With consumers increasingly focused on how food is made – but unsure how to identify ultra‑processed products – emerging non‑UPF standards aim to provide clarity, credibility and a competitive edge for early‑stage brands.
The conversation around ultra‑processed foods (UPFs) has moved quickly from niche nutrition research into mainstream consumer awareness.
“Ultra-processed foods have been having a moment in the media lately,” said Hannah Claridge Non‑GMO Project’s client experience associate during a Startup CPG webinar last week. But this is “more than just a passing trend,” she added.
With a formal definition of UPFs from FDA in the works, certification efforts are expanding across the food industry, from state-level initiatives like California’s AB 2244 and Non-UPF Verified’s program to Wisecode’s consumer app. As certifications and initiatives evolve to provide more clarity to consumers seeking non-UPF foods, startups are increasingly challenged to offer credible guidance in a category where awareness is high, but understanding remains limited.
High awareness, low clarity: The market gap startups can leverage
One of the most important dynamics highlighted in the session is what Claridge described as the overlap of “high awareness but low clarity.” Consumers increasingly want to avoid ultra‑processed foods, but they lack the tools to do so confidently.
According to Non‑GMO Project research shared during the webinar, 72% of Americans are trying to avoid ultra-processed food, but don’t know how, while 57% of consumers say the level of processing is their No. 1 purchase driver, surpassing organic, non-GMO and sustainable label claims. At the same time, 83% of shoppers say they’re curious to learn more about processing, but only 37% rate themselves as knowledgeable in identifying what processing actually is.
For startups, this imbalance creates an opening. Consumers want guidance, but lack trust in brands to provide uniform education.
Claridge pointed out that “47% of US shoppers have little or no trust in food companies,” while “88% say they trust independent certifiers nearly as much as farmers, doctors and scientists.”
This trust gap is a major hurdle for emerging brands, unless credibility can be outsourced to a third party.
It’s not what you make, it’s how you make it: Why processing standards matter
While “labels on a product are a nice overview … they’re not giving consumers the full story,” Claridge said.
Understanding processing requires insight into “how those ingredients and inputs are prepared or refined,” information that “you’re not going to get from just looking at the ingredient list,” she added.
This gap between the “what” and “how” is central to Non‑UPF Verified’s standards. The standards look at ingredients, processing methods and finished product formulation. It also recognizes that food exists “on a spectrum,” Claridge said.
Some processing, like “grinding, fermenting or freezing,” can be beneficial, while other methods “fundamentally re‑engineer food,” turning it into what researchers call “processed edible substances,” she elaborated.
For startups that rely on simple, traditional processes, this framework formalizes what they may already be doing intuitively.
Startups may be closer to compliance more than they think
Yes Bar, a premium plant-based, gluten-free snack bar, is an example of how some brands focused on clean label ingredients may deliver on non-UPF claims.
“Every ingredient that you see on the back of our label is recognizable and something that your grandmother would trust,” explained Brennan Corbin Spreitzer, CEO of Yes Bar. Spreitzer added the brand’s process hasn’t materially changed since its origin.
The bars are devoid of “natural flavors, erythritol, allulose, stuff that you can’t find,” and are made using a scaled‑up version of home baking, according to Spreitzer.
Because of Yes Bar’s simple ingredient deck, “we didn’t have to change anything” to achieve verification,” he said. “It’s all real food … single individual ingredients that are then just mixed and cut and baked.”
This highlights a crucial insight for early‑stage brands: Non‑UPF verification does not necessarily require reformulation. Instead, it opens a certification pathway for companies that have deliberately avoided shortcuts from the beginning.
Operational rigor as a competitive signal
While the standard is attainable, it is formal. Non-UPF Verified certification requires documentation such as process flow charts and supplier information.
Spreitzer emphasized the importance of supply‑chain discipline, advising brands to “start having those conversations with your suppliers,” even if they don’t yet have everything in place.
Importantly, Claridge positioned this rigor not as bureaucracy, but as leverage.
Out of the four gaps – knowledge, behavioral, trust and structural – identified by non-UPF Verified, the certification aims to address the structural gap, where “market and manufacturing constraints make shortcut solutions tempting,” she said. Brands acting collectively can “justify sourcing choices and scale supply chains,” shifting the system rather than adapting to it, she added.
Retailers are paying attention – early
For startups thinking about distribution, the retailer implications are notable.
Spreitzer shared that Thrive Market implemented a Non‑UPF filter “right away,” and that buyers have been “really excited” to see the certification during outreach. She reinforced that retailers are tracking the trend, noting conversations with Whole Foods Market and Sprouts Farmers Market.
As one attendee summarized during the discussion, the certification helps cut through misleading claims like “no artificial colors” that create what they called a “natural halo” without addressing processing.
