Well Dressed vs. the Caesars you already know.

How this was put together

Every product below met all four of these tests, which were written down before any figure was compared:

Every metric we could compute

Including the ones that did not make the summary above. A metric reaches the top of this page only if enough of the set reports it and the difference is big enough to be worth reading; everything else is here with the reason it was left out.

Why the rest were left out

• Added sugar: only 46% of the set reports it, below the 75% needed for a figure to describe the category.
• Sodium: the product does not lead the category on it; the difference is 30mg, below the 50mg a label would round to a visibly different number; the difference is 12%, below the 25% worth a shopper’s attention.
• Fiber: the product does not lead the category on it; the difference is 0g, below the 1g a label would round to a visibly different number.

What’s on the label

What each ingredient list does and does not contain, matched against a fixed list of terms. A product with no ingredient list on record is counted as unknown, never as “doesn’t contain it”.

The 72 products

Named, with a link to the public record behind each one. Figures are per 2 tbsp (30 g); each product’s own declared serving may differ, and the record shows it.

What was left out, and why

These 9 products met the category but do not count toward the figures above. Leaving a competitor out moves every number in our favour, so each one is named here with the reason. They are in the downloadable data too — put them back and the comparison is still there to check.

• The manufacturer labels this a light, lite or reduced-calorie version. A reduced-calorie dressing is a different proposition from a full-fat one, so it is recorded here and excluded from the figures rather than compared against a full-fat product.

How the figures were normalized

What this does not say

• This comparison makes no health, dietary or medical claim, and does not describe any product as healthy or unhealthy.
• It does not assert that any comparator brand participated in, reviewed or endorsed it.
• It reports label figures as published by their manufacturers. It is not a laboratory analysis and does not verify that any product matches its own label.
• Label data carries a publication date. A label published some years ago may not match the package on shelf today, so every product’s publication date is included.
• It says nothing about protein quality, amino acid profile, or how well the body uses it.
• It is a ratio, so a dressing with very few calories can score well on very little protein.
• Both figures come from labels that round protein to the nearest gram, which matters more for a product declaring 1 g than for one declaring 6 g.
• It says nothing about protein quality or source.
• Nutrition labels round protein to the nearest gram, so a product declaring 1 g contains somewhere between half a gram and one and a half.
• Total sugar includes sugar naturally present in ingredients, not only sugar added to the recipe.
• Fat is not automatically undesirable; this row reports the number, not a verdict.
• Well Dressed’s own figures are brand provided, taken from its printed Nutrition Facts panel. Every other product’s figures come from USDA FoodData Central (Branded Foods), where the manufacturer submitted them.
• No independent third party has reviewed this comparison. If one ever does, it will be named here with what they checked — and until then, this page will not suggest otherwise.

Take the data

Every number on this page, every source link, every collection date, the products that were excluded and the metrics that were dropped — in one file. Nothing is held back for the summary.

Download as CSV · Download as JSON