"Large" is not a measurement. It is a position in a range, and the range is set locally. A large drink in one market can hold less than a medium in another, under the same brand, with the same name printed on the cup.
Sizes are relative, not absolute
Chains set portion sizes per market, informed by local norms, packaging supply and what competitors offer. Because the names are relative to each other rather than to a standard, the same word can describe very different quantities across borders.
This creates a specific trap for travellers: ordering by habit. If you always order a medium at home, ordering a medium abroad tells you nothing about what will arrive. The reliable move is to check the stated volume or weight where a market publishes it, and to treat the name as a label rather than information.
The price ladder is the whole game
Here is the pattern that appears on nearly every board we hold. Going up a size adds a large proportion of extra product for a small proportion of extra money.
| Size step | Typical extra volume | Typical extra price | What it feels like |
|---|---|---|---|
| Small to medium | Substantially more | A small increment | Obviously worth it |
| Medium to large | More again | A smaller increment still | Almost free |
| Large to extra large | More again | The smallest increment | Irrational not to |
That structure is not accidental and it is not dishonest - The per-unit price genuinely does improve. But two things are true simultaneously: upsizing improves value per millilitre and worsens value per meal. Only the first is ever advertised.
The question that cuts through it
Not "is the large better value?" - It almost always is. The question is "do I want the extra?" If the answer is no, the small is the better purchase at any per-unit price.
How sizes appear on this site
When we store a menu we keep every size option as a separate priced row against its item, which is why many rows on our menu pages show a range - A low price for the smallest option and a high one for the largest. Across the database there are 19,689 priced options against 15,775 items, so roughly a quarter of items carry more than one size or configuration.
For the price index we always take the cheapest published option in each market. That is the conservative choice: it compares entry prices rather than letting a market with an unusually large default size look expensive for reasons that have nothing to do with pricing.
The naming games
Some chains avoid small, medium and large entirely, using proprietary names instead. The commercial logic is straightforward: a proprietary name cannot be compared to a competitor's, and it removes the word "small", which nobody enjoys saying.
The smallest size is the one most likely to be renamed. "Small" is a word customers resist and chains have noticed.
Watch for markets where the smallest size has quietly disappeared from the board while remaining available if asked for. That is a well-established retail pattern and it is worth a question at the counter, especially for drinks and coffee.
Practical advice
- Order by volume, not by name, where the volume is published.
- Assume a size step abroad is a bigger jump than at home until you have seen one.
- Ask whether a smaller size exists if the board starts at medium.
- For drinks, check free refills - In markets that offer them, the small is the correct purchase at any price.
Size behaviour also interacts with combos, since a combo price is normally quoted for its smallest configuration. That interaction is where most of the money moves, and we take it apart in how to spot a bad meal deal.
