Whether its Starbucks or Costa, Hot Chocolate is my go-to on any cafe menu.
Steaming hot chocolatey goodness, coated in skooshy cream (I'm Scottish) and topped with sweet and melting marshmallows - it just can't be beaten.
But with so many major coffee shop chains offering the classic hot drink - not to mention the abundance of festive spin-offs - how can we possibly know who does the best one?
That's my cue.
I (too enthusiastically) volunteered as tribute to taste test hot chocolates for some of the UK's biggest brands from Starbucks and Costa to Pret A Manger and Caffè Nero.
@uktoday_ I found the best hot chocolate between #starbucks #costa #pretamanger #caffenero ♬ Hanging Lanterns - Kalaido
My dentist was less than pleased.
I ordered a medium (or regular depending on the store's offering) takeaway hot chocolate from each place.
Here's what I thought based on its taste as well as how much it cost and whether I thought it was worth the money based on what you got with it.
Enjoy and let us know what your favourite hot chocolate is in the comments.
Costa
Score - 8/10
Cost - £4.35
I wasn't expecting a lot from Costa's Hot Chocolate but I was pleasantly surprised.
As a child and teen, I spent a lot of time in this particular chain and I always found its hot chocolate bland and too milky.
Even its whipped cream was a bit sickly for me but I'm happy to report that I was proven wrong.
This time around, it hit just the right spot.
There was plenty of chocolatey flavour without it being too sugary.
At £4.35, it's the most expensive out of the lot but overall I would say it's worth the extra pennies.
There's not a substantial difference in price compared to its rival and the cost does include both cream and marshmallows.
Caffè Nero
Score - 6/10
Score - £3.50
Truthfully, Caffè Nero's regular Hot Chocolate was nothing special. In fact, I was a little disappointed.
I have always considered Caffè Nero's version to be among the best - it's always been the most chocolatey (to give you the technical term).
Also, I've always enjoyed the chocolate chips they used to top the whipped cream with rather than marshmallows.
It was perfectly drinkable - if a bit milky - which I guess fits its £3.50 price point.
However, this price didn't include any toppings - you need to pay another 50p for cream for example.
For this reason, I won't be in a rush to try it again.
Pret A Manger
Score - 4/10
Cost - £3.45
I'm struggling to find many good things to say about Pret's Hot Chocolate I'm afraid.
I'd never had one from Pret before so I had no idea about what to expect.
It was ready extremely quickly - too quickly - which was immediately unnerving.
Don't get me wrong, speedy service earns it brownie points but it did make me question, how much effort and attention had been taken into its preparation.
Ultimately I only drank half of my Hot Chocolate, throwing the rest into a bin on Edinburgh's Princes Street.
I hate throwing any kind of food away but it was so flavourless, I simply couldn't taste any chocolate at all.
Although it was warm, it reminded me of the hot milk that you would give to a child to knock them out before bedtime.
If that's what you're looking for? Great. If you're looking for a chocolatey Ho Cho, keep walking.
Starbucks
Score - 9/10
Cost - £3.80
I can't really fault Starbucks' Hot Chocolate.
In my opinion, it scores well across the board. It lands with a good and present chocolatey taste without being too sweet and sickly.
Recommended reading
- £5 supermarket red wine review - Where sells the best wine?
- Drink or down the sink? I tried instant coffee from Lidl, Tesco and more
- Where sells the best wine? £5 supermarket white wine review
At the same time, it's a good price at £3.80 - especially compared to what feels like the rest of Starbucks' menu at the moment.
The price also includes the cream which was an added bonus and makes it the cheapest out of the lot - especially when you consider the add ons.
Those looking for a reliable, good-tasting winter treat, don't need to look any further.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel