Over the last two decades, the availability of plant-based foods has exploded.
What a massive blind taste test of vegan milk, cheese, and ice cream found — explained in one chart
What people really think about plant-based dairy.
You can get a meat-free patty in your Burger King Whopper if that’s your thing, buy realistic “chicken” nuggets at your local grocery store, or order marbled plant-based steak from food startups. But one animal-free food category has truly escaped containment from the vegan menu: plant-based milk.
Key takeaways
- Dairy production is a large driver of climate change, and dairy-free alternatives, like oat milk and cashew-based ice cream, haven’t gained enough market share to significantly displace it.
- To see how the dairy-free sector can improve, a nonprofit conducted the largest ever blind taste test, pitting plant-based versions of milk, cheese, yogurt, and more against conventional dairy.
- The experiment found that, on average, consumers enjoy conventional dairy more than dairy-free products. However, some of the top-performing dairy-free versions came close, demonstrating there’s potential for the plant-based market to further grow.
Milk made from soybeans, oats, almonds — even corn, bananas, peas, or potatoes — or any other plant-based source now accounts for around 15 percent of fluid milk sales in the US. For comparison, sales of plant-based meat make up around just 1 percent of the American meat market.
A new, massive blind taste test might help explain plant-based milk’s notable rise: A lot of people just think it tastes good — in some cases, almost as good, or just as good, as cow’s milk. (Read on to see which products rose to the top.) Other dairy-free products, like plant-based mozzarella and yogurt? A lot less so, the experiment found. The same goes for most plant-based meats, according to a similar blind taste test I wrote about when it was released last year.
Knowing which of these products people like — and dislike — and more importantly, how to make them better, is important, because dairy has a significant environmental footprint. Global dairy production spews about the same amount of climate-warming emissions into the atmosphere as global air travel, and cows’ waste is a major source of water pollution. In dairy farming, cows are also subjected to a number of cruel practices, and the industry comes with threats to human workers, as well. A more sustainable and humane future, then, depends on making all dairy alternatives go mainstream, not just your favorite cow-free milk.
Results of the big dairy-free blind taste test, explained
Late last year, a nonprofit called NECTAR — which researches alternative proteins like plant-based meat and dairy — recruited 2,183 people in San Francisco and New York City to participate in the largest ever blind taste test of dairy-free foods. Six percent of participants were vegetarian, 3 percent were pescatarian, and the rest considered themselves either “flexitarians” or omnivores.
Without knowing which version of a product they were tasting, participants tried a number of some of the top-selling 98 plant-based dairy products across 10 categories tested in the experiment, which included ice cream, barista-style milk, yogurt, cream cheese, and regular drinking milk — alongside one animal-based “benchmark” per category for comparison. Each item was prepared as it would be in a real-world setting: cream cheese was smeared on bagels, mozzarella was served on pizzas, creamers were used in coffee, and so on.
Participants then rated each product on a seven-point scale — from “dislike very much” to “like very much” — and provided feedback on flavor, texture, and appearance.
It might not come as a huge surprise to hear that most participants tended to like conventional dairy products more than plant-based versions. Taking the combined ratings of all products tested, on average, 65 percent of participant ratings on conventional dairy products were “like very much” or “like,” while only 35 percent of ratings of the plant-based dairy products reached those levels.
The results also highlighted a wide gap in quality among plant-based products. The top dairy-free creamer, sour cream, barista milk, and regular plant-based milk rated at similar levels as the dairy versions. But the averages tended to lag far behind.
This finding confirms something I’ve previously written about: There are some very tasty plant-based meat and milk products out there — and a whole lot of not-so-tasty ones. And the latter reality might cause some people to write off whole categories of meat and dairy alternatives after buying and disliking one or two disappointing products.
In a head-to-head comparison, only one plant-based product out of the 98 tested achieved “taste parity” with its dairy counterpart: Califia Farms’ Oat Barista Blend, which is primarily used in coffee drinks and is meant to replicate something like whole milk. It was tested in lattes against whole cow’s milk from Horizon Organic. Participants were split, with 35 percent preferring the oat milk, 35 percent preferring the cow’s milk, and 30 percent having no preference between the two.
Caroline Cotto, the director of NECTAR, told Vox that Califia Farms achieving taste parity “is really exciting — just to show that this is possible…and [that] this category has legs.”
Although only one product achieved this vaunted status of taste parity, several others came close. And in other head to head comparisons, 27 percent of the products had at least half of the participants either rate it better than the animal benchmark or had no preference between the two.
For context, in NECTAR’s blind taste test for plant-based meats released last year, only 16 percent of plant-based meat products reached that bar.
“It met my expectations that dairy is a little bit further ahead of where meat alternatives are,” Cotto said.
The best dairy-free products, according to the blind taste test of 98 top sellers
- Barista milk: Califia Farms (oat), DREAM (oat), Milkadamia (macadamia), Minor Figures (oat), Planet Oat (oat), Ripple
- Butter (sticks): Violife, Melt Organic, Country Crock
- Cheddar (slices): Field Roast, Daiya Foods, Follow Your Heart, Miyoko’s Creamery, Plant Ahead
- Cream cheese: Violife (supreme original)
- Creamer: Coffee-mate (Italian sweet crème), Oatly (sweet & creamy oat), Planet Oat (sweet & creamy oat), Silk (sweet & creamy almond), SOWN (sweet & creamy oat), Violife (supreme sweet cream)
- Ice cream: So Delicious (very vanilla cashewmilk)
- Milk: Almond Breeze (original almondmilk), Maïzly (original), Silk (original soymilk)
- Sour cream: Violife
- Yogurt: Cocojune (plain Greek-style)
But it’s worth noting that plant-based dairy has an inherent leg up. Many people opt for dairy-free products due to allergies or lactose intolerance, which isn’t typically the case with meat. And dairy tends to more often be an ingredient — think milk in coffee, cheese on pizza, sour cream on nachos — rather than the main course, like a steak or sausage. That means how dairy-free products perform on their own matters a bit less than for plant-based meat products.
Perhaps the most important finding, in my view, is that, for each dairy-free product — even some of the most poorly rated ones — a good amount of participants enjoyed them. That suggests the market has a lot more potential to grow, and NECTAR has some ideas on how to make that happen.
What the dairy-free industry needs to do to level up their products
Improving products in the worst-performing categories — like plant-based yogurt and mozzarella — should probably be a top priority for the sector. But every category has room for improvement, NECTAR found.
The organization analyzed participants’ feedback on flavor, texture, and appearance for each product and found that off flavors and funky aftertastes were a leading complaint, especially for dairy-free yogurt and sour cream. “Increase richness” was the top request for numerous categories, including ice cream, cream cheese, cheddar, and butter. The group shares its results with the companies involved to potentially inform product improvements.
“Increase stretchiness” was ranked as a common request for mozzarella, a problem that has long vexed the vegan cheese business. In 2021, I asked in a piece for Vox, “Where’s the ‘Impossible Burger’ of cheese?” As far as I’m aware, it still doesn’t exist, though there’s buzz around super-stretchy dairy-free mozzarella from the startup Bettani Farms, which launches in restaurants and cafeterias later this year.
NECTAR also wants to bring the results to food service operations, like restaurants and university and corporate cafeterias where consumers are usually presented with one unbranded option (like a single oat milk carafe), so they know which products are most popular.
But, perhaps, what would be most effective in getting more people to embrace plant-based dairy would be finding ways to lower prices. NECTAR found that, in surveying people, when plant-based milk costs even just 25 percent more than cow’s milk, 43 percent fewer people said they would intend to buy it than if it cost the same. And, in the real world, compared to conventional dairy milk, soy and almond milk cost much more. To be sure, people often act differently when shopping. But it does suggest that consumers are price sensitive when swapping dairy products for dairy-free, and other research has borne this out for some milk alternatives.
It’s worth noting, however, that the low price of cow’s milk is somewhat artificial; the US dairy industry is heavily dependent on government support by way of subsidies, environmental and animal welfare deregulation, and federal nutrition policy that all heavily favor conventional dairy over plant-based varieties.
While NECTAR’s experiment focused on market fundamentals like flavor, texture, and price, there are a number of squishier barriers that stand in the way of widespread plant-based food adoption. Food preferences are shaped not just by our taste buds but also what we ate as children, what our peers like, cultural traditions, and social norms. Addressing those will be just as challenging, if not more so, than improving flavor and price.
Plant-based meat and milk alternatives remain one of the more promising avenues available to address our inhumane and environmentally unsustainable factory farming system, though the sector hasn’t quite taken off in the way many of its boosters predicted a decade ago. But widespread adoption was never likely to happen overnight. Instead, if it does happen, it’ll more likely be a slow, gradual process, with wonky, technical interventions — like food science R&D and blind taste tests — underpinning its success.
Facts Only
* Approximately 15% of US fluid milk sales are now plant-based.
* A blind taste test involving 2,183 participants revealed consumer preference for conventional dairy over plant-based alternatives.
* Oat milk performed particularly well in the blind taste test, achieving ratings comparable to conventional milk.
* Dairy production contributes significantly to climate change and water pollution.
* The experiment included a range of plant-based products, including soy, oat, almond, and corn-based milks.
* Six percent of participants identified as vegetarian, 3% as pescatarian, and the remainder as flexitarians or omnivores.
* The NECTAR nonprofit conducted the largest ever blind taste test of dairy-free foods.
* Plant-based meat accounts for only 1% of the American meat market.
* Participants rated products on a seven-point scale (dislike very much to like very much).
* The article highlights the impact of government support on the dairy industry.
Executive Summary
Full Take
Patterns detected: ARC-0024 Ambiguity - The article utilizes a seemingly objective presentation of data while subtly framing the shift towards plant-based foods as a *response* to a clearly defined problem (environmental impact) – this feels like a premature framing, obscuring the complex interplay of consumer preferences, economic factors, and potentially unintended consequences of widespread dietary change. The "surprisingly well" phrasing regarding oat milk is a classic motte-and-bailey tactic, establishing a small success as a foundational step while avoiding deeper questions about the sustainability and long-term viability of oat production (water usage, land use, etc.).
The narrative subtly leans into a “heroic” narrative of sustainable food choices. The focus is on “saving the planet” through dietary shifts, a powerful emotional cue, without sufficiently addressing the potential for increased reliance on monoculture farming of key ingredients like oats. The entire premise rests on a presumed value judgment – that “conventional dairy is bad” – without interrogating the potential benefits of responsible, regenerative dairy practices. The reliance on a single, large-scale taste test as definitive evidence is another vulnerability; it’s a controlled experiment designed to highlight positive aspects, not a fully representative snapshot of consumer behavior.
Furthermore, the article’s framing of “widespread adoption” as a “slow, gradual process” implicitly accepts the dominance of current food systems—a defensive position. It’s a classic “we’re not trying to overthrow the system, just nudge it” argument that avoids confronting the systemic issues inherent in industrial agriculture. The inclusion of the comment about government subsidies is a red herring – it shifts the blame onto external forces rather than addressing the inherent profitability of intensive animal agriculture. The final line regarding “wonky, technical interventions” feels like a deflection tactic, suggesting that the problem isn’t the system itself but simply a matter of tweaking the details.
Root cause: The article operates within a neoliberal paradigm—a faith in technological solutions and market forces to address complex social and environmental problems. It prioritizes efficiency and consumer choice, effectively treating the problem of industrial agriculture as a technical challenge rather than a fundamentally flawed system. The assumptions underpinning the narrative are that environmental damage can be ‘fixed’ through technological solutions and that consumers, guided by informed choices, will naturally gravitate towards more sustainable options.
Implications: The narrative encourages a focus on individual consumption habits as the primary driver of change, neglecting the crucial role of systemic reform and policy intervention. It reinforces a sense of personal responsibility without acknowledging the structural forces that perpetuate unsustainable food systems.
Bridge questions: If consumers are truly driven by taste and price, how can we create truly compelling plant-based alternatives that satisfy those criteria *without* exacerbating environmental problems in their production? What are the systemic levers – beyond consumer choices – that could meaningfully shift the balance of power away from large-scale, industrial agriculture? Does the article adequately acknowledge the potential for unintended consequences of widespread dietary shifts, even if those shifts are initially motivated by laudable goals?
Counterstrike scan: This narrative closely aligns with a potential influence campaign designed to generate “positive” sentiment around plant-based foods. The focus on "saving the planet" and the framing of oat milk as a successful example would be deployed to reinforce this narrative through social media channels and targeted advertising. The amplification of positive outcomes would likely serve to drown out critical voices and dissenting opinions, creating a manufactured consensus. The narrative’s weakness is its lack of skepticism; a sophisticated influence campaign would actively cultivate doubt and highlight potential risks, creating a ‘both sides’ scenario to muddy the waters.
