Fig App vs Aurascan: Diet Matching vs Ingredient Grades

Fig checks whether a product fits a diet, allergy or ingredient profile; Aurascan grades each ingredient against published studies and regulator rulings.

Fig and Aurascan are both barcode-based label apps, but they answer different questions. Fig checks whether a product's ingredients are compatible with a diet, allergy or ingredient profile, and its listing says it covers more than 2,800 options. Aurascan grades each ingredient against published studies and regulator rulings, labels the evidence tier behind each grade, and does not return a single product score. The sections below compare what each app's own pages say about data sources, family profiles and Fig's pricing model.

Key takeaways:

• Fig matches products to diet, allergy and ingredient profiles built on ratings from its dietitian team. Aurascan grades each ingredient against published studies and regulator rulings.
• Fig's store-coverage claims differ by source: 50+ stores on foodisgood.com, and 100+ grocery stores and restaurants on the App Store listing.
• Aurascan publishes its six-step grading scale and four evidence tiers, and returns an unresolved result when the evidence is insufficient.
• Both apps rely on barcode records, and Aurascan also accepts community label photos. Neither app's pages state an accuracy rate.
• Fig lets you create a profile for each person, while Aurascan reads products against conditions and rules for you and your household.

What Does Each App Actually Measure? Diet Compatibility vs Ingredient Research Grades

Fig measures whether a product fits a diet, allergy or ingredient profile (it lists 2,800+ options), while Aurascan measures what published studies and regulator rulings say about each ingredient.

Fig's App Store listing says its scanner checks 'if a product's ingredients are compatible with your diet in under a second using the barcode scanner.' It names options including Low FODMAP, Gluten-Free, Vegan, Low Histamine and Alpha-Gal, and says it 'supports EVERY dietary restriction and allergy.'

Aurascan's site describes it as a scanner for 'Food, drinks, cosmetics, personal care and household products.' It says 'Every ingredient is checked against published studies and regulator rulings,' and its site adds that products can be read against 'your health conditions, sensitivities and dietary rules, for you and your household.'

The difference lies in the starting point. Fig starts with a profile and asks whether the label fits it. Aurascan starts with the ingredient and asks what the cited evidence says. Neither approach replaces reading the label itself.

How Does Fig Decide a Product Fits Your Diet or Allergy Profile?

Fig says its compatibility results are powered by 'millions of ingredient ratings and notes from our team of 11+ expert dietitians.' The method is described only at this summary level.

Fig's clinician page says it covers 'any combination of 2,800 diets, allergies, and ingredients' and is 'Only available in U.S.' Its public ingredient database answers questions for specific diets, such as 'Is acacia (arabic gum) gluten-free?' That format checks one ingredient against one diet, which differs from scanning a full label.

Coverage claims differ by source. The foodisgood.com site says 'Find thousands of products that fit your needs from 50+ stores.' The App Store listing says readers can 'Discover a comprehensive list of foods that work for you at 100+ grocery stores and restaurants.' These are different claims, so check each count against the source quoted.

Fig's pages do not explain how it resolves an ingredient where ratings disagree, or how often ratings are updated. Those details were not disclosed.

How Does Aurascan Grade Each Ingredient, and What Do the Evidence Tiers Mean?

Aurascan grades each ingredient on a 6-step scale and labels which of 4 evidence tiers is behind it, according to its How It Works page. The scale runs from Beneficial, Neutral, Mild concern, Concern, Serious concern, to Serious harm.

The four evidence tiers are:

• Tier 1: Human clinical trials
• Tier 2: Human observational studies
• Tier 3: Animal studies
• Tier 4: Mechanistic hypotheses

Its methodology page says the app never gives 'a single score for the whole product' and that 'with no good evidence we return an unresolved result, not a guess.' An unresolved result means the evidence was insufficient to reach a grade. It does not mean an ingredient is safe or unsafe.

The sample result on aurascan.app shows a processing label, 'Ultra-processed · NOVA 4.' NOVA describes how processed a food is, which is separate from the grade of any single ingredient. For nutrient amounts, the Nutrition Facts panel on the package is the reference. Aurascan's pages do not provide nutrition figures.

A Tier 4 mechanistic hypothesis carries different weight than a Tier 1 human trial, so check the tier and the date of any ruling you read. For a comparison of pass/fail labels with per-ingredient verdicts, see Aurascan vs Bobby Approved: Pass/Fail or Per-Ingredient Verdicts?.

Where Does Product Data Come From in Fig and Aurascan?

Aurascan names 3 barcode sources, saying the number is 'looked up across Open Food Facts, USDA FoodData Central and a barcode database,' and it accepts community submissions made by photographing a label. Fig does not disclose which databases supply its barcode records.

Aurascan's food-label scanner page states: 'When barcode scanning is on, the camera decodes the number on your device. Only the decoded barcode is sent for the product lookup.' That describes what leaves your phone during a barcode scan, not how accurate the returned record is.

A barcode lookup returns whatever record the database holds. Community photos depend on the contributor. Before you rely on any app result, a few checks help:

• Confirm the barcode matches the package in your hand.
• Read the ingredient list on the package, not only the app's output.
• Check the Nutrition Facts panel for nutrient amounts.
• Read any allergen statement printed on the package.

For a closer look at how Aurascan's data sources compare with a public food database, see Aurascan vs Open Food Facts: What Each One Tells You.

How Do Family Profiles Work in Fig and in Aurascan?

Both apps cover a household: Fig lets you make a profile for each person, while Aurascan says it reads products against your health conditions, sensitivities and dietary rules, for you and your household.

Fig's listing says: 'Make a profile for everyone you care about and find food that works for everyone at once.' Its listing also names 'Multiple Figs' as a Fig+ feature and includes 'Create shopping lists' among its features. The listing does not explain how a product that suits one person but not another is displayed.

Aurascan's pages do not state how many household members can be added or how conflicts between members are shown. Those details were not disclosed.

For parents managing a child's allergy, the FDA's list of major food allergens is a common starting point. The FDA lists them as 'milk, eggs, fish, Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, soybeans, and sesame,' and says it 'enforces regulations requiring companies to list ingredients on packaged foods and beverages.' A household profile in either app does not replace label reading or guidance from the child's clinician.

What Does Fig Cost, and What Is Still Undisclosed?

Fig is free to download and use, with 1 optional subscription tier, Fig+, according to its App Store listing; the Fig+ price is not disclosed.

Fig's App Store listing shows 'Free · In-App Purchases.' The listing says: 'Fig is free to download and use. However, we offer an additional subscription (Fig+) that unlocks additional features, including Restaurants, Multiple Figs, Unlimited Scans and more.' The listing also shows a 4.7 out of 5 rating from 17K ratings and a 16+ age rating. Those ratings reflect user opinion, not measured accuracy.

The following were not disclosed for Fig: the price of Fig+, any trial length, and the scan limit on the free tier.

Which Limits and Caveats Apply to Each Approach?

Both approaches depend on the completeness of their data, and neither app's pages publish an accuracy or error rate. The evidence available here cannot establish how often either app returns a wrong or outdated result.

Several limits apply to each:

• Barcode records may lag behind reformulated packaging, and a record can be missing or outdated.
• Aurascan's community photo submissions depend on the contributor who took the photo.
• Aurascan's evidence tiers include animal studies and mechanistic hypotheses as well as human trials, and some results return unresolved.
• Fig's compatibility answers rest on ratings whose method is summarized but not fully described on its pages.
• Fig's clinician page says the service is only available in the U.S.

Cross-contact is often reflected in precautionary wording on packages, not in an ingredient list, so the package statement is worth reading whichever app you use.

Neither app can predict how your body will respond to an ingredient, and published research may not cover every population, including young children, pregnant people, or people with rare conditions. These apps do not diagnose or recommend what to eat.

How Do Fig and Aurascan Compare at a Glance?

The table compares 11 stated facts side by side; the biggest difference is the core question each app answers.

Factor	Fig (Food is Good, Inc.)	Aurascan
Core question	Does the product fit a diet, allergy or ingredient profile?	What do published studies and regulator rulings say about each ingredient?
Stated coverage	2,800+ diets, allergies and ingredients	Food, drinks, cosmetics, personal care and household products
Rating basis	Ingredient ratings and notes from 11+ expert dietitians	Published studies and regulator rulings, with evidence tiers
Result format	Compatibility with a diet, allergy or ingredient profile	Per-ingredient grades with an evidence tier
Grading scale	Not disclosed	Beneficial, Neutral, Mild concern, Concern, Serious concern, Serious harm
Single product score	Not stated	None; grades are per ingredient
Product data	Not disclosed	Open Food Facts, USDA FoodData Central, a barcode database, community label photos
Family setup	A profile for each person; Multiple Figs with Fig+	Reads products against household conditions and rules
Pricing	Free to download; optional Fig+ (price not disclosed)	Not covered in this comparison
Store or market coverage	50+ stores (website) or 100+ grocery stores and restaurants (App Store); U.S. only per clinician page	Not disclosed
Processing label	Not stated	Sample result shows 'Ultra-processed · NOVA 4'

Scan a product yourself with the Aurascan app and compare its per-ingredient results with the label in your hand.