New mums: This is why expensive formula milk is not worth your money
When it comes to choosing formula milk for your baby – whether breastfeeding isn’t an option or just isn’t the right choice for you – it’s all too easy to just reach for the most expensive, well-known premium brands, believing that they’re higher-quality and therefore better for your baby. After all, as parents, all we want is the best for our little ones – so it’s only natural to assume that a higher price tag equals better quality.
But what if spending extra money on the ‘expensive brands’ wasn’t actually buying anything better?
In the UK, all formula milk must meet strict legal requirements to provide the essential nutrients a baby needs. Yet, despite this, many parents still believe that higher-priced formula is better, leading them to spend up to £540 more in their baby’s first year — a cost that many families simply can’t afford.
Widespread marketing ploys
It’s fair to say that baby formula companies are clever. With slick packaging, they make their products seem like the best choice with bold claims including ‘scientifically advanced’ and ‘nutritionally complete’, saying it’s ‘closer to breast milk’ or a ‘breastmilk substitute’. This just manipulates exhausted parents into believing that a higher price means a healthier baby.
‘Having a baby is a vulnerable time and that vulnerability can be taken advantage of by infant formula brands,’ says Chloe Leverkus, nutritional therapist and founder of Nappy Valley Nutrition.
‘New mothers are informed about the benefits and superiority of breastfeeding; however, there are many different scenarios as to why a mother may need infant formula for her baby – she may have tried and been unable to breastfeed (latch issues, tongue-tie, inverted nipples, infection, underproduction of milk), she may decide that she would like to combi-feed (breast/express breast and formula), she may just want some in the cupboard for emergencies or, she simply might choose not to breastfeed.
‘Each mother in all of these differing and plausible scenarios, naturally, wants to reach for the next best thing for her new baby. Therefore marketing claims like “closer to breast milk” or “scientifically advanced” are going to make a huge difference in buying decisions – these terms are a way of getting around the legal restriction that “nutrition and health claims shall not be made on infant formula”,’ she says.
But, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has made it clear that all formula brands in the UK must meet the same nutritional standards. This means the expensive brands aren’t actually offering anything substantially better, just a fancier label and a bigger dent in your bank balance.
Key macronutrients that all infant formula must contain by law include: protein, fat (sesame seed and cotton seed oils are prohibited), linoleic acid or LA (omega 6), alpha-linolenic acid or ALA (omega 3), docosahexaenoic acid or DHA (omega 3), and carbohydrates (in the form of lactose, maltose, sucrose, glucose, glucose syrup, malto-dextrins and others).
Key vitamins that all infant formula must contain by law include: Vitamin D, Vitamin A, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Folate, Vitamin B12, Vitamin E, among others.
Key minerals that all infant formula must contain by law include: potassium, chloride, calcium, sodium, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, zinc, among others.
‘There are no significant nutritional differences between budget and premium formula brands,’ confirms Leverkus.
‘In terms of energy content, all typically range from 66 to 67 kcal per 100 ml of prepared formula, with legal requirements stipulating a minimum of 60 kcal and a maximum of 70 kcal per 100 ml. Similarly, protein content falls between 1.8g to 2.4g per 100 kcal, with regulations mandating a minimum of 1.8g and a maximum of 2.5 g per 100 kcal.’
However, Leverkus points out that there are some very subtle variations when it comes to micronutrients (vitamins and minerals). ‘For example, SMA’s Little Steps First Infant Milk – one of the more affordable options – contains lower levels of iron (0.46 mg per 100 kcal) and calcium (63 mg per 100 kcal) compared to some premium brands such as Aptamil First Infant Milk, which provides 0.8 mg of iron and 88 mg of calcium per 100 kcal.’
On the other hand, certain premium brands have lower amounts of specific micronutrients than their budget counterparts, she says. ‘HiPP Organic 1 First Infant Baby Milk, for instance, contains less Vitamin E (1.06 mg per 100 kcal), while Kendamil First Infant Milk has a lower calcium content (65.5 mg per 100 kcal).’
Government regulations in the UK for infant formula milk:
- Iron content must range from 0.3mg to 1.3mg per 100 kcal
- Calcium must be between 50mg and 140mg per 100 kcal
- Vitamin E must be between 0.6mg and 5mg per 100 kcal
Another tactic is brand familiarity. Many hospitals are supplied with discounted or even free formula from big-name manufacturers – not because those brands are ‘the best’, but because it’s an easy way to hook parents in early. For first-time parents – who might have never stepped down the baby aisle in the supermarket before – it’s much easier to pick up a tub of formula that you recognise from using in the hospital.
Yet the brands hospitals choose to offer in their maternity wards have nothing to do with nutrition, and everything to do with profit.
‘I think it would be a good move for hospitals to only provide plain-packaged formula to prevent brand loyalty from forming early on,’ says Leverkus.
‘However, to prevent confusion due to the sheer volume of different infant formulas on the market, hospitals would need to provide parents with clear, consistent, evidence-based information on infant formula and the range of available brands, so that parents are able to make their own well-informed decision.’
The real cost of expensive formula
According to the CMA parents could ‘make a saving of around £300 over a baby’s first year of life by switching from a popular mid-priced product to a low-priced brand’.
The regulator added that sticking with Aptamil Advanced could set you back £540 more per year compared to a budget-friendly alternative like Little Steps.
‘The difference in prices between brands leads to substantial differences in the cost over a baby’s first year of life, such that brand choice has a sizeable financial impact on parents,’ the report stated.
‘Buying the current market leader Aptamil’s 800g tubs at the Tesco price (in November 2024) would cost around £700 for a baby exclusively formula-fed from birth to 12 months, based on the feeding guidance stated on the pack. On an equivalent basis, Little Steps (one of the cheapest widely available 800g products) would cost around £400; therefore, choosing Little Steps over Aptamil – as an example – could save parents around £300 over the first year of their baby’s life. Choosing Little Steps instead of Aptamil Advanced, meanwhile, could save parents around £540.’
That’s a huge amount of money for families – many of whom are already feeling the financial pressure of raising a child with soaring childcare costs and a lack of maternity leave support from employers.
For low-income families, the impact is even more severe. The CMA found that parents who rely on formula are ‘disproportionately impacted by infant formula pricing’. Government support like the Healthy Start and Best Start Food schemes exist, but ‘most formulas exceed the weekly value of these benefits’, forcing some parents into impossible choices – including going without food themselves to ensure their baby is fed.
What needs to change?
The CMA is calling for major changes to make the formula market fairer and more transparent. Their key recommendations include:
Removing brand influence in hospitals: Formula given to parents in hospitals should be plain-packaged or NHS-branded, so they don’t feel pressured into sticking with a particular brand.
Making formula labels clearer: Supermarkets should prominently display factual information about formula nutrition to help parents compare products easily.
Stronger advertising rules: Unverifiable claims like ‘decades of science’ should be banned, and the ban on advertising for infant formula should extend to follow-on formula.
Better price transparency: Formula should be grouped together in supermarkets to make price comparisons easier. Parents should also be able to use loyalty points, gift cards, and vouchers to help manage costs.
Leverkus agrees that clearer supermarket labelling regarding formula equivalence would be beneficial, but says it is hard to imagine a new, tired mother reading the back of every infant formula pack in her local supermarket.
‘I believe education plays a pivotal role,’ she says. ‘Based on the experiences of many of my clients (as well as my own), it is evident that every midwife, doctor, and even members of the public you encounter during pregnancy and childbirth often have varying and strong opinions – both for and against – breastfeeding, formula feeding, and specific formula brands.
‘These differing viewpoints can create confusion for new, vulnerable parents, who, understandably, may grab onto these strong opinions and inadvertently develop brand loyalty. Clear, consistent, evidence-based information on infant formula should, where necessary, be presented to expectant parents so that they are able to make their own well-informed decisions.’
What about families on really tight budgets?
Leverkus advises doing your homework and trying (where possible!) to do it before baby comes, when you are likely to have a little more time and head space.
‘Aldi’s Mamia First Infant Formula Milk is one of the cheapest on the market at the moment at (approx. £6.99 per 800g); its nutritional content is akin to many of the more premium brands, yet it is one of few that contains palm oil,’ she says.
‘If palm oil is something that you want your baby to avoid (for health and/or environmental reasons), then work out your next best economic option without palm oil – in this instance, perhaps SMA’s Little Steps First Infant Milk Powder (approx. £7.95 per 800g) would be the next best alternative.’
Remember, though, that all formulas on the market have to adhere to the legal standards set, she reiterates. ‘So don’t fret. And opt for the powder option – the pre-made formula will always be more expensive.’
The bottom line
Spending more on formula doesn’t necessarily mean getting a better product – just a pricier one.
Many parents worry about the nutritional value of formula compared to breast milk, but as Leverkus explains: ‘While it is widely acknowledged that breast milk is the optimal choice, it is not always feasible for a variety of reasons. In such cases, infant formula serves as a safe and nutritious alternative. Legal regulations in the UK ensure that all infant formulas meet the necessary standards for both macronutrients and micronutrients (although the ranges are broad for some micronutrients), supporting the healthy growth and development of babies.’
Read next
Creatine could ease symptoms of depression, new research finds
Eating this snack daily could lower your dementia risk by 12%, finds study
What to eat when breastfeeding? These are the 5 essential nutrients new mums need
Cut through the noise and get practical, expert advice, home workouts, easy nutrition and more direct to your inbox. Sign up to the WOMEN'S HEALTH NEWSLETTER
You Might Also Like
