Broad-scale interaction patterns among species in food webs can be identified using the group model, which identifies groups of species, sharing similar sets of predators and prey from other groups. These shared relationships are relevant for the functionality of species. The group model originates from stochastic block models, meaning the obtained group structures of the same food web can differ in multiple runs. A single best partition may miss relevant information, and a consensus solution may blur complementary communities. Hence, it is highly relevant to analyze the full solution landscape while searching for the optimal partitioning of species. In particular, a narrow solution landscape would highlight the reliability of the identified groups. Here, using five empirical food webs, we analyze their respective solution landscape based on multiple group model runs of the same network. By analyzing the solution landscapes, we aim to explain the differences between solutions and what they entail, structurally and ecologically. Our results show that the overall general group structures remain intact across different iterations. While some food webs vary more, differences are commonly limited to a smaller number of groups with seemingly similar species roles. Our results suggest that while the stochastic process of the group model can generate alternate solutions for the same food web, these differences generally involve weaker distinctions of species in a small number of groups rather than a large structural turnover.