Objective: to compare the time Brazilian adults required to make food choices with different models of front-of-pack nutrition labeling. Methods: Interviews were conducted with 150 participants, who were instructed to select the healthiest product between two foods, with eight pairs of images presented. One of the products in each pair had warnings (high in sugars, sodium, or saturated fat), evaluated in different formats according to the group in which the individual was allocated: magnifying glass, octagon, circle, triangle, and traffic light. The number of correct answers for the healthiest product in each pair and the time to correctly select of the healthiest product were measured. Results: A lower number of correct answers for the healthier product among the pairs occurred with traffic lights than with any other model (p <0.001), which is also the format in which the longest time was necessary to correctly select the healthiest product (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the other formats. In the individual analysis of the products, the circle performed better, with significantly less time required to make the correct choices in seven of the eight products. Conclusion: To support healthy food choices, any of the tested formats for frontal nutrition labeling are indicated, except for the traffic light. The circle appears to be a good option to reduce consumer’s time to select healthy choices.