US milk butterfat reaches 4.32% and protein 3.32% in 2025
CoBank estimates that herds producing milk with the highest component concentrations earn $101–$352 more per cow annually than those with the lowest concentrations, calculated using average US milk production. Corey Geiger, who wrote the report with Abbi Groves, recommends assessing production through the daily weight of components rather than traditional measures such as rolling herd or tank averages. He said differences in milk composition across the cattle population were insufficient to make this a comparable issue 15 years ago. Component concentrations now vary partly because farms differ in their breeding choices and the extent to which they pursue genetic improvement.
Nate Zwald, president and chief operating officer of Progenco, said genetic improvement that previously took 15 years can now be achieved in five. Gains once requiring three cattle generations are consequently possible within one, he said. Jordan Siemers, general manager of his family’s Siemers Holsteins farm in northeastern Wisconsin, said the business targets a fat-to-protein ratio of about 1.5 to one because its entire milk output is used for cheese. Its elite cows give more than 100 pounds of milk a day, containing over 5 pounds of butterfat and 4 pounds of protein. Cows in its highest-performing group average more than 7 pounds of butterfat and almost 5 pounds of protein daily. Siemers described those animals as an indication of future production potential. Zwald said that, historically, production levels first attained by individual animals have subsequently been achieved by whole herds.
Siemers Holsteins also selects for health characteristics, including resistance to mastitis, somatic-cell score and hoof health. Siemers said those breeding priorities can be pursued alongside higher component production. Zwald pointed to recent improvements in conception as another example of genetic progress accompanying increased output. In his assessment, breeders have combined higher component production with animals capable of longer lives, better performance and quicker pregnancies. For a farmer beginning to emphasise milk components in breeding decisions, Zwald estimated that strong genetics could produce a change in bulk-tank composition within a single generation. He said superior genetics perform better across different production environments, citing Australia, China, American grazing operations and large US herds. Geiger also argued that investment in genetics would bring financial returns.
John Goeser, a consultant on dairy feeding and management at Progressive Dairy Solutions, Inc., said nutrition may now constrain production more than genetics. When he entered the nutrition business two decades ago, limited genetic potential explained more of the differences he observed between farms, he said. His assessment is now reversed: cattle’s genetic capacity exceeds both current feeding performance and the industry’s understanding of how to support it. Zwald similarly described the nutritional requirements of present-day cattle as a changed landscape. Goeser said the industry still has an incomplete understanding of the dietary tools available to increase production from these animals.
The value of milk protein is rising faster than that of butterfat, giving farmers an incentive to select for greater protein output. Increasing protein through feeding changes is more difficult than the recent shift towards higher butterfat, however. Half of milk protein originates from protein in feed; the other half comes from microbial protein produced in the rumen. Goeser said targeted amino-acid feeding to increase milk protein has been practised for more than ten years, prompting attention to other dietary approaches. He is examining nutrients and feed characteristics that could support microbial protein production and increase protein concentration relative to fat. He identified added sugar, together with better digestion of fibre and starch, as possible ways to optimise that microbial output.
Animal management also affects component production, Geiger said. He highlighted cow comfort and warned that excessive numbers of animals in a pen, combined with inadequate feeding-rail space, reduce milk components. He recommended that farmers compare their herds’ component records over time with changes in stocking density to determine whether crowding warrants attention. His advice links the assessment of milk composition to the conditions in which animals are kept, alongside decisions about breeding and feed. Siemers likewise said that a cow’s genetic capacity alone does not ensure that it will reach the corresponding production level: animals experiencing problems can fall short of their potential.
At Siemers Holsteins, Siemers examines cows achieving the highest component yields to understand how they reach those levels under the farm’s conditions. For animals performing below their potential, he tries to identify the factors holding them back. He said smaller herds should not be regarded as a disadvantage, because their owners can apply greater selectivity and individual attention. In his view, that focus can accelerate the effect of spending on genetics. Zwald attributed the changes achieved over the past two decades to the combined contribution of herd management, nutrition and breeding.
