REVIEW: Starbucks Vanilla Almondmilk Frappuccino

Starbucks Vanilla Almondmilk Frappuccino

What is the Starbucks Vanilla Almondmilk Frappuccino?

Imagine a bottled Starbucks Frappuccino with, instead of reduced fat and skim milk, a liquid made from almonds that are treated as if someone is trying to extract top secret information from it. They’re drowned, chopped into tiny pieces, and then drowned again.

Besides this vanilla flavor, there’s also a mocha version.

How is it?

Full disclosure: I drink almond milk. More specifically, organic Silk Almondmilk from Costco that comes in a pack with three half-gallons, which I drink even though there’s a Silk’s Vanilla Soymilk multi-pack that’s cheaper and better tasting. I mention that to show I have no issues with the nut milk.

With that said, Starbucks’ Vanilla Almondmilk Frappuccino is something I wouldn’t buy again. At first, it’s decent coffee drink. But in the middle of every sip, a weird, acrid taste pops up in my mouth. It’s similar to what I experienced with Starbucks’ bottled Smoked Butterscotch Latte. It’s not so horrible that I’m spitting it out and pouring the rest down the drain, but the next time I’m looking for a non-dairy coffee drink, I’ll avoid this.

I’m not sure if it’s the nut milk that’s causing this or something else because the Smoked Butterscotch Latte doesn’t have almond milk and I also recently tried Starbucks’ Almondmilk Caffe Latte and Caffe Mocha which don’t have that acrid taste.

Is there anything else you need to know?

Because the almond milk tends to be thinner than cow milk or soy milk, I thought this would also be that way. But thanks to our friends carrageenan and cellulose gum, it’s as thick and creamy as regular bottled Frappuccino beverages.

Some of you astute readers might’ve noticed I’ve used two different spellings for almond milk. When used in product names, I’ll respect the one-word spelling, but I’m on Team #AlmondSpaceMilk and used the two-word spelling for all other instances. Eh, maybe I’m just a fuddy-duddy.


Starbucks’ Vanilla Almondmilk Frappuccino has fewer calories and fat than its dairy version, but its flavor makes it my least favorite bottled nut milk coffee drink. Thankfully, there are better options from Starbucks.

Purchased Price: $2.89
Size: 13.7 fl. oz.
Purchased at: Target
Rating: 4 out of 10
Nutrition Facts: (1 bottle) 180 calories, 5 grams of fat, 0 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 120 milligrams of sodium, 32 grams of carbohydrates, 3 grams of fiber, 28 grams of sugar, and 2 grams of protein.

8 thoughts to “REVIEW: Starbucks Vanilla Almondmilk Frappuccino”

  1. I had the mocha one and had the same experience too. Did you chill yours? I was hoping that would help it taste better… (Also are you going to review the almondmilk latte and mocha? I wanted to buy them but didn’t know if they were sweet or not.)

    1. I did chill mine. As for the Starbucks Almondmilk Latte and Mocha, they are sweet and much better tasting than this. I’d buy those again.

  2. I have waited for almond milk fraps in bottles for 10 years. However, 28 grams of SUGAR? Why no lite or SF even?

  3. I didn’t like the taste of this either! Then after a few sips I started to have stabbing stomach pains. Terrible. I’m off gluten and dairy so I’m thinking maybe the carrageenan is the culprit as it causes inflammation and gut issues I read. ?

  4. I had been excited that now I don’t have to run to Starbucks in the morning before work if I wanted a non dairy coffee beverage since I’m severely lactose intolerant but I should have checked before drinking but I’m very disappointed that they used carrageenan in this drink. It upset my stomach so much. I might have well had the regular and suffered through that.

  5. I too am alright with Nut milks. The Almond Milk Frappuccino was underwhelming but for a different reason. I found it to be too thin ( no creaminess to it at all) which was surprising as it only has .5 less fat. It was considerably less sweet which was expected due to significantly less sugar. That being said depending on your intent for drinking a non-dairy coffee drink, IF your goal is ONLY cutting calories, I’d say it’s a good option- not so much so if you’re cutting fat grams. It wasn’t nearly as satisfying as the regular version but would certainly drink it again if I’m trying to watch my overall calorie intake.

    1. Agree. The mocha almondmilk was like drinking chocolate milk—not the robust StarBucks roast flavor. As for the salted carmel it also didn’t have that robust SB coffee roast flavor. Back to normal Fabbs.

    2. Agree. The mocha almondmilk was like drinking chocolate milk—not the robust StarBucks roast flavor. As for the salted carmel it also didn’t have that robust SB coffee roast flavor. Back to normal Fapps.

Comments are closed.