DATA STORY · WIDGET 38

Honey Variety Radar

15 varieties · 6 dimensions · compare up to 3 at once · no variety leads all six

Varieties
15
in catalog
Dimensions
6
metrics compared
Perfect honey
None
no variety leads all six
Heather
5/6
most balanced variety
Choose up to 3 varieties to compare
Variety 1
Variety 2
Variety 3
Multi-Dimensional Profile Radar
Each axis = 0 (centre) → 100 (outer edge) · outer ring = maximum score · hover variety name to highlight
255075AntioxidantsORAC capacityHealth ActivityAntibacterialFlavor DepthComplexity & aromaShelf StabilityStays liquidAffordabilityValue for moneyProvenanceOrigin exclusivity
Hover a variety name in the legend to highlight its profile · Scores are relative indices derived from cited literature
Score Breakdown (0–100)
Dimension🌾 Buckwheat🌺 Manuka🌸 Acacia
Antioxidants
ORAC capacity
100
27
7
Health Activity
Antibacterial
85
95
15
Flavor Depth
Complexity & aroma
95
82
20
Shelf Stability
Stays liquid
35
60
95
Affordability
Value for money
35
5
42
Provenance
Origin exclusivity
42
85
35
Bold = highest of the three selected varieties on that dimension
🌾 Buckwheat
Highest antioxidants + antibacterial activity — but fast-crystallising and strong-flavoured.
🌺 Manuka
Peak health activity via MGO — but mid-tier antioxidants; the premium is real, just misunderstood.
🌸 Acacia
Maximum liquid shelf life; nutritionally the most neutral variety.
The No-Perfect-Honey Finding

Across all 15 varieties, no single honey scores ≥ 60 on all six dimensions. The closest is Heather — it clears 60 on five of six (antioxidants 62, health activity 75, flavor depth 90, shelf stability 75, provenance 80) — but its affordability score of 38 keeps it from a clean sweep. The radar chart makes this visible: every strong polygon has at least one axis that sags toward the centre.

🌾 Buckwheat
Max antioxidants & health — short shelf life
🌺 Manuka
Max health activity — mid-tier antioxidants
🌸 Acacia
Max shelf stability — lowest nutrition
💜 Heather
5 of 6 dimensions ≥ 60 — fails only affordability
The Manuka Mismatch

Manuka scores 95/100 on Health Activity but only 27/100 on Antioxidants — its ORAC of ~215 μmol TE/100g is comparable to Orange Blossom and well below Buckwheat (796), Chestnut (620), and Heather (490). The premium is entirely justified — but by MGO (methylglyoxal), not phenolics. Manuka is the correct choice for antibacterial wound-care applications; it is not the highest-antioxidant honey on the shelf. Buckwheat is, at roughly one-fifth the price.

Embed on Your Site — Free

Food bloggers, nutrition educators, and honey retailers can embed this comparison tool free of charge. No account, API key, or tracking required. Add ?theme=dark for dark mode.

<iframe
  src="https://rawhoneyguide.com/tools/honey-variety-radar"
  width="100%" height="1260"
  frameborder="0" loading="lazy"
  title="Honey Variety Radar">
</iframe>
FAQ
Which honey has the most antioxidants?
Buckwheat honey has by far the highest ORAC antioxidant capacity (~796 μmol TE/100g), roughly 10× that of Clover (~80) and Acacia (~55). Chestnut (~620), Heather (~490), and Blueberry (~315) complete the top tier. Scores are sourced from Gheldof & Engeseth (2002) and Bertoncelj et al. (2007).
What is the best honey for everyday baking and cooking?
Clover is the practical answer: widely available, mild flavour that doesn't compete with other ingredients, affordable, and stable enough in storage. Wildflower is a step up in complexity while remaining affordable. For pairing with stronger flavours (cheese, charcuterie, aged spirits), Buckwheat, Chestnut, or Heather's intensity is an asset.
Why do Tupelo and Sourwood score so high on Provenance?
Tupelo (95/100) is produced commercially only along the Apalachicola and Choctawhatchee River floodplains of Florida during a 2–4 week bloom window in April–May. No other region produces authentic white tupelo honey from Nyssa ogeche. Sourwood (90/100) is similarly confined to the Appalachian Mountains where Oxydendrum arboreum grows at 1,000–4,500 ft elevation. Both are harvested in small quantities and verified primarily by taste, enzyme profile, and pollen analysis.
Sources
  • Gheldof N & Engeseth NJ (2002). Identification and quantification of antioxidant components of honeys from various floral sources. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 50(21):5870–5877.
  • Bertoncelj J et al. (2007). Identification and quantification of phenolic compounds in Slovenian honey. Food Chemistry 105(2):822–828.
  • Brudzynski K (2006). Effect of hydrogen peroxide on antibacterial activities of Canadian honeys. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 52(12):1228–1237.
  • Molan PC (1992). The antibacterial activity of honey. 1. The nature of the antibacterial activity. Bee World 73(1):5–28.
  • Chen C et al. (2012). Glucose oxidase activity in honey from Chinese beekeepers. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 60(26):6425–6431.
  • Beutler E (1955). The crystallization of honey. American Bee Journal 95(1):20–22. [Fructose:glucose ratio data.]
  • USDA (2024). Honey Report — National Agricultural Statistics Service. Washington DC. [Price tier benchmarks.]