Cronometer review: the most accurate food database you can buy

What the peer-reviewed test found

In the 2025 Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics study that had two raters enter the same 43 three-day food records into both apps, Cronometer showed good inter-rater reliability and validity for most nutrients, with exceptions for fibre, vitamin A and vitamin D. MyFitnessPal, on the identical records, showed poor validity across energy, carbohydrate, protein, cholesterol, sugar and fibre.

That design tests two separate things — whether the app is right, and whether it gives the same answer twice — and Cronometer passed both. It is close to the only consumer nutrition app about which that can be said.

Why it's accurate: curation, not cleverness

There's no algorithmic magic here. Cronometer builds on USDA FoodData Central and the Nutrition Coordinating Center Food & Nutrient Database — lab-analysed, research-grade sources — and staff-verifies entries before they become searchable. Every row can tell you where its numbers came from.

The cost is coverage. A curated database will not have the specific seasonal item from a regional chain, and you'll spend more time finding a close match. That's a real daily friction and it's why the Daily UX axis sits at 7.4 while everything else is above 8.

It is unusual for the more accurate product to also be the cheaper one. That's the whole review.

The free tier is the story

Cronometer free tracks up to 84 nutrients, includes barcode scanning, and shows seven days of reports, with ads. Gold runs roughly $50–60 a year and removes ads, unlocks full history, custom charts and recipe tools.

Put that against the competition: MyFitnessPal paywalls barcode scanning at $79.99 a year and covers a fraction of the micronutrients. It is unusual for the more accurate product in any category to also be the cheaper one, and it's the single strongest argument in this review.

Who it's actually for

Anyone whose question is what did I actually eat rather than am I under my calorie goal. In practice that means people tracking a deficiency, people working with a dietitian who needs data they can trust, people managing sodium or cholesterol, and the constituency this site is written for — those who want to know where a number came from.

It is a poor first tracker for someone who has never logged food. The interface assumes interest, the density is high, and a beginner is better served by something friendlier that they'll actually keep using. An abandoned accurate log beats nothing by exactly zero.

The staying-power question

Our lowest axis here, at 6.4, and it isn't about product quality. Cronometer is a small company in a category where the competition is owned by much larger ones. Our sixth axis exists because three health apps in our database shut down in twelve months and took user data with them.

The mitigating factor is real: Cronometer's export is complete and easy, so leaving is genuinely possible. Export your history once a quarter and this risk mostly evaporates. That's advice we'd give for any tracker; here we'd actually follow it.

Who should use it

• Use it if you track micronutrients, sodium or cholesterol, or if a clinician reads your log.
• Use it if you want to know the provenance of every number.
• Consider MyFitnessPal if you eat out constantly and need the bigger catalogue.
• Skip if this is your first food log — start friendlier, come back when you care about the data.

The bottom line

Cronometer earns 79/100, the highest of any general nutrition tracker we've scored. The data is the best available to consumers, the free tier is more capable than most paid competitors, and the only real reservations are interface density and the size of the company behind it.