally hide certain derivatives.
What this score is not: Allergen handling is a safety aid, not a guarantee. Packaging can change by country, batch, or retailer, and cross-contact may not be declared. Always read the physical label before eating.

Food · Structure

Plate breakdown

What it is: A 15-category structural decomposition of a product or scanned meal — vegetables, fruits, whole and refined grains, plant / fish / poultry / red / processed protein, dairy, oils, beverages, snacks, condiments, other — mapped onto the Harvard Healthy Eating Plate framework.
Source: Categorisation follows the Harvard Healthy Eating Plate, developed by nutrition experts at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and editors at Harvard Health Publications. Forkin does not reproduce the Harvard graphic — only the category taxonomy, with attribution.
What this score is not: A structural decomposition is not a dietary recommendation. The Harvard Healthy Eating Plate is an educational guide for general healthy adults, not a personalised meal plan. Specific dietary needs require professional input.

Beauty · Environment

Cosmetic environmental score

What it is: A 0–100 packaging-only environmental score for cosmetic products, log-normalised against the observed distribution of cosmetic packaging emissions across our database.
Source: Computed from ADEME Base Carbone (Open Licence 2.0) material emission factors with recycled-content blending per ISO 14021 and refillable amortisation per ADEME's published reuse counts. Cosmetics have no published ingredient-level life-cycle inventory comparable to Agribalyse for food, so for beauty products the environmental tile reflects packaging only.
What this score is not: Packaging emissions are an estimate, not a verified product LCA. The score is a comparative signal between cosmetic products, not an absolute carbon footprint claim.

Beauty · Allergens

Cosmetic allergen tags

What it is: A list of fragrance allergens detected in a cosmetic product's ingredient list. Each tag is one of the individually-declarable fragrance allergens in Annex III of the EU Cosmetics Regulation — both the original 26 and the substances added by the 2023 expansion.
Source: Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on cosmetic products (Annex III). Risk class assignments follow opinions of the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS/1459/11). Coverage includes the substances added by Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1545 — which become mandatory on-pack for products placed on the market from 31 July 2026 — so Forkin reads both the original 26 fragrance allergens and the expanded list.
What this score is not: Annex III declaration is a regulatory transparency requirement, not a hazard verdict. The presence of an allergen on a label means the substance is above the disclosure threshold — it does not mean the product is unsafe for the general population. Most people are not allergic to most of the 26. Allergen tags are most useful for users who already know they react to a specific substance, typically diagnosed via dermatologist patch testing.

Food · Additives

Food additive concern

What it is: Per-additive concern classification on a 0–4 scale (no known concern → severe concern), and a per-additive penalty in the Forkin Score with a hard cap at 49% when any additive of significant or severe concern (concern level 3+) is present. Duplicate codes and sub-variants are collapsed so one substance is penalised once.
Source: Risk levels are aggregated from published actions and classifications by official food-safety and chemicals authorities, including EFSA, JECFA, IARC, ECHA, EU regulations, FDA, Health Canada, OEHHA, and ANSES. Each additive entry carries the regulatory ID (E-number), assessment basis, concern level, and legal-status fields separately.
What this score is not: Concern classifications reflect the regulatory and scientific record at the time of assessment. They are population-level signals, not individual medical advice, not a legal-status claim, and not a statement that an authorised additive is unsafe at permitted levels.

Open record

Transparency and corrections

The full scoring methodology, the percentile anchors, and the source citations for every score are public — documented on this page and updated as the underlying science evolves. If you believe a score is wrong, the underlying methodology is wrong, or a citation needs updating, please email us — we will investigate and correct the record where appropriate. We correct a score only when the underlying data or methodology is wrong, never to accommodate a commercial interest — and we keep a record of every correction.

Read this

Important disclaimer

Forkin scores are for informational purposes only. They are not medical, dietary, nutritional, or veterinary advice. They do not replace consultation with a qualified healthcare professional. Do not use Forkin to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Always read the product label and verify allergen information before consuming any food or applying any cosmetic. The presence or absence of any signal on Forkin should not be relied upon for any decision involving health risk. The Forkin Score is Forkin's own editorial opinion and composite assessment, formed from the public methods and sources documented on this page (it is not the official Nutri-Score), and is independent of any commercial relationship with manufacturers or retailers. For the full terms governing these scores, including the limitation of liability, see our Terms of Service.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

How does Forkin score a product?: The Forkin Score starts from the Nutri-Score 2023 v2 base published by Santé publique France, then applies transparent, documented adjustments: NOVA processing group, per-additive risk (capped at 49% when a significant-concern additive is present), and IARC indicators for processed and red meat. Environmental impact is scored separately, not folded into the Forkin Score. Every formula and source is on this page.
Is the Forkin Score the same as the official Nutri-Score?: No. The Forkin Score uses the official Nutri-Score 2023 v2 as its base but layers additional, openly documented adjustments on top, and it preserves the unadjusted grade as a separate field. Forkin is independent of Santé publique France and is not the official Nutri-Score.
Is Forkin's environmental score the same as Eco-Score?: No. It is built on ADEME Agribalyse 3.1 and aligned with the EU Product Environmental Footprint method, covering agriculture and processing stages only. Forkin does not use the names "Eco-Score", "EcoScore", or "Green-Score" — those are trademarks held by ADEME and others. The score is a comparative signal between products in the same category, not a certified carbon-footprint claim.
Does Forkin give medical or dietary advice?: No. Every Forkin score is informational only and is not medical, dietary, nutritional, or veterinary advice. Do not use Forkin to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Always read the physical label and consult a qualified professional for clinical guidance.
Why might Forkin's score differ from another food app's?: Different apps use different formulas, source datasets, and processing or additive adjustments. Forkin documents its exact method and public sources here, uses label data read from product photos where available, and keeps the unadjusted Nutri-Score grade as a separate field for transparency.
Can I rely on the allergen and dietary flags for safety?: They are an informational aid, not a guarantee. Packaging changes by country, batch, and retailer, and cross-contact may not be declared. Always read the physical label, and rely on recognised certification marks for strict medical, allergy, vegan, halal, or kosher requirements.

Reach us

Questions?

Email us at hello@forkin.io.