University students are a nutritionally vulnerable population, characterised by suboptimal diet quality and elevated risk of food insecurity(1). Campus food environments can strongly shape student dietary behaviours through food and beverage availability, affordability and marketing(2). Although prior research shows poor compliance of Australian universities with government-endorsed benchmarks for healthy food environments(3), the relative affordability of healthier options and compliance with Victorian guidelines remains underexplored. This was the first study which aimed to comprehensively evaluate the nutritional quality, affordability and marketing of food and beverages at a large university campus in Melbourne, Australia, using the Victorian Healthy Choices Guidelines ("Guidelines"). Between March and July 2026, campus-wide audits were conducted in-person across 34 fixed food outlets and 53 vending machines. Data on nutrient profiles, ingredients, pricing, and marketing were collected and assessed according to the Guidelines. Marketing was quantified by product placement (checkouts, eye-level shelving, refrigerated displays and cabinets), advertisements (posters, signs) and specials (meal bundles, discounted items). Food and beverages were classified according to the Guidelines as “Green” (best choice), “Amber” (choose carefully) or “Red” (limit). Data were analysed campus-wide and by vendor type (outlet, vending machine). Descriptive statistics assessed Guideline compliance, the availability of Green, Amber and Red items by product type and within prominently marketed areas. Compliance benchmarks were defined as offering ≥ 50% Green and < 20% Red items. Affordability was assessed within product groups by comparing the proportion of "Green" ("healthier") and "non-Green" (Amber and Red, "less healthy”) items in the lowest price tertile using chi-square goodness-of-fit tests. No outlets or vending machine met both compliance benchmarks. Campus-wide, nearly half (49%) of items were classified as Red while 20% were Green. Within food outlets, Red items dominated foods (56%) and beverages (47%), with minimal Green, comprising 10% and 17%, respectively. Similarly, across vending machines, snacks were 50% Red and 12% Green, though beverages were 26% Red and 54% Green. Across outlets, significantly more non-Green than Green choices were within the lowest price tertile for all primary product types (mains, snacks and drinks; all p < 0.0001). Similarly in vending machines, a greater proportion of non-Green than Green snacks were within the lowest price tertile (p < 0.0001), though the reverse was observed for drinks (p = 0.0126). Across marketing, Red items constituted 64% of products displayed in highly visible areas and advertisements, with 11% as Green. Among specials, 72% included ≥1 Red item, while 48% offered exclusively Red. Less healthy foods and beverages were more abundant, prominently marketed and affordably priced than healthier choices across most product types. The poor alignment between the campus food environment and government-endorsed recommendations highlights the need for strategies that improve the availability, affordability and marketing of healthy choices in universities.