The impact of testing locations, home use test (HUT) and central location test (CLT) on consumer evaluations of food products using rate all that apply (RATA) was investigated. As a case study, eight cold cuts were evaluated: four vegetarian/vegan and four meat-based products. A between-subjects design was used, whereby consumers were randomly allocated to either HUT or CLT test location (58 and 71 consumers, respectively). To retain as much similarity as possible across locations, consumers in both groups received identical bags of products with palate cleansers and instructions. Consumers evaluated the products using a lexicon consisting of 32 sensory attributes based on similar studies and benchtop tasting, using RATA with 7pt scales. A total of 30 and 31 attributes differed significantly (p < 0.05) across the products for HUT and CLT, respectively. Sample discrimination was similar between the two locations. Location significantly (p < 0.05) affected discrimination of 14 attributes, but a particular location having consistently higher attribute means was not observed. Bootstrapping of the attribute means per product showed no significant differences between the two testing locations, and multilevel regression models using Bayesian inference did not reveal marked differences in expected ratings between locations. Further comparisons of sample discrimination patterns through principal component analysis showed that the two locations were very similar, including the overlap of confidence ellipses. The between-subjects design strengthens the results: that comparable sensory profiles were obtained from different consumers in different testing locations supports the notion that RATA data from consumers can be reliably collected for relatively sensorially distinct products with minimal data compromise.