Dear Client:
The industry has been obsessed with ready-to-drink beverages for the last few years, as they’ve outpaced overall bev alc’s growth.
Total RTDs of any base were up a bit over 6% in dollars YTD ended 3/21 in NIQ off premise channels (by contrast, total bev alc is actually down 1.4% YTD in NIQ, though slightly up in Circana [see last story]).
But on a much smaller scale, perhaps a non-alc RTD wave is starting to form.
We predict that Constellation’s purchase of HOPWTR could rev the race for large brewers to buy or take stakes in NA RTDs. But what is the list of top NA RTDs? We enlisted 3 Tier’s Danelle Kosmal, long time industry analyst, to help us size this category and enumerate its top players. It’s this month’s “Around the World” feature.
NA RTDS $66 MILL FOR 52 WEEKS, UP 40%. To paint a picture: Total NA RTD dollars amount to almost $66 million over the 52 weeks ended 3/21 in NIQ off-premise channels, where they do the bulk of their sales.
It’s a big aggregate number, but as Danelle points out, “It’s worth noting that NA is still a small segment, accounting for 3.2% of total beer/wine/spirits RTD dollars.”
But NA RTDs, at +40.3% YTD to 3/21, are “far outpacing” hard RTD growth (remember, up 6%-ish).
AN INTERESTING SNAPSHOT OF NA VS. HARD RTD TRENDS IN BIG BOOZE STATES. Danelle indeed offered an “Around the World” snapshot of NA and hard RTD performance across several states, underscoring the “nuance” of their interplay in different markets (and suggesting that NAs can be a good hedge):
- “In California, the gap in growth rates between total RTDs (+8.0%) and non-alc RTDs 50.8% is even bigger” than the national spread, “with non-alc RTDs gaining popularity at a faster pace than many other parts of the country.”
- “Growth rates for total RTD and non-alc RTDs are very strong in Illinois, up 9.4% and 58.5% respectively.” (This brings to mind JR Hand’s quote from our Beer, Wine & Spirits Summit this Jan that he expects Chicago/Illinois to pass Cali as the “being the largest RTD market” for A-B in the country [see BBD 01-20-2026].)
- “On the other hand, total RTDs dollars declined 4.1% in New York state, and non-alc RTDs grew by only 27.7% — much lower than other parts of the country, despite the double-digit growth rates.” And finally:
- “Trends in Florida are also unique, with total RTDs down 1.5%, while non-alc RTD grew 63.1% in dollars.”
TOP BRANDS, AND FASTEST GROWING, RULED BY INDIES. But back to the promise at the article’s outset: Who are the top – and fastest growing — NA RTD players?
First of all, they’re mainly independent, still. Mostly. Among the top 15 brands of non-alc RTDs (ranked by off-premise dollar sales YTD to 3/21), only Hiyo (the top brand in the list, with a Constellation stake); HOP WTR (the no. 2 NA RTD but not actually on the list below because of how NIQ happens to categorize it … STZ of course just announced its full purchase); and White Claw NA (no. 4) are associated with large producers.
(However, the top NA RTD players do account for the majority of the segment, as with any category. “To give you a sense of how big the top brands are… the top 5 brands account for 59% of NA RTD dollars (YTD) and the top 15 account for 83% of dollars,” said Danelle.)
The “outsiders” have a leg up on growth, too: “Non-alcoholic RTDs stand apart from traditional RTDs in that growth is being driven predominantly by independent brands, which account for the majority of both total dollars and dollar gains. This dynamic also distinguishes the segment from non-alcoholic beer,” said Danelle.
The majority (77%) of YTD growth dollars within non-alc RTDs “are from small producers not owned by large brewers or suppliers.”
TOP PLAYERS. The list of top NA RTDs by dollars is as follows:
- Hiyo (STZ stake)
- Mingle
- Recess
- White Claw Zero Proof (MAB)
- De Soi
- Athletic Brewing (just the NA cocktails, Moscow Mule/Paloma)
- Ghia
- St. Agrestis
- Kin Euphorics
- Free AF
- Lyre’s
- Lapo’s
- Kul Mocks
- Edna’s
- Gruvi
Note that many of these players are growing by triple (Hiyo, Lapo’s) and double digits (Mingle, Recess, De Soi, Free AF, Kul Mocks) for the 12-week period, but some are also down (Ghia, St. Agrestis, Edna’s, Gruvi).
TOP GROWERS BY ACTUAL $ GROWTH, But there are growers after the top 15 lineup as well: Notably, The Pathfinder is up quadruple digits. Here is the list of the top 10 NA RTDs by actual dollar growth for the 12-week period:
- Hiyo
- Athletic Brewing
- Recess
- Mingle
- De Soi
- Free AF
- Mingle Mood
- Lapo’s
- The Pathfinder
- Naked Life (which Molson Coors recently brought over to U.S.)
Stay tuned.
FTC PRICING CASE: DISCOVERY ISSUES APLENTY, AS SOUTHERN GLAZER’S SAYS FTC HAS FAILED TO ID A SINGLE TRANSACTION SHOWING PRICE DISCRIMINATION
There’s been a flurry of filings the past month in the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Robinson Patman Act (RPA) price fixing case against Southern Glazer’s Wine & Spirits (SGWS) related to mounting discovery issues in the case. Most notably: SGWS says the FTC has failed to identify at least one of over 17 million alleged transactions involving price discrimination during the discovery process. As such, it is asking the federal judge overseeing the case to preclude the FTC from expanding the price discrimination inquiry to include states beyond those initially identified when the case was filed in 2024 (AZ, CA, IL, TX and WA). With discovery issues continuing to unfold, legal publication Law360 published an opinion piece recently suggesting the case could “redefine price discrimination.”
DISCOVERY STATUS. The long and short of it is this: in a joint filing, SGWS and the FTC both make the case for why the lawsuit (and discovery) should or should not be limited to transactions between SGWS and its retail partners in states the federal agency initially identified where it says transactions involving price discrimination took place.
SGWS says the FTC “has not identified a single transaction that it claims violates the Robinson-Patman Act,” despite discovery requests being served over six months ago, and has failed to “timely supplement” its identification of “paired” transactions where alleged price discrimination took place.
“The agency’s pattern of delay is a clear attempt to let its factual investigation catch up to its allegations,” counsel for SGWS writes. SGWS also points to the deposition testimony of an FTC representative who said that “closer to trial, we will determine which transactions would be the focus of the trial” as further evidence of the agency’s stalling tactics.
For its part, the FTC said SGWS tried previously to limit discovery to five states rather than the ~30 the agency says price discrimination took place and the court “refused to prune the case to specific geographies or products.
“SGWS now seeks to achieve the same objective through discovery gamesmanship,” counsel for the FTC writes.
The FTC says while it has identified over 17 million paired transactions across 30 states where “a disfavored retailer paid 10% or more than a nearby favored chain” for the same item, SGWS “misunderstands” the requirements of the RPA by insisting “on a final, transaction-by-transaction catalog” of the alleged violations.
“Injury to competition is established prima facie by proof of a substantial price discrimination between competing purchasers over time,” the FTC says, with proof of RPA violations arising “both from individual transactions and patterns of substantial price discrimination over time.” As such, the FTC told the court it will identify more granular details of the claimed RPA violations early this summer, which will still be several months before the discovery deadline.
3RD PARTY DISTRIBUTORS COOPERATING WITH SGWS TO PROVIDE INFO RELEVANT TO CASE. In a separate discovery issue, SGWS has been working with third-party distributors subpoenaed in the case, including Breakthru Beverage, Johnson Brothers Liquor Company, Republic National Distributing Company, Reyes and Winebow to negotiate the production of disputed discovery information related to their businesses.
Generally, the subpoenaed distributors have agreed to provide SGWS with five years of sales data for their top 100 wine and spirits SKUs in certain identified states (since Winebow skews toward wine, it has agreed to provide information for its top 100 wine SKUs and ~25 spirits SKUs).
In a “compromise,” subject to individual agreements with each distributor, SGWS said it “has agreed to limit its requests” to purchase and sales data, data dictionaries kept in the ordinary course, accounting policies or other documents reflecting how the distributors account for support from suppliers and discounts the distributors make available to retailers.
LAW 360’S TAKE? THE CASE COULD “REDEFINE” PRICE DISCRIMINATION. In an opinion article published by Law360, contributor Jeremy Sandford suggests the FTC’s case against SGWS “risks redefining price discrimination” by potentially redrawing the line where “price discrimination that may be illegal under the Robinson-Patman Act” ends and “ordinary competition” begins.
While the statute may have been designed to prevent price discrimination impacts on competing retailers, “especially smaller, independent businesses,” Jeremy cautions that “the pitfalls of aggressive Robinson-Patman enforcement are immediate” and could lead to “negative legal consequences for common, pro-competitive practices like bulk prices” that could ultimately harm consumers.
As for FTC’s legal strategy of “relying on large data sets to develop its case later in the litigation,” Jeremy says RPA has “traditionally required transaction-specific evidence,” and so it “may well fall short” of what is required under the letter of the law. Then too, a similar RPA case the FTC case brought against PepsiCo was withdrawn following the change in administration, as new FTC leadership noted the case did not include specific transaction-level evidence, Jeremy points to.
“If the agency cannot clearly distinguish between unlawful discrimination and lawful bulk pricing, it risks setting a precedent that could put nearly any manufacturer at risk of Robinson-Patman enforcement,” he writes.
Lots of moving parts in this case remain uncertain. Stay tuned for more as it rolls in.
CIRCANA ROUNDS UP Q1: “SOLID START”
We gave you a preview earlier this week about the good news for beer. But sister publication WSD rounded up Circana’s Q1 report for all of bev alc. The good news is that things are looking up (on an easy comp, of course).
For the latest 12 weeks ended March 29– which encapsulates the bulk of the first quarter– total beverage alcohol sales were up 1.2%, while volumes were down 0.3% versus the same period a year ago, according to Circana’s latest read covering total US MULO + Conv channels.
Beer sales were up 1% and volumes were down 0.7% for the 12 weeks.
“Given all the negatives facing alcohol Q1 ’26 ended with a solid start (technically two days shy of the quarter),” per Circana’s EVP, alcoholic beverages Scott Scanlon.
Total spirits sales were up 5.5% and volumes were up 10.7% for the 12 weeks. Ready-to-drink (of all bases) sales were up 8% and volumes were up 2.6% for the period.
Total wine sales were down 2% and volumes were down 3.3% for the period. However, that trend was largely driven by table wines, with the category’s sales down 2.3% and volumes down 3.6%, while sparkling sales and volumes were both in the black for the quarter, up 1% and 0.7%, respectively.
Across the board, the most recent 4-week results through March 29 were similar, which could indicate some momentum building throughout the quarter. The stronger numbers as of late couldn’t overcome trends from the last year, however, with latest 52-week reads still in negative territory.
“Upcoming, with the close of the quarter we will look toward Easter results and then attention will draw back to impact of gas prices on the consumer,” highlighted Scott. “Additionally, a bit challenging to read much into consumer confidence data until some of the geopolitical data points calm, perhaps the recent slight dip in unemployment helps sentiment,” he added.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.” – Harry S Truman
Until tomorrow,
Jenn, Jordan, Bianca, and Harry
———- Sell Day Calendar ———-
Today’s Sell Day: 6
Sell days this month: 21
Sell days this month last year: 21
This month ends on a: Thurs.
This month last year ended on a: Wed.
YTD sell days Over/Under: 0
Beernet Radio Weekly Podcast: Youtube | Spotify | Apple
