Nando’s is the strongest-performing large fast food chain in the UK for hygiene ratings, with 99.4 per cent of its locations scoring either a four or five, according to new analysis of Food Standards Agency data.

The findings point to generally high standards across the sector, but also reveal a notable gap between the best-performing brands and those showing greater variation across their estates.

Among the largest chains, KFC followed closely behind with 98.7 per cent of sites rated four or five, while Burger King reached 97.2 per cent and McDonald’s 96.7 per cent.

Several brands, including Domino’s, Five Guys, Tortilla and Wasabi, recorded no sites rated below four, underlining the extent to which some operators have been able to maintain consistency across their portfolios.

At the other end of the table, Chicken Cottage ranked lowest, with 75 per cent of locations scoring either a four or five. Chipotle and Upper Crust both recorded 88.2 per cent, while Popeyes stood at 89 per cent and Wimpy at 89.8 per cent.

Despite that spread, the overall picture remains a positive one for the sector. Even among the lowest-ranked chains, the majority of sites were still rated either “good” or “very good”, reinforcing that the real differentiator is consistency rather than widespread underperformance.

Smaller chains join larger operators at the top

A mix of national giants and smaller fast food players featured among the strongest performers.

Barburrito, Domino’s, Five Guys, German Doner Kebab, Morley’s, Tortilla and Wasabi all achieved 100 per cent of locations rated four or five. Nando’s followed on 99.4 per cent, ahead of KFC on 98.7 per cent and Itsu on 98.2 per cent.

The findings suggest that operational discipline is not solely a function of scale. While larger estates inevitably introduce more complexity, some brands appear to have built systems robust enough to maintain standards across regions, formats and local management teams.

Franchise and scale continue to shape outcomes

The analysis points to consistency as the central issue behind the variation in ratings.

For larger chains, the challenge often lies in maintaining standards across hundreds of sites, multiple regions and different operating teams. Franchise models can add another layer of complexity, with central standards set at brand level but daily execution handled locally.

Training, oversight and repeatable processes remain central to performance, particularly for businesses trying to grow quickly without sacrificing standards at site level.

Across all analysed locations, up to around 7 per cent of sites were rated between zero and two, meaning improvement was required. That equates to roughly one in 14 locations.

What the ratings measure

Food hygiene ratings are issued by the Food Standards Agency following inspections carried out by local authorities.

Businesses are assessed on how safely food is handled, prepared and stored, the cleanliness and condition of the premises, and the systems and staff training in place to ensure standards are maintained.

Operators then receive a rating from zero to five, with five indicating “very good”, four “good”, three “generally satisfactory”, and zero to two showing that improvement is needed.

Ratings usually remain in place for up to two years, although businesses with lower scores may be inspected again sooner. In England, operators are not legally required to display their rating, while in Wales display is mandatory.

Sign up here to get the latest grocery and food news each morning