Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo

The Rankiteo MCP server is now available.

Discover MCP
!

Top 25 Worst Food and Beverage Services Companies

Identify the lowest-scoring most renowned Food and Beverage Services companies. Understand where critical cyber risk exposure exists in this industry. 278 companies scored.

906
Companies in Industry
278
Scored
763.7
Avg Score
71
Cyber Incidents
Bottom 25
Shown

Food and Beverage Services Cybersecurity Risk Assessment - Lowest-Scoring Companies in 2026

Out of 906 food and beverage services companies monitored by Rankiteo, this page highlights the Bottom 25 organizations with the weakest cybersecurity posture. These rankings are based on our proprietary Cyber Resilience Score, which integrates time-decayed incident exposure, sector-sensitive impact analysis, and market-cap-aware baseline and dampening to produce a single, interpretable score between 100 and 1,000.

Companies at the bottom of this ranking carry the heaviest accumulated cyber incident burden - including recent or severe ransomware attacks, data breaches with significant financial losses or records exposed, and repeated disclosure events. Their scores are further influenced by sector-specific impact multipliers that amplify penalties in high-criticality industries. Understanding where these risk concentrations exist is essential for supply chain risk management, regulatory compliance, and competitive benchmarking within the food and beverage services industry.

The current average score for the most renowned Food and Beverage Services companies is 763.7 out of 1,000. Companies shown below score significantly lower than this average, falling far behind an industry that generally maintains reasonable security standards.

Risk Highlights

734
Lowest Score
763.7
Industry Average
4%
Scoring B or Below
71
Recorded Incidents
AI Analysis

Cyber Risk in Food and Beverage Services

Generating industry analysis...

Score Distribution

Aaa
0 (0.0%)
Aa
0 (0.0%)
A
17 (6.1%)
Baa
235 (84.5%)
Ba
15 (5.4%)
B
5 (1.8%)
Caa
5 (1.8%)
Ca
0 (0.0%)
C
1 (0.4%)
#CompanyLabelScoreBandIncidentsScore Bar
1
Asahi Group Holdingsasahigroup-holdings.com
Food Services and Drinking Places100C14
2
Krispy Kremekrispykreme.com
Food Services and Drinking Places610Caa3
3
Asahi Holdings Southeast Asia Sdn Bhdasahisea.com
Food Services and Drinking Places616Caa1
4
Dot Foodsdotfoods.com
Food Services and Drinking Places622Caa3
5
Bob's Red Millbobsredmill.com
Food Services and Drinking Places634Caa3
6
Westlife Foodworld Limitedwestlife.co.in
Food Services and Drinking Places636Caa3
7
UNFIunfi.com
Food Services and Drinking Places655B2
8
B&G Foods Inc.bgfoods.com
Food Services and Drinking Places670B2
9
Dole Food Companydole.com
Food Services and Drinking Places679B2
10
Compass Group Italiacompass-group.it
Food Services and Drinking Places684B1
11
Godiva Chocolatierpladisglobal.com
Food Services and Drinking Places699B2
12
King Arthur Baking Companykingarthurbaking.com
Food Services and Drinking Places707Ba1
13
Lagunitas Brewing CompanyLAGUNITAS.com
Food Services and Drinking Places712Ba1
14
Barcel USAbarcel-usa.com
Food Services and Drinking Places713Ba1
15
Refrescorefresco.com
Food Services and Drinking Places713Ba2
16
Performance Food Grouppfgc.com
Food Services and Drinking Places716Ba1
17
Ben E. Keith Companybenekeith.com
Food Services and Drinking Places717Ba1
18
FIFCOfifco.com
Food Services and Drinking Places718Ba1
19
Syscosysco.com
Food Services and Drinking Places718Ba3
20
Nassau Candy Distributors, Inc.nassaucandy.com
Food Services and Drinking Places721Ba1
21
GoTo Foodsgotofoods.com
Food Services and Drinking Places723Ba1
22
Restaurant Brands Internationalrbi.com
Food Services and Drinking Places724Ba3
23
Home Chefhomechef.com
Food Services and Drinking Places732Ba1
24
Cambro Manufacturingcambro.com
Food Services and Drinking Places733Ba1
25
UniPro Foodservicehttp://www.uniprofoodservice.com/
Food Services and Drinking Places734Ba1

How Cyber Risk Scores Are Calculated

Rankiteo's Cyber Resilience Score produces a single value between 100 and 1,000 for each organization, where higher scores indicate lower estimated cyber risk. The framework integrates three principal components that together balance evidence, context, and comparability across industries and company sizes. Learn more in our AI Cyber Score methodology.

Core Scoring Components

  • Time-Decayed Incident Exposure (Pinc): Every confirmed cyber incident - ransomware, data breach, cyber attack, or disclosed vulnerability - contributes a penalty weighted by recency and scaled by quantitative severity (financial loss and records exposed). Category-specific base weights reflect real-world impact: ransomware (100 pts), data breach (60 pts), cyber attack (20 pts), and vulnerability (5 pts). Each category decays at a different rate - roughly 3 years for ransomware and data breaches, 2 years for cyber attacks, and 18 months for vulnerabilities - so older, lower-impact events fade while recent, severe incidents retain lasting influence.
  • Sector-Sensitive Impact Multipliers: Identical incidents carry different weight depending on the industry. Each NAICS sector receives multipliers based on four dimensions: safety-of-life risk, service continuity, regulatory/legal exposure, and data sensitivity. A ransomware attack on a hospital or utility carries a higher penalty than the same attack on a retail company, reflecting the greater real-world consequences.
  • Market-Cap Baseline & Dampening: A logistic baseline between 750 and 850 anchors each company's starting score based on organizational size. A continuous dampening factor attenuates incident penalties for very large firms, recognizing higher disclosure rates and greater absorption capacity - without masking genuinely severe events.
  • Industry Adjustment (Aind): A bounded additive term derived from NAICS-level historical incident-rate z-scores. This rewards companies in historically resilient sectors, but only when they maintain a clean or near-clean record. Once material incidents occur, firm-specific performance dominates.
  • Quantitative Severity Scaling: When financial loss or records-exposed data is available, incident penalties are amplified proportionally - scaled relative to market capitalization so the same dollar loss has a larger effect on a smaller firm. The combined severity multiplier caps at 3×.
  • Ransomware Recurrence Escalation: Repeated ransomware events trigger a bounded recurrence multiplier (up to 1.5×), reflecting elevated systemic risk from persistent adversarial footholds or remediation failures.

Understanding the Risk Bands

Each score maps to a letter-grade band. Companies appearing in this lowest-scoring ranking typically fall in the bottom bands:

  • Aaa (900–1,000): Exceptional cyber resilience - very few companies in a worst list reach this level.
  • Aa (800–899): Very strong security posture with minimal weaknesses.
  • A (700–799): Strong practices with some areas for improvement.
  • Baa (600–699): Adequate protection but notable security configuration gaps exist.
  • Ba (500–599): Below average - multiple risk areas require attention.
  • B (400–499): Weak security with significant exposure across categories.
  • Caa (300–399): Very weak with a high probability of exploitable vulnerabilities.
  • Ca (200–299): Critically poor with severe, widespread security gaps.
  • C (0–199): Extreme risk - immediate remediation is needed across all dimensions.

Why Monitoring Low-Scoring Food and Beverage Services Companies Matters

Cybersecurity risk doesn't exist in isolation. If your organization works with, purchases from, or shares data with companies in the food and beverage services sector, their security weaknesses become your risk. Supply chain attacks - where adversaries compromise a less-secure vendor to reach a larger target - have become one of the most common and damaging attack vectors in recent years.

By identifying the lowest-scoring food and beverage services companies, procurement teams, risk managers, CISOs, and compliance officers can:

  • Flag third-party vendors that may introduce unacceptable risk into the supply chain.
  • Require cybersecurity improvement plans as part of vendor management and contract renewal processes.
  • Benchmark their own organization against industry peers and understand where the floor lies.
  • Satisfy regulatory due-diligence requirements such as those mandated by NIS2, DORA, SOC 2, and ISO 27001 supply chain provisions.

Rankiteo continuously monitors 906 food and beverage services companies keeping these rankings up to date so you always have an accurate, current picture of the sector's risk landscape.

Top 25 Worst Food And Beverage Services Companies by Cybersecurity Score (2026) | Rankiteo | Rankiteo