Five key takeaways from our new plant-based fish report

As overfishing, environmental degradation, and shifting consumer values reshape global seafood demand, plant-based fish alternatives are splashing onto the market. But what do they offer in terms of nutrition, and how can manufacturers, retailers, and policymakers harness their full potential?

ProVeg International’s latest report Out of the net, into the future seeks to answer these questions. It examines the rapidly expanding market for plant-based fish alternatives, providing a comprehensive analysis of 100 retail products sold in 2024/2025 across 11 countries and three continents. These include familiar favorites such as fish sticks, burgers, filets, canned tuna, smoked salmon, shrimp, and calamari – all made without fish. Our research examined their nutritional quality, front-of-pack labeling, and use of micronutrient fortification.

This summary presents the most important findings from the report, offering actionable recommendations for producers, retailers, policymakers, consumers, and consumer organizations. 

Market snapshot: a category gaining interest

Consumer interest in alternative seafood is growing fast:

• 42% of Europeans find plant-based fish alternatives appealing.¹
• 43% of European consumers are open to buying such products.²
• The global market for plant-based seafood is projected to reach USD 1.3 billion by 2027, with a compound annual growth rate of 28.5% from 2020 to 2027.³

These figures show that the market is no longer a niche space – it’s emerging as a serious contender in the alternative-protein sector. 

So, what does the data say? How do current products measure up, and how can they be improved?

Five insights from our report

1. Fortification with micronutrients is inconsistent, varying significantly across markets

Animal-based fish can be a valuable source of key micronutrients, including vitamins B12, iron, and iodine. In order for plant-based alternatives to serve as suitable substitutes, they should provide a similar mix of these nutrients. 

Although fortification is a common and widely used strategy for enhancing the nutritional value of plant-based meat analogs, we found that fortification is not commonly used when it comes to plant-based seafood products. 

2. Most plant-based fish products deliver meaningful protein content, although regional and product-type differences remain

78% of plant-based fish products met the EU’s ‘source of protein’ criteria, which requires that at least 12% of calories come from protein.⁴ Protein content averaged 10.2 g per 100 g, compared to 18-20  g for animal-based fish. However, this varied by product and country. UK plant-based canned tuna had 15 g per 100 g, for example, while a German equivalent had 22.6 g per 100 g. Smoked salmon alternatives averaged just 2 g, while plant-based tuna averaged 16 g.

Regional differences were also notable. For example, 100% of products in Czechia and Spain met the protein claim, versus only 50% in the UK and South Africa.

Although many products offer good amounts of protein, more work is needed to better match the nutritional profile of animal-based fish. Still, the data shows that with optimal formulation and diverse protein sources, plant-based seafood could rival conventional fish in protein content, supporting healthier, more sustainable diets.

3. All plant-based fish alternatives contain fiber (unlike animal-based fish), with an average of 3.57 g per 100 g

Other than products that are coated with breadcrumbs, animal-based fish doesn’t contain fiber. The fish alternatives that we evaluated contained, on average, 3.57 g of fiber per 100 g, qualifying them as a ‘source of fiber’ according to the EU nutrition-claims legislation. All of the countries, except the Netherlands, Spain, and the USA, had, on average, more than 3 g of fiber per 100 g of product. Dietary fiber is vital for overall health, and is particularly important for maintaining a healthy gut microbiota and lowering cholesterol levels. 

Fiber content varied between countries, with, on average, more than 70% of products in the UK and Belgium qualifying as a ‘source of fiber’. In South Africa, it was 50%, while in Spain and the USA, less than 25% of products qualified for the claim. In total, 40% of the products analyzed qualified as a ‘source of fiber’. 

4. Plant-based fish products are typically low in sugar but often high in salt

In all of the countries analyzed except the USA, average salt content exceeded 1 g per 100 g, with an overall average of 1.3 g per 100 g, which constitutes a significant share of the WHO’s recommended daily limit of 5 g.⁵ Salt levels varied by product, brand, and country. For example, plant-based smoked salmon contained 2.17 g per 100 g, slightly less than the 2.96 g per 100 g found in animal-based versions, while plant-based tuna and filets were lower in salt. These findings align with other studies showing high variability in sodium levels across products. 

It’s worth noting that conventional fish is also typically salted, albeit during cooking. As such, studies such as SWAP-MEAT found that there are no adverse health outcomes linked to the sodium in plant-based meat alternatives when compared to conventional meat.⁶

Sugar content was consistently low – 3 g or less per 100 g – meeting EU criteria for a ‘low sugar’ claim (which requires that a product has less than 5 g per 100 g of product).

5. Most plant-based fish products are low in saturated fat, but few list omega-3 content, and even fewer contain the most beneficial types

Nearly all of the products analyzed were low in saturated fat, meeting the EU threshold of less than 1.5 g per 100 g, except in Belgium, South Africa, Spain, and the USA – though even there, averages stayed below 2 g per 100 g, comparable to animal-based fish.^{7 8 9}

However, only 27 of the 100 products we evaluated listed omega-3 content in their nutritional profile, with an average of  0.75 g per 100 g for these products, which is similar to animal-based fish.¹⁰ Belgium stood out with 1.5 g per 100 g, while South African products didn’t mention omega-3s at all, only general polyunsaturated fats. 

Where omega-3s were present, they were primarily ALA, not EPA or DHA, the more bioavailable forms found in fish. In order to better match fish nutritionally, manufacturers should consider adding EPA and DHA derived from algae oil.  

Plant-based fish shows strong potential for healthy fat profiles, but brands should focus more on omega-3 quality as a way to meet both nutritional standards and consumer expectations.^{11 12 13}

Recommendations

Creating a sustainable and healthy food system requires close collaboration between all stakeholders. ProVeg International recommends the following actions for improving the formulation, marketing, and understanding of plant-based fish alternatives:

Conclusion

As overfishing continues to deplete marine ecosystems, and as consumer demand for sustainable options grows, plant-based fish alternatives offer an increasingly promising solution. Our analysis shows these products can support healthy, ethical diets – delivering protein, fiber, and low saturated fat – but often fall short on key micronutrients such as B12, iron, and iodine. 

In order for these products to reach their full potential, manufacturers need to prioritize fortification and omega-3 quality, while policymakers and retailers have a vital role to play in driving accessibility and awareness. 

With coordinated action from all stakeholders and across the sector, plant-based seafood can help to build a more resilient and sustainable food system for people, animals, and the planet.

Read the full report here for the complete breakdown and all our insights. Get access to expert advice by getting in touch with one of our colleagues via [email protected]. 

Subscribe to our newsletter for bi-weekly industry updates.

1.  Evolving appetites: European attitudes to plant-based eating, (2023). ProVeg. Smart Protein Project. Available at: https://proveg.org/report/market-consumer-reports/#evolving-appetites:-european-attitudes. Accessed 2025-06-23.
2.  Evolving appetites: European attitudes to plant-based eating, (2023). ProVeg. Smart Protein Project. Available at: https://proveg.org/report/market-consumer-reports/#evolving-appetites:-european-attitudes. Accessed 2025-06-23.
3. The rise of alternative seafood: plant-based and cultivated options, (2025). ess feed. Available at: https://essfeed.com/the-rise-of-alternative-seafood-plant-based-cultivated-options/ accessed 2025-07-07.
4.  Nutrition claims. European Union, EFSA, 2006. Available at: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/health-claims
5. WHO (2025): Sodium reduction. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/sodium-reduction#:~:text=For%20adults%2C%20WHO%20recommends%20less,or%20just%20under%20a%20teaspoon.
6.  Roberts, Aubrey & Busque, Vincent & Robinson, Jennifer & Landry, Matthew & Gardner, Christopher. (2022). SWAP-MEAT Athlete (study with appetizing plant-food, meat eating alternatives trial) – investigating the impact of three different diets on recreational athletic performance: a randomized crossover trial. Nutrition Journal. 21. 10.1186/s12937-022-00820-x.
7.   Wambogo, E. A., Ansai, N., Terry, A., Fryar, C., & Ogden, C. (2023). Dairy, Meat, Seafood, and Plant Sources of Saturated Fat: United States, Ages Two Years and Over, 2017–2020. The Journal of Nutrition, 153(9), 2689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjnut.2023.06.040
8.   Gonçalves, R. M., Petenuci, M. E., Maistrovicz, F. C., Galuch, M. B., Montanher, P. F., Pizzo, J. S., Gualda, I. P., & Visentainer, J. V. (2020). Lipid profile and fatty acid composition of marine fish species from the Northeast coast of Brazil. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 58(3), 1177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04631-y
9.  McMullan, J. E., Yeates, A. J., Allsopp, P. J., Mulhern, M. S., Strain, J., Myers, G. J., Shroff, E., Shamlaye, C. F., & McSorley, E. M. (2023). Fish consumption and its lipid modifying effects – A review of intervention studies. Neurotoxicology, 99, 82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuro.2023.10.003
10. Omega-3 Fatty Acids:Fact Sheet for Health Professionals. NIH, 2024. Available at: https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Omega3FattyAcids-HealthProfessional/
11.  Boukid, F., Baune, MC., Gagaoua, M. et al. Seafood alternatives: assessing the nutritional profile of products sold in the global market. Eur Food Res Technol 248, 1777–1786 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-022-04004-z
12. Drewnowski, A., Bruins, M. J., & F Besselink, J. J. (2024). Comparing Nutrient Profiles of Meat and Fish with Plant-Based Alternatives: Analysis of Nutrients, Ingredients, and Fortification Patterns. Nutrients, 16(16), 2725. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16162725
13.  Nowacka, M., Trusinska, M., Chraniuk, P., Piatkowska, J., Pakulska, A., Wisniewska, K., Wierzbicka, A., Rybak, K., & Pobiega, K. (2022). Plant-Based Fish Analogs—A Review. Applied Sciences, 13(7), 4509. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13074509