Best Food Scales
We tested 10 food scales—including models from Escali, Oxo, and Taylor—for accuracy and ease of use and found that some digital and analog models had their pros and cons
When you shop through retailer links on our site, we may earn affiliate commissions. 100% of the fees we collect are used to support our nonprofit mission. Learn more.
If you’re learning to cook, buy yourself a good set of chef’s knives and a reliable cookware set. When you’re ready to turn yourself into a great cook or baker, invest in a food scale.
A food scale is essential during food prep to measure ingredients accurately for consistent results. If you aren’t perfectly packing flour or baking soda into a measuring cup, being off by an ounce can affect the taste and appearance of cakes, muffins, and cookies. But the numbers on a scale usually don’t lie—if your lemon cake calls for 285 grams of flour, that’s the exact number your scale should read. And even if you aren’t a baker, imagine a world in which a recipe calls for 4 ounces of chicken, and you can measure 4 ounces of chicken on your scale instead of eyeballing the portion size and taking an educated guess.
The Escali Primo is our top choice in digital food scales because it had the highest average percentage of accuracy among digital scales in our tests: 84 percent. The scale features a simplistic control panel with two buttons: a tare feature on the left side and a unit scale button on the right side that can measure in ounces, grams, and pounds and ounces. A clear plastic shield covers the control panel to make it easier to clean, and it is designed with an auto shutoff function that turns it off after 4 minutes. It runs on two AA batteries, which are included, comes in nine colors, and includes a user manual and lifetime warranty.
This scale can measure amounts as high as 11 pounds, or 5,000 grams, and proved the most accurate of all the scales we tested, both digital and analog, for measuring tiny amounts. The Escali Primo was one of two scales we tested, along with another digital scale called the Ozeri Pronto, that could register weight as small as 1 gram. Every other digital model we tested registered zero when a 1-gram weight was placed on it. The Escali Primo wasn’t as accurate when confronted with more considerable or increasing weights. The scale was only 64 percent accurate when our CR tester, José Amézquita, placed a 10-gram weight on it and gradually increased it until it ended in 5,000 grams. “Don’t trust this or any of the scales when dealing with weights of high values,” Amézquita says.
Photo: Scott Meadows/Consumer Reports Photo: Scott Meadows/Consumer Reports
Even though the Escali Primo can measure up to 5,000 grams, only three scales were most accurate at measuring this high weight—the Escali Primo was not among them. When tested for decreasing weight, where high weights were added first and gradually reduced, the Escali Primo was the second most accurate digital scale behind the Oxo Good Grips Scale, below. Still, it outperformed both analog scales we tested. This pick also was the hardest-to-use scale we tested, though by just a few points. At 1.26 square inches, its screen size is the second smallest after the Etekcity Digital Food Scale. It has a small font size, it rounds up, and its display doesn’t pull out. Given the placement of its tare and unit buttons, it may be easier for a left-handed person to use this scale.
The Etekcity Digital Food Scale came very close in ranking to the Escali Primo. Still, it needed to be more accurate and precise and measure a 1-gram measurement in our testing (it remained at zero during this test). It was on target when weights between 2 and 20 grams were placed on it, and it was 18 percent more accurate than the Escali Primo during our increasing-weights evaluation (it is designed to handle up to 11 pounds, or 5,000 grams). It was also the only digital scale that gained 20 percent accuracy when measuring high weights of up to 5,000 grams, but be aware that this accuracy percentage is still low overall, and the Etekcity Digital Food Scale was on target only 1 out of 5 times.
This scale is square, with a 30-second standby time and an auto shutoff that turns off after 2 minutes and 15 seconds. It comes with two AAA batteries and can measure five units: ounces, pounds, ounces, milliliters, and fluid ounces. Unfortunately, the Etekcity wasn’t our easiest-to-use model. At just 1.13 square inches, its screen size is the smallest of all 10 scales we tested, its display does not pull out, and it has two buttons: on the left, you’ll find an on/off and tare button, while the button on the right allows you to adjust measurement units. It comes in five colors and larger sizes, and it may be easier for a right-handed user to operate.
The Escali Mercado Retro Mechanical boasts our highest average accuracy—96 percent—and is our top choice for analog food scales and our top overall choice if you are willing to put in the work required to set up and maintain an analog scale. “The analog models, while they did very well in our tests, can present a challenge to some people and take more work to use than the digital models,” Amézquita says. The Escali Mercado and Heath & Hand Stainless Steel 11 lb analog scales required tools to assemble. When using them, Amézquita says the user has to check that the needle is pointing to zero. If not, it has to be adjusted—which may have to be done every time. Adjusting the scale can be difficult for some because the bowl can get in the way of turning the dial. Another aspect of measuring with the analog scale is reading the scale. Reading the markings on the scale can require some skills.
If all this sounds good, there are numerous benefits you’ll get from making the Escali Mercado a permanent fixture on your kitchen countertop. It performed the best in our tests when increasing weight from 10 to 5,000 grams (like the previous scales, this scale can measure up to 11 pounds or 5,000 grams). It was also the second-most-accurate scale for measuring high weights of 5,000 grams, achieved 100 percent accuracy when tested for decreasing weight (17 percent better than the second-best scale in this test), and was our third easiest-to-use scale. It has, by far, the largest screen size at 28.9 square inches, and it features just one dial in the center, which is a tare feature. One downside: if you need a scale that can measure minimal amounts of food, the Escali Mercado (as well as the Hearth & Hand analog scale) was not on target when Amézquita tested weights less than 20 grams (analog scales are not the ideal models for measuring very small quantities). It tends to round up when measuring items.
A removable, dishwasher-safe stainless steel 1-quart bowl comes with the scale and is positioned at the top for weighing food. No batteries are required, and the Escali Mercado can provide measurements of ounces, pounds, grams, and kilograms. Because this is an analog model, it doesn’t have an automatic shutoff or pullout display but has a lifetime limited warranty.
Let’s start with all the great features that the stainless steel Oxo Good Grips Scale gets right: It scored the highest in ease of use, thanks to its 3.32-square-inch screen size—the largest of all our digital scales—a display that pulls out, and two easy-to-use buttons. The tare button is on the left, and the unit conversion button on the right can be adjusted to ounces, pounds, grams, and kilograms. It even boasts one of the largest font sizes of all models, though it may be easier for a right-handed user to operate. It has a standby time of 5 minutes and 30 seconds, and an auto shutoff time of 16 minutes and 49 seconds (which is nice if you’re cooking a holiday meal and require your scale often during meal prep), plus the four AAA batteries you need to operate it are included.
How did it perform in our accuracy and precision tests? Smack somewhere in the middle with an average percent accuracy of 74 percent. The Oxo Good Grips tends to round down when measuring items. In our small weights test, it didn’t register a weight of 1 gram and overshot in most instances when measuring between 2 and 5 grams, while undershooting at 20 grams. It achieved 64 percent accuracy when weight was slowly added to the scale and missed the target on every occasion when being tested for high weights of 5,000 grams, even though it is designed to measure up to 11 pounds or 5,000 grams. Surprisingly, it was our best digital scale performer when we tested it with decreasing weight. The square scale looks sleek and has a removable platform for easier cleaning.
Other Foods Scales We Tested
Although the other scales that we tested did not score as highly as our top four picks, some of them boast great features.
Even though the Ozeri Pronto digital scale’s average accuracy was 84 percent—on a par with the Escali Primo’s average score—its overall accuracy and precision were slightly lower. It was less accurate than our top digital scale pick when we tested it for increasing and decreasing weights, and high weight, where it came in last in its ability to accurately measure 5,000 grams, despite the manufacturer’s claim that it has a 5,100-gram (or 11.24-pound) capacity. However, the scale did well in our small weight test and registered 1 gram, then stayed up to 20 grams on target. It tends to round down in number.
The Ozeri Pronto is average in its ease of use and may be easier for a left-hander. It features a relatively small 1.51-square-inch screen size and two simple buttons: a tare button on the right and a unit measurement button on the left that can measure in grams, pounds, pounds and ounces, ounces, milliliters, and kilograms. Its automatic shutoff feature went off after 2 minutes and 5 seconds, and it runs on two AAA batteries, which are included. This scale has a round platform that may be the perfect fit for a bowl but may also be limiting in terms of what may fit on it.
The Hearth & Hand Stainless Steel 11lb Scale was the second analog scale we tested, though its average accuracy was 78 percent—18 percent less than our top pick, the Escali Mercado. Like the Escali Mercado, it tended to round up in number and mainly was on target with higher weights of 20 to 300 grams, but could not register weights below 20 grams, which is typical of an analog scale. It had average performance in increasing and above-average performance in decreasing-weight tests, and it boasts the second-largest screen size (after the Escali Mercado) at 14.58 square inches. It features a tare knob on the center of the scale and, because of its analog nature, lacks a pullout display, auto shutoff, and the need for batteries. The scale has an 11-pound capacity, a stainless steel bowl, and a five-year limited warranty. Remember that all analog scales require calibration maintenance, and the Hearth & Hand requires a screwdriver to assemble.
The Amazon Basics Digital Kitchen Scale has a round stainless steel platform (which can be limiting in terms of the items you can fit on top of it) and can measure from 2 to 5,000 grams, or 11 pounds. In our tests, it was 77 percent accurate on average and did not register weight at 1 gram. It was on target from 2 to 5 grams, but then it overshot its measurement when a 20-gram weight was placed on it. It proved average at handling high weights and increasing and decreasing weights, and tends to round up in number and over the target weight. It was also one of our least user-friendly models, with a reasonably small screen size of 1.48 square inches and a display that doesn’t pull out.
This scale’s interface is simplistic: It features a tare button on the right and a unit measurement button on the left, and it may be easier for a left-handed person to operate. It runs on two AAA batteries, which are included, features a 2-minute auto shutoff function, and comes with a one-year limited warranty.
The Greater Goods Digital Scale measures up to 5,000 grams, and the manufacturer claims it can register weights as low as 1 gram. However, it failed to register 1 gram in our tests, yet was accurate at 2 to 20 grams. This scale is tied with the Amazon Basics Digital Kitchen Scale in average accuracy—77 percent—but performed slightly worse in our increasing- and decreasing-weight tests and tends to round down in number. Unlike the Amazon Basics model, this scale is square and measures in grams, pounds and ounces, fluid ounces, and milliliters. It has a tare button to the right and a unit/hold button on the left (it may be easier for a left-handed user), with a 2-minute automatic shutoff function and a five-year warranty. Its screen size is on the smaller side at 1.67 square inches, but two nice perks are that it runs on only one CR2032 battery (and one extra battery is included) and comes in 13 colors.
Taylor claims its Digital Kitchen Scale can handle a capacity of 11 pounds (or 5,000 grams), but it performed poorly at registering high weights of 5,000 grams. Unlike some of the other digital models, it also did not register weight at 1 gram, though it was on target at 2 to 20 grams. It performed average and below average in increasing- and decreasing-weight tests and tends to round up and under target weights.
As for its usability, the square-shaped Taylor Digital Kitchen Scale is actually one of our easier-to-use models, with a large 2.24-square-inch screen, more considerable font height than most of the other digital models, and two sizeable buttons: a tare button to the right and a unit button to the left that measures in ounces, pounds, grams, and kilograms. It runs on two AAA batteries, which are included, and comes with a one-year limited warranty. Left-handers may have an easier time using this scale.
The KitchenAid Waterproof Kitchen Digital Food Scale was one of our lowest performers in accuracy and precision, though it fared better in ease of use. KitchenAid claims the scale has an 11-pound, or 5,000-gram, capacity, but it was our worst contender when tested with 1-gram weights: It didn’t register a weight until 5 grams was laid on the scale. It then undershot at 5 grams but was on target at 20 grams. It was also our lowest performer in increasing- and decreasing-weight tests and our second-to-last performer (just ahead of the Ozeri Pronto) at high-weight tests when accurately measuring 5,000 grams.
It’s too bad its accuracy and precision weren’t better because this waterproof square scale has a large 2.43-square-inch screen, the largest font size of any of the digital models, and four buttons: separate tare, power, unit, and hold buttons. All the other scales have one or two buttons, and the power button splits its time into a tare button, for example, making it easier to push the wrong button. This scale lacks a display pullout and measures pounds and ounces, grams, fluid ounces, and milliliters. It runs on three AAA batteries, which are included, tends to round down, and is designed with a 3-minute auto shutoff function and a screen that goes into standby mode after 45 seconds. The scale comes with a one-year warranty, and tools are required to install the batteries.
What to Look for in a Food Scale
A good-quality kitchen scale should be designed with a tare button that resets its displayed weight to zero so the bowl or plate containing your ingredients isn’t factored into the overall food/ingredient measurement. Scales vary in terms of their units of measurement, but finding one that offers at least a few unit options—like grams, ounces, and pounds—can help you successfully convert recipes on a page into real-life culinary creations. Some scales may be more accessible for right-handers or left-handers depending on the location of the tare/zero button, according to Amézquita, as this is the kitchen scale button he says we tend to use the most (if this button is placed on the right side, it’s better for a right-hander; if it’s placed on the left side, it’s better for a left-hander).
Some scales may round up, which overestimates a value, while others round down, which can underestimate a value. “Some models were more consistently one-sided than others, but on average, they fall on one side or the other,” Amézquita said. For transparency, we included these findings in our scale evaluations.
Before you purchase a scale, check the measurement dimensions to ensure it will properly fit on your kitchen cabinet or can be stored in a drawer if you prefer to tuck it away between uses. If you are interested in a retro analog scale, remember that it may need tools to assemble and will require calibration—possibly before every use, depending on whether the arrow is perfectly aligned with the zero position. “Make sure the needle is pointed to the zero marking,” Amézquita says. “I sometimes, after zeroing it, apply some pressure on the scale to test the needle. The needle should return to the zero position.”
Accuracy is priority No. 1 with any kitchen scale because an inaccurate scale is worse than no scale at all since it provides bad information, says Paul Hope, CR’s classically trained chef. “I love them in particular for baking because many of the ingredients used in baking, like flour and sugar, are notoriously fickle,” Hope says. “A cup of flour measured by two different bakers can actually vary a considerable amount, whereas 300 grams of flour is always 300 grams. In my experience, you’ll get the best results (especially from European baking recipes) if you weigh your ingredients in grams, as many European baking recipe developers do.” Hope adds that it is great to have a model that has as high a capacity as possible—if you’re doubling or tripling a recipe, it makes it much easier to weigh each ingredient only once, rather than in batches, Hope says.
When cooking, as opposed to baking, Hope says scales can provide a level of reassurance to home cooks. “After years of cooking, it’s pretty easy to eyeball a 6-ounce chicken breast or a 4-ounce salmon filet,” Hope says. “But a scale is a great way for a burgeoning cook to feel comfortable that they’re following a recipe as written.”
How CR Tested Food Scales
Amézquita conducted several accuracy, precision, and ease-of-use tests on the 10 digital and analog scales. In addition to measuring screen size, font size, and testing buttons for tactile and audible features (as well as several other factors that determine ease of use), here are details about his accuracy and precision test methods.
Small Weights
In Amézquita’s small weights test, he evaluated how the scales handled weights in the low range limit by applying 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 20-gram weights in each of the five positions on the weighing platforms of each scale. He used precise weights that are used to calibrate CR’s lab scales and confirmed the weights with an analytical scale. A Sartorius scale with one one-hundredth of a gram precision was used to check the weight accuracy. All the digital models had a 1.0-gram precision, according to the specifications. The analog models were less precise, with 20-gram graduation marks. He added weights to the scale in 1-gram increments from 1 gram to 5 grams and then weighed a 20-gram weight. The analog models were tried on 11 occasions and included weights of 20, 40, 100, 200, 300, and 400 grams.
Increasing Weights
In the increasing-weights test, Amézquita added 10 grams to each scale and continued with 30, 50, 100, 300, 500, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, and 5,000 grams.
High Weights
In the high-weights test, all models were tested with a 5,000-gram weight at five positions on the weighing platform, except for the analog model Hearth & Hand, which has a small bowl as a weighing platform, and the 5,000-gram weight falls only in one position.
Decreasing Weights
In the decreasing-weights test, Amézquita began by placing a 5,000-gram weight on each scale and then decreasing the weight to 4,000, 3,000, 2,000, 1,000, 500, 400, 300, 200, 100, 50, and 20 grams.
Tare Against Maximum Capacity
Amézquita placed a 5,000-gram weight on the scale, pushed the tare/zero button to adjust to zero, and then added a 2,000-gram weight to the scale. If the overload message appears, it means that the tare values are counted against the scale’s weight capacity. In all the scales tested, the tare amount counted against the scale’s maximum capacity, which means the tare buttons functioned correctly on all models.
Load Fatigue
This test was designed to evaluate if the scales exhibit load fatigue by placing a 2,000-gram weight on the center of the weighing platform and timing how long it takes for the stable reading to start changing or fluctuating. Except for the analog models, all the scales in this evaluation shut off automatically before the weight started to fluctuate.
Standby and Automatic Shutoff Time
In this evaluation, we determined how long each scale takes to go into standby or automatically shut down. A weight was placed on the center of the scale, and the timer was started. The technician watched the screen. The elapsed time was taken when the scale went into standby and when the scale automatically shut off.
