Table of Contents
Executive Summary
-
- The issues
- Diet carbonated soft drinks struggle, overall category sales flat
-
- Figure 1: Total US retail sales and forecast of carbonated soft drinks, by segment, at current prices, 2011-21
- High cross-consumption with sparkling waters
-
- Figure 2: CSD consumption – Any consumption, by CSD consumption – Flavored sparkling water, April 2016
- Slight declines in volume consumption, steeper consumer exit rate
-
- Figure 3: Carbonated soft drink consumption, trended 2011-15
- The opportunities
- Majority drinks more than one type of CSD
-
- Figure 4: Repertoire of CSD consumption, April 2016
- Rise of natural carbonated soft drinks
-
- Figure 5: CSD consumption – Stevia-sweetened/natural/craft, March 2015 and April 2016
- 73% of consumers want added functional/health benefits
-
- Figure 6: Ideal CSD creation – Functions/benefits, April 2016
- Ideal carbonated beverage is refreshing
-
- Figure 7: Ideal CSD classification, April 2016
- What it means
The Market – What You Need to Know
-
- Category sales plateau
- Regular carbonated soft drinks keep category afloat
- Majority of CSD drinkers consume flavored sparkling waters
- Health a key driver in CSD category evolution
Market Size and Forecast
-
- Category sales growth forecast to remain flat
-
- Figure 8: Total US sales and fan chart forecast of carbonated soft drinks, at current prices, 2011-21
- Figure 9: Total US sales and forecast of carbonated soft drinks, at current prices, 2011-21
-
- Figure 10: Total US sales and forecast of carbonated soft drinks, at inflation-adjusted prices, 2011-21
Market Breakdown
-
- Regular carbonated soft drinks keep category afloat
-
- Figure 11: Total US retail sales and forecast of carbonated soft drinks, by segment, at current prices, 2011-21
- Regular CSD segment growth remains flat through 2021
-
- Figure 12: Total US retail sales and forecast of carbonated soft drinks, by segment, at percent change of current prices, 2011-21
- “Other” retail channel posts only positive growth from 2014-16
-
- Figure 13: Total US retail sales of carbonated soft drinks, by channel, at current prices, 2014 and 2016
- Carbonated soft drink natural channel sales grow 3.6% from 2015-16
-
- Figure 14: Natural supermarket sales of carbonated soft drinks, at current prices, rolling 52-weeks March 2014-16
- Sugar-sweetened sodas dominate sales at natural channels
-
- Figure 15: Natural supermarket sales of carbonated soft drinks, by type of sweetener, at current prices, March 2016
Market Perspective
-
- Majority of CSD drinkers consume flavored sparkling waters
-
- Figure 16: CSD consumption – Any consumption, by CSD consumption – Flavored sparkling water, April 2016
- Bottled water disrupts growth of natural sodas
-
- Figure 17: Beverage Tracker – Natural soda/diet drinks/drinks with natural sweeteners, at-home consumption, June 2014-April 2016
Market Factors
-
- Health concerns remain top-of-mind with consumers
-
- Figure 18: Important to achieve good health – Any top three rank, May 2015
- Millennial population has positive growth
-
- Figure 19: Population by generation, percentage change, 2011-21
- Hispanic population growing
-
- Figure 20: Population by Hispanic origin, percent change, 2011-21
- Declining household income challenges some soft drink segments
-
- Figure 21: Median household income, in inflation-adjusted dollars, 2004-14
- Overlap between Millennials, acculturated Hispanics, and parents
- Millennials as parents
-
- Figure 22: Households with own children, by age of householder, 2013
- Hispanics as parents
-
- Figure 23: Households with own children, by Hispanic origin of householder, 2013
- Hispanics as Millennials
-
- Figure 24: Generations, by Hispanic origin, 2016
Key Players – What You Need to Know
-
- Leading companies’ MULO sales flat, losses cancel out growth
- Regular soft drinks post positive growth at MULO channels
- Diet struggles at MULO channels, battle continues against sugary drinks
- Premiumization, functionality, hard sodas grab consumer interest
Manufacturer Sales of Carbonated Soft Drinks
-
- Leading companies’ MULO sales flat, launch new/extended campaigns
-
- Figure 25: MULO sales of carbonated soft drinks, by leading companies, rolling 52-weeks 2015 and 2016
- Manufacturer sales of carbonated soft drinks
-
- Figure 26: MULO sales of carbonated soft drinks, by leading companies, rolling 52-weeks 2015 and 2016
What’s Working?
-
- Regular soft drinks post positive growth at MULO channels
-
- Figure 27: MULO sales of regular soft drinks, by leading companies and brands, rolling 52-weeks 2015 and 2016
- Ginger ales continue to perform well
- Leading companies’ cherry-flavored offerings see growth
- Throwbacks, limited editions generate renewed product interest
- Natural soft drinks trend
- Craft continues to gain exposure
What’s Struggling?
-
- Soda bans complicate positive category messaging
- Diet struggles to recover at MULO channels
-
- Figure 28: MULO sales of diet soft drinks, by leading companies and brands, rolling 52-weeks 2015 and 2016
What’s Next?
-
- Premium carbonated soft drinks not limited to craft
- Not soda, but sparkling beverages
- Functionality under-tapped, but desired
- Hard soda launches explode
The Consumer – What You Need to Know
-
- Volume consumption only slightly declines among drinkers
- Regular carbonated soft drinks dominate consumer preference
- Natural carbonated soft drinks generate interest
- Total craft soda consumption only slightly up
- Taste, refreshment, all-natural important to CSD selection
- Greater concern about sugar content than artificial ingredients
- Afternoon, evening most popular dayparts for consumption
- Consumers drink on-the-go rather than at work/school
- Consumers prefer CSDs with meals
- Cola preferred flavor in ideal carbonated beverage creation
- Consumers want cane sugar
- Vitamins and minerals, caffeine preferred soft drink functions
- Bottles preferred carbonated beverage packaging
- Most described their creation as a soda
Volume Consumption versus Consumer Base
-
- Volume consumption only slightly declines among drinkers
-
- Figure 29: Carbonated soft drink consumption, trended 2011-15
-
- Figure 30: Carbonated soft drink consumption – Average number of drinks in the last seven days, trended 2011-15
Classic Carbonated Soft Drink Consumer
-
- Regular carbonated soft drinks dominate consumer preference
-
- Figure 31: CSD consumption – Regular/diet/low – or mid-calorie, April 2016
- Older Millennials lead carbonated soft drink consumption
-
- Figure 32: CSD consumption – Regular/diet/low- or mid-calorie, by generation, April 2016
-
- Figure 33: Repertoire of CSD consumption, April 2016
- Hispanics lead consumption, possible opportunity with Asians
-
- Figure 34: CSD consumption – Regular/diet/low – or mid-calorie, by race and Hispanic origin, April 2016
- Low/mid-calorie, diet consumption increases with income level
-
- Figure 35: CSD consumption – Regular/diet/low – or mid-calorie, by household income, April 2016
Natural Carbonated Soft Drink Consumer
-
- Natural carbonated soft drinks generate interest
-
- Figure 36: CSD consumption – Stevia-sweetened/natural, April 2016
- Older Millennials core natural CSD consumer
-
- Figure 37: CSD consumption – Stevia-sweetened/natural, by generation, April 2016
- Hispanics stand out with their natural soft drink consumption
-
- Figure 38: CSD consumption – Stevia-sweetened/natural, by race and Hispanic origin, April 2016
- Natural soft drink consumption rises with income level
-
- Figure 39: CSD consumption – Stevia-sweetened/natural, by household income, April 2016
Craft Carbonated Soft Drink Consumer
-
- Total craft soda consumption only slightly up
-
- Figure 40: CSD consumption – Craft, April 2016
- Older Millennials heaviest craft soda consumers
-
- Figure 41: CSD consumption – Craft, by generation, April 2016
Impact of Taste, Refreshment, Health
-
- Taste, refreshment attributes important CSD drivers
- Consumers take note of all-natural ingredient
-
- Figure 42: Attitudes toward CSDs, April 2016
- Millennials drink for reasons beyond taste
-
- Figure 43: Attitudes toward CSDs, by generation, April 2016
Replacement, Concerns
-
- Greater concern about sugar content than artificial ingredients
-
- Figure 44: Attitudes toward CSDs, April 2016
- Younger Millennials, iGeneration, Boomers concerned about sugar
-
- Figure 45: Attitudes toward CSDs, by generation, April 2016
- Some concern with brands going natural
Daypart
-
- Afternoon, evening most popular dayparts for consumption
-
- Figure 46: Drinking occasions – Daypart, April 2016
-
- Figure 47: April 2016 ideal CSD creation – Function, by drinking occasions – Daypart, April 2016
Activity
-
- Consumers drink on-the-go rather than at work/school
-
- Figure 48: Drinking occasions – Activity, April 2016
- Opportunity to connect with mothers through on-the-go use
-
- Figure 49: Drinking occasions – Activity, April 2016
Usage with Meals, as Mixers
-
- Core consumers under index for consumption with meals
-
- Figure 50: Drinking occasions – Usage, April 2016
- Carbonated soft drinks as alcoholic mixers
Ideal Flavor
-
- Cola preferred flavor in ideal carbonated beverage creation
-
- Figure 51: Ideal CSD creation – Flavor, April 2016
- Millennials drive interest in unique flavors
-
- Figure 52: Ideal CSD creation – Flavor, by generations, April 2016
- Blacks stand out for ginger ale, fruit flavors
-
- Figure 53: Ideal CSD creation – Flavor, by race and Hispanic origin, April 2016
Ideal Sugar/sweetener
-
- Consumers want cane sugar
-
- Figure 54: Ideal CSD creation – Sugar/sweetener, April 2016
- Generations stand out for specific sugar types
-
- Figure 55: Ideal CSD creation – Sugar/sweetener, by generation, April 2016
Ideal Functions/benefits
-
- Vitamins and minerals, caffeine preferred functions
-
- Figure 56: Ideal CSD creation – Function, April 2016
- Millennials, iGeneration want functionality
-
- Figure 57: Ideal CSD creation – Function, by generation, April 2016
- Ideal drink contains vitamins, miners, caffeine, and zero calories
-
- Figure 58: TURF analysis – Ideal CSD creation – Other add-ins, April 2016
Ideal Packaging
-
- Bottles preferred carbonated beverage packaging
-
- Figure 59: Ideal CSD creation – Packaging, April 2016
- Women want resealable packaging
-
- Figure 60: Ideal CSD creation – Packaging, by gender, April 2016
- iGeneration disinterested in classic aluminium can, wants reusable
-
- Figure 61: Ideal CSD creation – Packaging, April 2016
Ideal Carbonated Soft Drink Creation
-
- Most described their creation as a soda
-
- Figure 62: Ideal CSD classification – Drink type, April 2016
- Older Millennials make a natural soda
-
- Figure 63: Ideal CSD classification – Drink type, by generation, April 2016
- Consumers want refreshing
-
- Figure 64: Ideal CSD classification – Drink qualities, April 2016
Appendix – Data Sources and Abbreviations
-
- Data sources
- Sales data
- Fan chart forecast
- Consumer survey data
- TURF methodology
- Abbreviations and terms
- Abbreviations
- Terms
Appendix – Market
-
-
- Figure 65: Total US retail sales and forecast of regular carbonated soft drinks, at current prices, 2011-21
- Figure 66: Total US retail sales and forecast of regular carbonated soft drinks, at inflation-adjusted prices, 2011-21
- Figure 67: Total US retail sales and forecast of diet carbonated soft drinks, at current prices, 2011-21
- Figure 68: Total US retail sales and forecast of diet carbonated soft drinks, at inflation-adjusted prices, 2011-21
-
- Figure 69: US supermarket sales of carbonated soft drinks, at current prices, 2011-16
- Figure 70: US convenience store sales of carbonated soft drinks, at current prices, 2011-16
- Figure 71: US sales of carbonated soft drinks through other retail channels, at current prices, 2011-16
-
Appendix – Key Players
-
-
- Figure 72: MULO sales of regular soft drinks, by leading companies and brands, rolling 52-weeks 2015 and 2016
- Figure 73: MULO sales of diet soft drinks, by leading companies and brands, rolling 52-weeks 2015 and 2016
-
Appendix – Consumer
-
-
- Figure 74: Carbonated soft drink consumption – Average number of drinks in the last seven days, December 2015
-
Back to top