Sweeteners vary dramatically in potency—saccharin is approximately 300 times sweeter than sugar by weight. Understanding the sweetness intensity scale and relative potency of different sweeteners explains why tiny amounts of some sweeteners can replace larger amounts of sugar.
What Is Relative Sweetness
Relative sweetness is a measure of how sweet a compound is compared to sucrose (table sugar), which is assigned a value of 1.0. A sweetener with relative sweetness of 300 is 300 times sweeter than sugar by weight. Sweetness is measured in standardized taste tests where trained panelists compare sweetness intensity at various concentrations.
The measurement is standardized—comparative sweetness is consistent across different studies and populations (though individual variation exists). This standardization allows meaningful comparison of dramatically different compounds.
Sweetness Intensity Scale
Sucrose (sugar): 1.0 (reference). Fructose: 1.2-1.8 (slightly to moderately sweeter). Aspartame: 160-200x. Acesulfame K: 200x. Saccharin: 300-400x. Sucralose: 600x. Monk fruit (mogrosides): 250-300x. Stevia: 200-300x (depending on extraction/purification).
The range is enormous—from sugar at 1x to sucralose at 600x. This extreme potency difference creates both advantages (tiny amounts needed, minimal bulk) and challenges (measurement difficulty, formulation complexity).
Artificial Sweeteners Potency
Synthetic sweeteners are generally very potent—200-600x sucrose. The potency reflects chemical design—artificial sweeteners are engineered to bind very tightly to sweetness taste receptors, requiring minimal binding to produce strong sweetness perception.
This potency is why tiny sachet amounts (e.g., 1 gram packet sweetens a beverage equivalent to 1-2 teaspoons of sugar). The extreme concentration requires bulking agents in some formulations (sweeteners are then diluted with fillers like maltodextrin to make them measurable by typical spoons/cups).
Natural Sweeteners Potency
Honey: Approximately 1.0-1.2 (similar to sugar). Maple syrup: Approximately 0.7-0.8 (less sweet than sugar). Stevia: 200-300x. Monk fruit: 250-300x. Allulose: 0.7-0.9 (less sweet than sugar, requires 10% more by weight).
Natural sweeteners vary enormously in potency—from barely as sweet as sugar (allulose) to extremely potent (stevia, monk fruit). The “natural” designation doesn’t correlate with potency—some natural sweeteners are more potent than artificial ones.
Sugar Alcohol Potency
Erythritol: 0.6-0.8x (less sweet than sugar). Xylitol: 1.0x (equivalent to sugar). Sorbitol: 0.5-0.6x (substantially less sweet). Maltitol: 0.75-0.9x (somewhat less sweet than sugar).
Sugar alcohols are generally similar to or less sweet than sugar (unlike artificial sweeteners which are much more potent). This is why sugar alcohol products often require larger quantities than their artificial sweetener counterparts to achieve equivalent sweetness.
Practical Measurement Implications
Sweetness potency differences create practical challenges: (1) Measurement precision: Saccharin at 300x requires measuring 0.003 teaspoons to equal 1 teaspoon sugar—practically impossible without laboratory equipment. (2) Bulk requirements: Pure saccharin sachet contains 40-50 mg saccharin diluted with maltodextrin to 1 gram total, making it measurable. (3) Formulation complexity: Products substituting sugar must account for lost bulk—sweeteners alone can’t replace sugar’s texture/mouthfeel in many applications.
These practical challenges explain why pure high-potency sweeteners are rarely used alone—they’re always diluted or blended with other ingredients to create measurable, formidable products.
Sweetener Formulation Challenges
Extreme sweetness potency creates formulation problems: (1) Uneven distribution: Tiny amounts of potent sweeteners must be dispersed uniformly in large product batches. Uneven distribution creates bitter spots. (2) Bulking agents: Most diet products use both sweetener (for sweetness) and bulking agent (for texture/mouthfeel). (3) Synergy blending: Multiple sweeteners blended together often produce better taste than single sweeteners—masking individual aftertastes.
This complexity explains why commercial diet products contain multiple sweeteners and ingredients—the formulation is engineered to overcome individual sweetener limitations.