Which microgreens do buyers like best? What taste tests and shopper studies show
Seed catalogs and grower videos will tell you sunflower is the best seller. No study has counted sales. What researchers have done is put microgreens in front of hundreds of tasters and shoppers. The results show what makes someone buy a second time, and it’s mostly what happens in their mouth.
The short answer
- Flavor decides. In taste panels, how a microgreen tasted predicted how much people liked it better than how it looked. Xiao 2015 Caracciolo 2020
- Bitter, sour and astringent lose. The less of those a microgreen had, the more people accepted it. Caracciolo 2020
- Local beat the grocery store. 150 tasters rated local farm broccoli microgreens above a store brand on every measure, and price didn’t drive their intent to buy. Chen 2020
- Looks and trust move the price. Shoppers valued green microgreens above purple ones, and would pay $0.47 to $0.79 more when light was used to raise nutrients. Rihn 2024
Which microgreens sell best?
No published study has ranked microgreens by sales. The best evidence is what tasters and shoppers prefer.
The lists you’ll find online come from seed companies and growers. They tend to agree on sunflower, pea shoots, radish and broccoli. That’s real experience, and it’s worth something. But it isn’t measured, and none of those lists says why a crop sells.
The studies on this page answer the why. They show what makes a taster score a microgreen high, what makes a shopper pay more, and what makes a buyer walk away. For crops picked by profit, see the most profitable microgreens to grow and sell.
What makes people like a microgreen?
Taste and texture, far more than color. Bitterness, sourness and a dry, puckering feel pull scores down.
- Flavor drives the overall score. Across six microgreens, overall eating quality tracked flavor more closely than any other rating Xiao 2015. In a panel tasting 12 species, people liked the looks of most of them. Flavor and texture decided who they’d eat again Caracciolo 2020.
- The puckering tastes lose. The lower the astringency, sourness and bitterness, the higher the acceptance Caracciolo 2020. Acidity and phenolic content were closely tied to those same tastes Xiao 2015.
- Heat has a ceiling. In five brassicas, the compounds behind a spicy, pungent bite were linked to harvest stage. The authors suggest picking a harvest day that stops the heat before it turns people off Cano-Lamadrid 2023.
How taste itself works, from the five basic tastes to a tasting party, is in what do microgreens taste like?
Which microgreens score best in taste tests?
It depends on the panel. What the winners share is less of the bitter, sour bite.
| Study | Panel | Top scores | Lowest scores |
|---|---|---|---|
| Xiao 2015 | Consumer panel, 6 species | Bull’s blood beet, for flavor and overall eating quality | Peppercress. All six still rated good to excellent. |
| Caracciolo 2020 | 54 students, Naples, Italy, 12 species | Swiss chard and coriander. Swiss chard tasted sweetest. | Mibuna and cress for acceptance. Amaranth for eating quality. |
| Michell 2020 | 99 people, Colorado, 6 species | All six scored as acceptable, from slightly to highly | Tendril pea rated lowest for looks Kelley 2025 |
| Bafumo 2024 | Consumer test, 14 brassica species | Cauliflower was the most accepted | Not given in the abstract |
Two things stand out. First, every panel liked most of what it tasted. Second, the crops growers name as best sellers, sunflower and pea shoots, barely show up in these trials. Pea shows up once, as tendril pea, and it trailed on looks.
Do buyers prefer local microgreens?
Yes, in the taste tests that compared them. Local farm samples won on flavor.
- Local beat the store brand. Tasters favored broccoli microgreens from a local farm, soil or hydroponic, over a commercial sample. Their liking tracked taste most of all Tan 2020.
- Price wasn’t the deciding factor. In a second test with 150 people, the grocery store sample scored lowest on every sensory measure. Taste and perceived benefits shaped intent to buy. Price had no significant direct effect Chen 2020.
- In-state counts. Tennessee shoppers’ choices shifted with whether microgreens were grown in their state Rihn 2024.
That’s a small grower’s edge: freshness a grocery shelf has a hard time matching. For keeping that edge through delivery, see the shelf life and storage research hub.
Does the color of microgreens affect what buyers pay?
Yes. In one large survey, shoppers paid more for green. In a tasting, the reds won on looks.
- Green over purple in photos. 821 Tennessee shoppers valued green microgreens above light or dark purple ones. Height affected their choices too Rihn 2024.
- Red on the plate. In a hands-on panel, bull’s blood beet, red cabbage and red garnet amaranth scored highest for appearance Kelley 2025.
The two don’t have to clash. Shoppers judging a photo may want something familiar. Tasters with the greens in front of them may enjoy the color. Mixes give you both.
What makes buyers trust microgreens, or walk away?
Methods they understand earn trust. Bad news, even vague bad news, costs more than good news earns.
- Light feels safe. Fertilizer and gene editing don’t. Out of eight ways to raise nutrients, 820 shoppers saw picking the right species and using lighting as the safest. Gene editing and genetic modification ranked least safe Rihn 2025.
- The premium follows. Light-boosted nutrients earned $0.47 to $0.79 more. Extra fertilizer was seen as riskier, and the more risk a shopper saw, the less they’d pay Rihn 2024.
- Bad news sticks. Negative information about how microgreens were grown cut what shoppers would pay. Positive information did little Ricks 2023.
- Dates matter. 89% of buyers in a US survey looked for a use-by or best-by date Kelley 2025.
Food safety questions come up fast with wholesale buyers. The evidence is in the safety research hub.
Who buys microgreens?
In the largest US survey, regular buyers who eat them often, and many who can’t tell them from sprouts.
- Frequent eaters. Of 660 buyers in all 50 states, about half ate microgreens once or twice a week. Most were in their 30s, with a college degree Yeargin 2023.
- Confused about what they’re buying. Most of those buyers didn’t know the difference between a microgreen and a sprout. 71% washed them Yeargin 2023.
- Held back by the basics. Cost, access, freshness and not knowing the product kept tasters from buying, even after they liked what they ate Michell 2020.
- Open to paying more. In a smaller survey in the UAE, 75% said they’d accept a premium price. Knowing the health benefits and seeing microgreens in stores went with interest in growing them at home Nair 2026.
So a sample and a one-line explainer at the table may sell more than a lower price. For what the numbers say about price, see the costs and profit research hub.
What the research doesn’t show yet
- No sales data. No study we found ranked microgreens by what sells.
- No chef surveys. We found no study that asked chefs which microgreens they buy or why.
- The big sellers are untested. Sunflower hasn’t been in a published taste panel against other crops that we found.
- Small, local panels. Most panels had 50 to 150 people, often students, in one city.
Key papers to start with
The studies that carry most of the weight on this page. Each title opens the paper at the publisher.
Evaluation and correlation of sensory attributes and chemical compositions of emerging fresh produce: Microgreens
Six microgreens tasted and tested. Flavor drove the overall score.
Sensory Attributes and Consumer Acceptability of 12 Microgreens Species
Twelve species, and the tastes that pulled acceptance down.
Microgreens: Consumer sensory perception and acceptance of an emerging functional food crop
Six crops tasted by 99 people, and what kept them from buying.
Consumers’ acceptability and perceptions toward the consumption of hydroponically and soil grown broccoli microgreens
Local farm vs grocery store broccoli microgreens, with 150 tasters.
The Influence of Risk Perceptions on Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Nutrient-enhanced Microgreens
What 821 shoppers would pay for color, growing method and local origin.
Consumers’ risk perceptions of production practices to enhance the nutrient content of microgreens
Which ways of raising nutrients shoppers see as safe or risky.
Consumer practices and perceptions regarding the purchasing and handling of microgreens in the United States
Who buys microgreens in the US, how often, and how they handle them.
How does the phytochemical composition of sprouts and microgreens from Brassica vegetables affect the sensory profile and consumer acceptability?
The compounds behind the spicy bite, and when to harvest to tame it.
Newest papers on this topic
- Newest papers load from the research database.
Questions people ask
What is the best tasting microgreen?
There’s no single winner. Bull’s blood beet topped one panel, Swiss chard and coriander an Italian one, and cauliflower a test of 14 brassicas. The common thread was low bitterness.
Do customers prefer spicy or mild microgreens?
Some heat is fine, but too much costs points. Researchers linked the hot, pungent compounds in brassicas to harvest stage, so cutting earlier or later can tune the bite.
Will people pay more for locally grown microgreens?
Tasters preferred local farm samples, and cost wasn’t what swayed their plans to buy. Shoppers in Tennessee weighed in-state growing too.
How can a small grower find out what customers like?
Hand out a few varieties with a short score card, the kind researchers use: how it looks, feels, tastes and rates overall. It’s the same method the published panels used, scaled to your own market.
Keep reading
Sources
- Xiao, Z., Lester, G. E., Park, E., Saftner, R. A., Luo, Y., & Wang, Q. (2015). Evaluation and correlation of sensory attributes and chemical compositions of emerging fresh produce: Microgreens. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 110, 140–148. doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.07.021
- Tan, L., Nuffer, H., Feng, J., Kwan, S. H., Chen, H., Tong, X., & Kong, L. (2020). Antioxidant properties and sensory evaluation of microgreens from commercial and local farms. Food Science and Human Wellness, 9(1), 45–51. doi.org/10.1016/j.fshw.2019.12.002
- Caracciolo, F., El-Nakhel, C., Raimondo, M., Kyriacou, M. C., Cembalo, L., De Pascale, S., & Rouphael, Y. (2020). Sensory Attributes and Consumer Acceptability of 12 Microgreens Species. Agronomy, 10(7), 1043. doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10071043
- Michell, K. A., Isweiri, H., Newman, S. E., Bunning, M., Bellows, L. L., Dinges, M. M., Grabos, L. E., Rao, S., Foster, M. T., Heuberger, A. L., Prenni, J. E., Thompson, H. J., Uchanski, M. E., Weir, T. L., & Johnson, S. A. (2020). Microgreens: Consumer sensory perception and acceptance of an emerging functional food crop. Journal of Food Science, 85(4), 926–935. doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.15075
- Chen, H., Tong, X., Tan, L., & Kong, L. (2020). Consumers’ acceptability and perceptions toward the consumption of hydroponically and soil grown broccoli microgreens. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 2, 100051. doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2020.100051
- Cano-Lamadrid, M., Martínez-Zamora, L., Castillejo, N., Cattaneo, C., Pagliarini, E., & Artés-Hernández, F. (2023). How does the phytochemical composition of sprouts and microgreens from Brassica vegetables affect the sensory profile and consumer acceptability?. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 203, 112411. doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2023.112411
- Bafumo, R. F., Alloggia, F. P., Ramirez, D. A., Maza, M. A., Fontana, A., Moreno, D. A., & Camargo, A. B. (2024). Optimal Brassicaceae family microgreens from a phytochemical and sensory perspective. Food Research International, 193, 114812. doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2024.114812
- Rihn, A., Walters, K., & Bumgarner, N. (2024). The Influence of Risk Perceptions on Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Nutrient-enhanced Microgreens. HortScience, 59(10), 1465–1474. doi.org/10.21273/hortsci17888-24
- Rihn, A. L., Walters, K., Bumgarner, N., & Bajgain, P. (2025). Consumers’ risk perceptions of production practices to enhance the nutrient content of microgreens. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 19, 101542. doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101542
- Ricks, J., Secor, W., & Campbell, B. L. (2023). Consumer Preference for Microgreens in the Presence of LED Lights and Information Treatments. HortScience, 58(3), 327–332. doi.org/10.21273/hortsci16948-22
- Yeargin, T. A., Lin, Z., do Prado, I., Sirsat, S. A., & Gibson, K. E. (2023). Consumer practices and perceptions regarding the purchasing and handling of microgreens in the United States. Food Control, 145, 109470. doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109470
- Kelley, K. (2025). Marketing microgreens. Penn State Extension. Summarizes Michell et al. (2020) and Yeargin et al. (2023). extension.psu.edu/marketing-microgreens
- Nair, C. S., Bakheet Hamad Alsudain, M., Varaparambil Abdul Kadher, J., Nishanth, D., Osman, R., Manoharan, R., Subramanian, R., Vasantha-Srinivasan, P., Fathelrahman, E., & Jaleel, A. (2026). Consumer adoption of microgreens in a sustainable urban food system: awareness, willingness to pay, and barriers in the UAE. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 10, 1878642. doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2026.1878642
Read the papers yourself
Every paper behind this page sits in the Microgreens World research database. Open any one to read its abstract and go straight to the full text.
Search the taste and buyer appeal papersThis page summarizes published research for education. Panels and surveys reflect the people and places studied, and your customers may differ.
