Table of Contents
Scope and Themes
-
- What you need to know
- Definition
- Data sources
- Sales data
- Consumer survey data
- Abbreviations and terms
- Abbreviations
Executive Summary
-
- The market
- Dollar sales losses in category could slow in coming years
-
- Figure 1: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar and sweeteners, at current prices, 2009-19
- Leading companies
- Category highly fragmented, Domino leads with 13% of MULO sales
-
- Figure 2: MULO sales of sugar and sweeteners at retail (and percentage change), by leading companies, rolling 52 weeks 2013 and 2014
- Segment performance
- Honey gains with sugar’s losses
-
- Figure 3: Total US retail sales of sugar and sweeteners (and percentage change) ($ millions), by segment, at current prices, 2009-14
- The consumer
- Honey leads perception of health
-
- Figure 4: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners, correspondence analysis, September 2014
- Consumers keep an eye on sweetener use in juice, carbonated soft drinks
-
- Figure 5: Paying attention to sugar/sweetener as an ingredient (top five), June 2014
- What we think
Issues and Insights
-
- How can the category combat negative perceptions of health?
- Issue
- Insight: The category needs to promote its strengths
- How closely do consumers pay attention to sweeteners in packaged food?
- Issue
- Insight: Arming shoppers with information about what’s inside should find appeal
- How can brands compete with the strength of private label?
- Issue
- Insight: Bring products out of the generic shadow
Trend Applications
-
- Trend: FSTR HYPR
- Trend: Life Hacking
- Trend: Help Me Help Myself
Market Size and Forecast
-
- Key points
- Sales and forecast of sugar and sweeteners
-
- Figure 6: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar and sweeteners, at current prices, 2009-19
- Figure 7: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar and sweeteners, at inflation-adjusted prices, 2009-19
- Dollar sales losses in category could slow in coming years
-
- Figure 8: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar and sweeteners, at current prices, 2009-19
- Forecast methodology
Market Factors
-
- Health woes hurt and help category
- Sugar consumption on the decline, but still exceeds recommendations
-
- Figure 9: U.S. per capita sweetener availability, 1966-2012
- Figure 10: Per capita sugar consumption in the United States: Actual versus Recommended, 1970-2010
- General interest in healthy eating grows
- Sugar substitutes should benefit, but find challenges of their own
-
- Figure 11: Sugar substitutes/artificial sweeteners, February 2008-March 2014
- Industry must promote its strengths and play a role in healthy eating
- Reduction of added sugars appears as cause célèbre
- Category players would do well to stay ahead of regulation
- Proposed Nutrition Facts label change looms large
Segment Performance
-
- Key points
- Honey is the only segment to see positive two-year movement
-
- Figure 12: Total US retail sales of sugar and sweeteners, by segment, at current prices, 2012 and 2014
- Sugar sales take a dive
- US retail sales of sugar
-
- Figure 13: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar at current prices, 2009-19
- Figure 14: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar at inflation-adjusted prices, 2009-19
- Syrup and molasses sales are stuck at $1 billion
- US retail sales of syrup and molasses
-
- Figure 15: Total US retail sales and forecast of syrup and molasses at current prices, 2009-19
- Figure 16: Total US retail sales and forecast of syrup and molasses at inflation-adjusted prices, 2009-19
- Sugar substitutes experienced the largest percentage declines
- US retail sales of sugar substitutes
-
- Figure 17: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar substitutes at current prices, 2009-19
- Figure 18: Total US retail sales and forecast of sugar substitutes at inflation-adjusted prices, 2009-19
- Honey is the only segment to post gains
- US retail sales of honey
-
- Figure 19: Total US retail sales and forecast of honey at current prices, 2009-19
- Figure 20: Total US retail sales and forecast of honey at inflation-adjusted prices, 2009-19
Spotlight: Sweeteners as Ingredient in Packaged Food and Drink
-
- Sorbitol leads in sales of products with added sweeteners
-
- Figure 21: Sales* of products with added sweeteners, by type of sweetener, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Stevia/stevia blends most prevalent in enhanced/flavored water despite declines
-
- Figure 22: Sales* of products sweetened with stevia/stevia blend, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Frozen desserts and juices and functional beverages lead agave use
-
- Figure 23: Sales* of products sweetened with agave, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Coconut/palm sweetener finds success in candy, cereal
-
- Figure 24: Sales* of products sweetened with coconut/palm sweetener, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Monk fruit growth seen in energy bars/gels
-
- Figure 25: Sales* of products sweetened with Lo Han, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Sugar alcohols used in widest range of products measured in this report
-
- Figure 26: Sales* of products sweetened with sugar alcohols**, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Cookies and snack bars hold largest share of products sweetened with other natural alternative single sweeteners
-
- Figure 27: Sales* of products sweetened with other natural alternative single sweeteners**, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Sales of products sweetened with other artificial alternative sweeteners down slightly
-
- Figure 28: Sales* of products sweetened with other artificial alternative sweeteners, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
- Natural/artificial blends find most success in candy products
-
- Figure 29: Sales* of products sweetened with natural and artificial sweetener blends, by product category, at current prices, rolling 52 weeks 2012 and 2014
Retail Channels
-
- Key points
- Supermarkets hold only slight dominance over other retail channels
- Retailers can lead shoppers to purchase through product positioning, health help
-
- Figure 30: Total US retail sales of sugar and sweeteners, by channel, at current prices, 2012-14
- Private label represents nearly half of MULO sales in category
- Private label sugar expands to natural, added flavor
- Store brand honey offers thrifty shoppers different formats, provenance, organic
- Private label sugar substitutes innovate, threaten brand dominance
- Store brand syrup and molasses seeps across retail channels
Leading Companies and Brand Analysis
-
- Key points
- Category highly fragmented, Domino leads with 13% of MULO sales
- MULO sales of sugar and sweeteners
-
- Figure 31: MULO sales of sugar and sweeteners at retail, by leading companies, rolling 52 weeks 2013 and 2014
- Domino controls 21% of MULO sugar sales, but is dwarfed by private label
- MULO sales of sugar
-
- Figure 32: MULO sales of sugar at retail, by leading companies, rolling 52 weeks 2013 and 2014
- Private label sugar loyalty points to need for differentiation
-
- Figure 33: Key purchase measures for the top sugar brands, by household penetration, 52 weeks ending Dec. 30, 2012 (year ago) and Dec. 29, 2013 (current)
- Maple syrup brands lead MULO segment sales
- MULO sales of syrup and molasses
-
- Figure 34: MULO sales of syrup and molasses at retail, by leading companies, rolling 52 weeks 2013 and 2014
- Expanding usage occasions can help syrup segment to grow
-
- Figure 35: Key purchase measures for the top syrup brands, by household penetration, 52 weeks ending Dec. 30, 2012 (year ago) and Dec. 29, 2013 (current)
- Splenda dominates sugar substitute sales at MULO
-
- Figure 36: Splenda, “For Anywhere You Use Sugar,” TV Ad, 2014
-
- Figure 37: In the Raw, “Cupcake,” TV Ad, 2014
- Figure 38: In the Raw, “Handshake,” TV Ad, 2014
-
- Figure 39: Truvia, “Kitchen Story,” TV Ad, 2014
- MULO sales of sugar substitutes
-
- Figure 40: MULO sales of sugar substitutes at retail, by leading companies, rolling 52 weeks 2013 and 2014
- Equal has trouble competing with the others
-
- Figure 41: Key purchase measures for the top sugar substitute brands, by household penetration, 52 weeks ending Dec. 30, 2012 (year ago) and Dec. 29, 2013 (current)
- Private label represents 50% of MULO honey market, growing
- MULO sales of honey
-
- Figure 42: MULO sales of honey at retail, by leading companies, rolling 52 weeks 2013 and 2014
- Expansion of honey brand lines could boost purchase occasions
-
- Figure 43: Key purchase measures for the top honey brands, by household penetration, 52 weeks ending Dec. 30, 2012 (year ago) and Dec. 29, 2013 (current)
Innovations and Innovators
-
- New varieties surpass new product launches in 2014
-
- Figure 44: Sugar and sweetener launches, by launch type, 2010-14*
- Added flavors could spice up the category
-
- Figure 45: Sugar and sweetener launches (honey), by top 10 flavors, 2010-14*
- Low calorie/low sugar claims on the rise
-
- Figure 46: Sugar and sweetener launches, by top 10 claims, 2010-14*
- Convenient sugar packaging prioritized in 2014
-
- Figure 47: Sugar and sweetener launches (sugar), by top 10 claims, 2010-14*
- Pourable sugar on the rise
-
- Figure 48: Sugar and sweetener launches (sugar), by package type, 2010-14*
- Low calorie/sugar claims in syrup/molasses on the rise
-
- Figure 49: Sugar and sweetener launches (syrup and molasses), by top 10 claims, 2010-14*
- Allergen claims growing in popularity among sugar substitutes
-
- Figure 50: Sugar and sweetener launches (sugar substitutes), by top 10 claims, 2010-14*
- Organic honey sees strong growth
-
- Figure 51: Sugar and sweetener launches (honey), by top 10 claims, 2010-14*
- Blends allow for familiarity, control
- Liquids lend to convenience, expand usage occasions
- Bring products out of the generic shadow
- Go premium
- Highlight heritage
- Emphasize provenance
Use of Sweeteners
-
- Key points
- More than half of US households use white granulated sugar
-
- Figure 52: Use of sugar, by gender, June 2014
- Younger consumers open to alternative sweeteners
-
- Figure 53: Use of sugar, by age, June 2014
- Figure 54: Use of sugar substitutes, by age, June 2014
- Use of alternative sweeteners tied to income
-
- Figure 55: Use of sugar, by household income, June 2014
- Figure 56: Use of sugar substitutes, by household income, June 2014
- Natural aspect of sugar may appeal to Asian households
-
- Figure 57: Sugar and sugar substitutes, by race/Hispanic origin, January 2013-March 2014
Sweetened Products
-
- Key points
- HFCS most recognized non-sugar sweetener
-
- Figure 58: Purchase of products that contain sugar substitutes, by age, June 2014
- Sweeteners most evident in juice/carbonated soft drinks
-
- Figure 59: Pepsi NEXT, “Baby Tricks,” TV Ad, 2013
- Figure 60: Paying attention to sugar/sweetener as an ingredient, by age, June 2014
Healthfulness of Sweeteners
-
- Key points
- Honey leads perception of health
-
- Figure 61: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners, September 2014
- Figure 62: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners, correspondence analysis, September 2014
- 25-44 year olds have strongest opinions on sweetener health
-
- Figure 63: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Good, by age, June 2014
- Figure 64: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by age, June 2014
- Respondents age 55+ look to control sugar intake
-
- Figure 65: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners (health), by age, June 2014
- High earners more likely than lower earners to see sweeteners as bad
-
- Figure 66: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by household income, June 2014
- Consumers continue to use the sweeteners they consider bad for health
-
- Figure 67: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by use of sugar, June 2014
- Figure 68: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by use of sugar, June 2014 (continued)
-
- Figure 69: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by use of sugar substitutes, June 2014
- Figure 70: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by use of sugar substitutes, June 2014 (continued)
Purchase Decision
-
- Key points
- While taste and natural lead purchase drivers, convenience provides an opportunity
-
- Figure 71: Purchase decision, by gender and age, June 2014
- Young shoppers interested in added value
-
- Figure 72: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners (flavor/format), by age, June 2014
- High earners particularly interested in natural
-
- Figure 73: Purchase decision, by household income, June 2014
- Figure 74: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners (price), by household income, June 2014
- Sugar alternatives may benefit from baking positioning
-
- Figure 75: Use of sugar, by purchase decision (1 of 2), June 2014
- Figure 76: Use of sugar, by purchase decision (2 of 2), June 2014
- Familiar packets make their mark, pointing to the importance of packaging
-
- Figure 77: Use of sugar substitutes, by purchase decision (1 of 2), June 2014
- Figure 78: Use of sugar substitutes, by purchase decision (2 of 2), June 2014
Custom Consumer Groups – Households with Children
-
- Key points
- Households with children use more sweetener types than those without
-
- Figure 79: Use of sugar, by presence of children in household, June 2014
-
- Figure 80: Use of sugar substitutes, by presence of children in household, June 2014
- Dads are a good target for sugar substitutes
-
- Figure 81: Use of sugar, by gender and presence of children in household, June 2014
-
- Figure 82: Use of sugar substitutes, by gender and presence of children in household, June 2014
- HHs with children more likely to pay attention to sugar/sweeteners in products
-
- Figure 83: Paying attention to sugar/sweetener as an ingredient, by presence of children in household, June 2014
Appendix – Other Useful Tables
-
- Use of sweeteners
-
- Figure 84: Use of sugar, by gender and age, June 2014
- Figure 85: Use of sugar, by Hispanic origin and income, June 2014
- Figure 86: Use of sugar substitutes, by gender and age, June 2014
-
- Figure 87: Use of sugar substitutes, by Hispanic origin and income, June 2014
- Sweetened products
-
- Figure 88: Purchase of products that contain sugar substitutes, by gender and age, June 2014
- Figure 89: Purchase of products that contain sugar substitutes, by Hispanic origin and income, June 2014
- Figure 90: Paying attention to sugar/sweetener as an ingredient, by gender and age, June 2014
- Healthfulness of sugar/sweeteners
-
- Figure 91: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Good, by gender and age, June 2014
- Figure 92: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Good, by Hispanic origin and income, June 2014
- Figure 93: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by gender and age, June 2014
-
- Figure 94: Healthfulness of sugars/sweeteners – Bad, by Hispanic origin and income, June 2014
- Purchase decision
-
- Figure 95: Purchase decision, by Hispanic origin and income, June 2014
- Attitudes toward sugar and sweeteners
-
- Figure 96: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners (health), by gender and age, June 2014
- Figure 97: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners (convenience), by gender and age, June 2014
- Figure 98: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners (price), by gender and age, June 2014
-
- Figure 99: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners (flavor/format), by gender and age, June 2014
- Figure 100: Attitudes toward sugar/sweeteners, by Hispanic origin and income, June 2014
Appendix – Information Resources Inc. Builders Panel Data Definitions
-
- Information Resources Inc. Consumer Network Metrics
Appendix – SPINS categories covered in Spotlight: Sweeteners as Ingredient in Packaged Food and Drink
Appendix – Trade Associations
Back to top