all marketsCandySour Candy
San Francisco · 3 grocers · Contested

the sour candy aisle

San Francisco's sour candy aisle is a fragmented shelf spread across many brands: 28 products from 8 brands across 3 grocers. better sour owns the most shelf — 29% of SKUs, ahead of bonbon. The shelf leans plant-based — 39% of SKUs carry that claim. Verdict: contested — real competition, no single winner (opportunity 60/100).

28
products
8
brands
$7.83
avg price
$2.79–$14.64
typical range

More in Candy

Who owns the shelf

brands by share of the sour candy shelf.

bbetter sour
29% of shelf8 SKUs
bbonbon
18% of shelf5 SKUs
kolsvart
14% of shelf4 SKUs
ssmartsweets
14% of shelf4 SKUs
yyumearth
7% of shelf2 SKUs
mmicrojoy
7% of shelf2 SKUs
aashby confections
7% of shelf2 SKUs
bburkes
4% of shelf1 SKU

How it's positioned

the claims products on this shelf lead with — share of SKUs carrying each.

Plant-Based
39%
Vegetarian
36%
Gluten-Free
29%
Dairy-Free
18%
Vegan
18%
Heart Health
11%
Nut-Free
11%
Weight Management
11%

Brand positioning

every brand by share of shelf × price. bubble size = the brand's total reach across all aisles; color = positioning stance. top-right owns the premium end; bottom-right owns the mainstream.

scale
premium leadersmainstream leadersniche premiumvalue playersshare of shelfavg $/oz
Color:indulgentbetter-for-you
Size:total brand reach (SKUs across all aisles)
price normalized per oz (sizes vary)1 omitted (no oz size)

All stores combined. Tap a store to see who wins its shelf.

Market structure

36
med
Brand competition
how many brands compete
80
high
Variety of offers
how differentiated the shelf is
17
low
Top-brand grip
how much a few brands dominate
60
med
Launch whitespace
room for a new brand

store-brand share: 0% · scores 0–100.

More aisles

how we measure.prices & assortment are collected from public storefronts of San Franciscogrocers, deduped to distinct products, and normalized to a per-unit price from each product's parsed size. market-structure scores come from brand shares. figures update as we re-measure. full methodology →