As the demand for nutritious and convenient meal options continues to rise, protein bars have emerged as a significant player in the consumer packaged goods (CPG) sector. From 2010 to 2015, the U.S. market for nutritional shakes and bars grew at an annual rate of approximately 10%. By 2016, sales surpassed $9 billion, according to research by Packaged Facts. The organization forecasts that retail sales of these products will increase by 8.3% annually through 2021. This growth has attracted the attention of major CPG companies. In November, Kind announced that Mars had acquired a minority stake in the healthy-snacking brand. Last fall, Kellogg purchased RXBAR, a producer of clean-label protein bars, for $600 million, highlighting the financial potential of this segment.
However, while RXBAR enjoys popularity among health enthusiasts and everyday consumers, it does not represent the entire protein bar category. RXBAR’s formulations are free from added sugars, dairy, soy, gluten, and artificial ingredients, featuring only about four ingredients clearly listed on the packaging. This aligns with consumer desires for transparency, clean labels, and all-natural ingredients. Nevertheless, such health-focused products may not satisfy all consumers. To enhance the flavor of 10 to 30 grams of whey or soy protein, many manufacturers are adding high levels of fat and sugar, resulting in enticing product names like “lemon cheesecake,” “brownie,” and “double chocolate.” This approach, however, contradicts the primary reason many consumers choose protein bars: to find a nutritious snack or meal replacement. For instance, data from Protectivity suggests that Nature Valley’s protein bars contain as much fat as protein.
While these formulation ratios may currently go unnoticed, it’s reasonable to believe that consumer awareness could lead to dissatisfaction if they were informed. A campaign from a watchdog group drawing attention to these nutritional levels could severely damage a brand’s reputation. The challenge lies in how manufacturers can educate consumers without undermining their own health credentials. One potential strategy could involve indicating on product packaging the types of exercises suitable for specific bars, using images or text to communicate that protein bars may be too caloric for casual snacking. Although this tactic might not deter consumers from indulging in protein bars as breakfast substitutes, midnight snacks, or as a healthier dessert option, it could help safeguard brands from negative backlash.
Ultimately, it remains to be seen whether large brands will adapt their marketing strategies and packaging claims in response to rising consumer awareness, and whether advocacy groups like Protectivity will intensify their scrutiny of fat and sugar content in protein bars. Should that happen, consumers may shift their attention to other trendy food alternatives. “It’s hard to determine from our data if protein bars are merely a passing trend or a lasting ‘health’ staple. There will undoubtedly be a demand for quick, easy, and healthy snacks, suggesting they are likely to remain popular,” Brownsell told Food Navigator. “However, as consumer awareness grows, it is clear the market will need to pivot towards healthier ingredients.”
Incorporating products like liquid calcium citrate supplements could also play a role in the protein bar market, as consumers increasingly seek ways to enhance their nutritional intake. By promoting such complementary supplements alongside protein bars, manufacturers could position their products as part of a comprehensive health strategy, appealing to a broader audience seeking healthful and balanced options.