09/14/2026
๐๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐โ๐ฌ ๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ง๐ญ๐ฒ ๐ฌ๐ข๐ญ๐ฌ ๐ข๐ง ๐ ๐ข๐ง ๐ ๐๐ฆ๐๐ซ๐ข๐๐๐ง ๐ก๐จ๐ฆ๐๐ฌ. ๐๐๐ฌ๐ญ๐ฅ๐ ๐ฃ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ญ ๐ฌ๐จ๐ฅ๐ ๐ข๐ญ, ๐๐ง๐ ๐ฌ๐ข๐ฑ ๐ฌ๐ข๐ฌ๐ญ๐๐ซ ๐๐ซ๐๐ง๐๐ฌ, ๐๐จ๐ซ ๐ฅ๐๐ฌ๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ง ๐จ๐ง๐ ๐ญ๐ข๐ฆ๐๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐๐ฅ๐๐ฌ.
$1.2B in annual sales. Sold for about $1B. A sub-1x multiple on the #2 vitamin brand in the United States.
Now compare. Earlier this year, a three-year-old greens-gummy brand, Grรผns, sold to Unilever for a reported ~$1.2B on roughly $300M of sales โ about 4x. P&G agreed to pay $3.8B for Thorne.
Same category. Opposite valuations. That gap is the whole story.
After 15+ years in supplement space, this is the clearest signal Iโve seen of where the category is heading.
The vitamins & supplements market has split in two. Value is leaving the commoditized middle and moving to two poles: premium, science-led brands, and differentiated, culture-driven brands with a clear reason to exist.
Nestlรฉ read it correctly. It kept its science-led brands (Solgar, Pure Encapsulations) and sold the mainstream ones, saying they now need โdedicated ownership.โ Translation: even the worldโs largest food company couldnโt create value in undifferentiated vitamins.
Three lessons for anyone building in health & wellness:
โ Ubiquity is not a moat. Being on every shelf didnโt protect value.
โ The middle is the danger zone. Compete on price, and youโll be sold by the pound.
โ Differentiation is the asset. A real โwhyโ โ efficacy, trust, a genuine thesis โ is what earns a premium.
Scale used to win. Now meaning does.
๐๐จ๐ญ๐ ๐จ๐ง ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐ก๐๐ซ๐ญ: ๐๐ก'๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก๐ข๐๐ ๐ฃ๐๐๐ข๐ ๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐, ๐๐๐ก ๐ ๐๐๐๐ก๐ก๐๐ ๐๐๐ก๐๐ ๐๐ก. ๐โ๐ ๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ก๐ ๐ โ๐๐ค ๐คโ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐โ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐ฃ๐๐๐ข๐๐ก๐๐๐ -- ๐บ๐รผ๐๐ ~4ร ๐ ๐๐๐๐ , ๐๐๐ ๐ก๐๐