The Retail Ecosystem: Why ‘Trade Share’ is the Only Metric That Truly Matters

Introduction: The Futility of a Blurry Map

For years, a single, frustrating scene played out in my career as a consumer packaged goods (CPG) analyst.

A brand team, armed with impressive national market share data, would walk into a high-stakes negotiation with a retail giant like Walmart or Kroger, only to walk out defeated and confused.

They were using what they thought was a detailed map, but in reality, it was a blurry, 30,000-foot satellite image of the entire country.

They were trying to win a street fight in a single neighborhood using a map that didn’t even show the streets.

This disconnect became painfully clear during a particularly humbling engagement with a promising organic snack brand.

They had fought hard to achieve a 5% national market share, a figure that became their north star.

They entered their annual review with a major grocery chain, ready to leverage this number to argue for better placement and promotional support.

They were blindsided.

The retailer’s buyer calmly presented a different number: within that specific chain, their brand accounted for a mere 1% of total category sales.

Their national strength was irrelevant.

In that specific store environment—the one that mattered for this negotiation—they were a rounding error, a prime candidate for delisting.

Their map had led them off a cliff.

That failure forced a reckoning.

The standard metrics were not just insufficient; they were dangerously misleading.

The turning point came from an unlikely source: the field of ecology.¹

It struck me that a retail category is not a simple battlefield where companies go head-to-head for market share.

It is a complex

business ecosystem.

Each retailer is a distinct habitat, with its own unique conditions, resources, and inhabitants.

Brands are the species competing within that habitat.

The massive budgets CPG companies pour into promotions, or “trade spend,” are the energy they introduce to shape that habitat to their advantage.

This ecological analogy provided a completely new paradigm, a new map that showed the streets, the alleys, and the power dynamics of each individual neighborhood.

It revealed that sustainable growth isn’t about dominating the entire landscape at once, but about mastering the dynamics of each critical habitat.

This report will explore that ecosystem, deconstructing the confusing constellation of “share” metrics to reveal why one, and only one, truly matters in the trenches of modern retail: trade share.

By understanding the principles of this ecosystem, brands can move from being passive inhabitants to becoming strategic architects of their own success.

Part I: Deconstructing the Ecosystem – A New Taxonomy of Share

The language of retail is littered with different, often overlapping, definitions of “share.” This confusion is the root of many strategic errors.

By applying the ecosystem analogy, we can create a clear and intuitive taxonomy that distinguishes these critical metrics.

1.1 The Total Environment vs. Specific Habitats (Market vs. Trade Share)

Market Share represents the 30,000-foot view of the entire environment.

It is a brand’s total sales calculated as a percentage of the entire industry’s total sales over a given period.²

This metric is a vital indicator of a company’s overall size and competitiveness, often influencing investor perceptions and stock prices.²

The calculation is straightforward:

Market Share=Total Industry SalesCompany’s Total Sales​×100

This formula can be based on revenue or on the number of units sold.2

Trade Share, also known as Sales Contribution, is the ground-level view of a specific habitat.

It measures a brand’s sales as a percentage of the total category sales within a single retailer or channel.⁶

This is the number that reveals a brand’s true performance and importance

to that specific retail partner.

The calculation is similarly focused:

Trade Share=Total Category Sales at Retailer XBrand’s Sales at Retailer X​×100

The critical danger for any brand lies in mistaking the average for the specific.

Market share is an aggregate metric, a weighted average of a brand’s performance across thousands of disparate retail environments.²

A retailer like Walmart has a unique shopper demographic and strategic focus on “Everyday Low Prices” that is fundamentally different from the ecosystem of a premium, health-focused retailer like Whole Foods.⁷

A brand’s product may resonate powerfully in one habitat while failing completely in another.

A high national market share could be propped up by strong performance in thousands of small, independent stores, while the brand is simultaneously failing at a key national account that represents 30% of its potential volume.

Using market share to negotiate with a specific retailer is therefore strategically naive; it ignores the reality of that retailer’s unique ecosystem, a lesson the organic snack brand learned at great cost.

1.2 The Species Within a Habitat (Category Share and Private Labels)

Category Share is a term often used interchangeably with trade share, but its emphasis is on the competitive context.

It frames the measurement within a specific product category, such as “carbonated soft drinks” or “laundry detergent,” reinforcing that the true competition happens on the category shelf, not across the entire store.⁶

Within any habitat, there is a powerful “native species” that fundamentally alters the competitive dynamics: the Private Label.

Store brands are no longer just inexpensive alternatives; they are sophisticated product lines that create a unique conflict of interest, as the retailer is both the habitat and a competing species.¹⁰

Retailers give their own brands advantages that national brands can only dream of: guaranteed full distribution, prime shelf placement (often directly to the right of the market leader), and 100% pass-through on promotions without the need for slotting allowances.¹⁰

This preferential treatment has fueled explosive growth, with private labels now accounting for 19.4% of fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) sales globally and a staggering 36% in Western Europe.¹¹

Retailers now view their own brands as their number one growth driver.¹¹

This dynamic creates a complex relationship of both partnership and direct competition.

A retailer’s primary goal is to maximize the profitability of the entire category, and private labels often deliver higher margins.¹²

When a national brand takes trade share from another national brand, the financial impact on the retailer is minimal.¹⁰

However, when a national brand’s strategy directly erodes the trade share of the retailer’s high-margin private label, it attacks the retailer’s bottom line.

A savvy national brand must therefore position itself as a “Category Growth Driver”.⁶

The strategic narrative must be about growing the entire category pie, not just stealing a bigger slice from the retailer’s own plate.

1.3 The Most Contested Resource (Shelf Share & Digital Shelf Share)

Shelf Share is the physical manifestation of a brand’s presence in the habitat.

It is the percentage of shelf space a brand occupies within its category, measured either by the number of product “facings” visible to the consumer or by the linear shelf space in centimeters or inches.¹⁴

High shelf share is critical because it directly impacts visibility and influences purchasing decisions, as consumers often equate a larger presence with popularity and reliability.¹⁶

In the e-commerce habitat, the “shelf” is the search results page.

This digital territory is measured by two key metrics:

• Digital Share of Shelf (DSoS): A broad measure of a brand’s visibility across online channels, encompassing its frequency and position in search results, the quality of its reviews, and its presence in promotions.¹⁷
• Share of Search (SoS): A more specific metric that calculates the percentage of search results a brand appears in for a particular keyword on a retailer’s website.¹⁹

The relationship between a brand’s visibility and its sales is one of the most powerful diagnostic tools available.

A brand invests resources—through various forms of trade spend—to earn its shelf share, its right to exist in the habitat.²¹

Consumers then vote with their wallets, determining the brand’s trade share.

The gap between these two metrics reveals critical truths:

• If Shelf Share > Trade Share, the brand is “over-spaced.” Its products are not selling well enough to justify the real estate they occupy. This is a major red flag, putting the brand at high risk of being delisted or having its space reduced during the next planogram reset.¹⁵
• If Shelf Share < Trade Share, the brand is “under-spaced.” Its products are selling faster than its shelf presence would suggest, creating a massive opportunity. This provides a data-backed argument to the retailer that granting the brand more space will likely lead to growth for the entire category.²²

1.4 The Consumer’s Personal Territory (Share of Wallet)

Share of Wallet (SOW) shifts the perspective from the retailer’s ecosystem to the consumer’s personal budget.

It measures the percentage of a customer’s total spending within a specific category that is captured by a single brand.²⁵

While market share measures a company’s slice of the entire market, SOW measures its slice of an

individual customer’s spending, making it a powerful indicator of loyalty.²⁵

The calculation is customer-centric:

SOW=Customer’s Total Spend in the CategoryCustomer’s Spend on Your Brand​×100

²⁶

Ultimately, increasing trade share at a retailer is not the end goal; it is a means to an end.

The strategic objective is to increase Share of Wallet with the specific shoppers who frequent that retail habitat.

A retailer provides access to a distinct pool of consumers.⁷

A brand fights for trade share at that retailer to become more visible and available to that pool.

The purpose of this increased visibility is to persuade those shoppers to allocate more of their category budget—their “wallet”—to the brand over its competitors.

Therefore, trade share is the tactical lever within the retail ecosystem used to achieve the strategic outcome of increased SOW among a target consumer base.

Feature	Market Share	Trade Share (Sales Contribution)	Shelf Share	Share of Wallet (SOW)
Core Question Answered	How big is my brand in the entire industry?	How important is my brand to this specific retailer?	How visible is my brand on the shelf?	How loyal is this specific customer to my brand?
Calculation Denominator	Total Industry Sales	Total Category Sales at a Specific Retailer	Total Shelf Space in a Category at a Specific Retailer	A Single Customer’s Total Spending in the Category
Primary Use Case	Investor relations, high-level competitive benchmarking, strategic planning.	Retailer negotiations, account-level performance management, identifying growth gaps.	Planogram design, merchandising strategy, assessing in-store visibility and potential.	Measuring customer loyalty, identifying cross-selling opportunities, personalization.
Perspective	Brand vs. All Competitors (Environment-wide)	Brand vs. Competitors (Habitat-specific)	Brand vs. Competitors (Resource-specific)	Brand vs. Competitors (Consumer-specific)

Part II: The Energy of Influence – Deconstructing Trade Spend

If the retail shelf is an ecosystem, then trade spend is the energy that CPG companies pump into it to influence outcomes.

It is a massive and complex investment, often the second-largest line item on a company’s profit and loss statement after the cost of goods sold (COGS), sometimes accounting for up to 30% of gross revenue.²¹

Understanding this energy source is critical to understanding how trade share is won and lost.

2.1 The Anatomy of Trade Spend

Trade spend encompasses all funds a CPG manufacturer allocates to a retailer to promote and sell its products through that channel.²¹

This investment is the bridge between manufacturer and retailer, designed to enhance product visibility, drive sales, and build lasting partnerships.²⁹

Type of Spend	Primary Objective	Typical Impact on Trade Share	Key Measurement Challenge
Slotting & Placement Fees	Gain distribution for new items; secure premium placement (e.g., endcaps).	Establishes a baseline trade share for new products; can cause a sharp, temporary lift for premium placement.	Isolating the impact of placement from the product’s inherent appeal or other promotional activity.
Temporary Price Reduction (TPR)	Drive consumer trial and purchase; increase sales velocity.	Creates a short-term spike in sales and trade share during the promotional period.	Attributing sales lift directly to the discount vs. other factors (seasonality, competitor activity); measuring cannibalization.
Cooperative Advertising	Build brand equity; drive store traffic for both the brand and the retailer.	Can provide a sustained lift if the campaign is effective and long-running.	Fragmented customer journey makes it difficult to link ad exposure to in-store purchase (attribution).
In-Store Displays	Increase visibility at the point of purchase; encourage impulse buys.	Generates a short-term lift in trade share, especially for products not on the main shelf.	Quantifying the incremental sales generated solely by the display versus the baseline sales.

2.2 Working vs. Non-Working Spend: A Critical Distinction

Not all trade spend is created equal.

The most important distinction is between investments that actively drive consumer purchases and those that are simply the cost of doing business.

• Working Trade Spend: These are expenditures that result in an offer visible to the end consumer, directly intended to influence their purchasing behavior. This includes activities like price discounts, BOGO offers, consumer rebates, and in-store displays.²¹
• Non-Working Trade Spend: This category includes expenditures a manufacturer must pay the retailer that do not directly induce a consumer to buy. Examples include administrative fees, data sharing fees, fines for late shipments, or deductions for damaged goods.²¹

A high or rising proportion of non-working trade spend is a major red flag.

It represents a “tax” on growth, indicating operational friction in the supply chain or a strained relationship with the retailer.

These funds are diverted from growth-driving activities (working spend) into operational maintenance.

Analyzing the ratio of working to non-working spend is therefore a critical diagnostic for the health of a brand’s partnership with a retailer and the overall efficiency of its trade investment.

2.3 The Strategic Purpose: Why Make This Massive Investment?

CPG companies invest billions in trade spend for several strategic reasons:

• Driving Sales and Volume: The primary goal is to incentivize retailers to prioritize a brand’s products over competitors’, ensuring better shelf positions and promotional visibility that attract consumers and grow trade share.²⁹
• Building Retailer Relationships: When managed strategically, trade spend fosters collaboration. It shifts the dynamic from a simple transactional relationship to a long-term partnership focused on joint business planning and mutual growth.²⁹
• Securing Distribution and Visibility: For new products, trade spend (especially slotting fees) is the cost of entry. For existing products, it is the price of maintaining a competitive presence on the shelf.²¹
• Competitive Defense: In the zero-sum game of the physical shelf, trade spend is a crucial defensive weapon used to protect a brand’s territory from competitors and the retailer’s increasingly powerful private label offerings.²⁸

Part III: Measuring the Health of the Habitat – Analysis & Benchmarking

To effectively manage a retail ecosystem, a brand needs the right analytical tools to measure its health.

This involves not only calculating trade share accurately but also benchmarking it against relevant metrics to turn raw data into actionable, strategic insights.

3.1 The Core Calculation & Data Requirements

The practical application of trade share analysis begins with the formula: Trade Share = (Brand’s Sales at Retailer X / Total Category Sales at Retailer X) x 100.

This can be calculated using either revenue or units sold, depending on whether the goal is to understand value contribution or volume movement.⁵

This analysis is impossible without access to robust data.

The primary sources are:

• Retailer Data: Point-of-Sale (POS) data provided directly by the retailer is the gold standard. It offers granular, SKU-level detail on what was purchased, where, when, and for how much.³⁴
• Syndicated Data: Third-party market research firms like NielsenIQ and IRI collect and aggregate retail data from a wide panel of stores. This provides a broader market context and crucial competitive intelligence, allowing a brand to see how it performs relative to others.³⁴
• Distributor Data: For brands that use a distribution network, data on product shipments to various retail locations can provide another layer of insight into product flow and availability.³⁴

3.2 The ‘Fair Share’ Index: The Most Powerful Diagnostic Tool

The most powerful application of this data is the Fair Share Index (FSI), a comparative analysis that pits a brand’s trade share against its shelf share.²²

It provides a clear, data-driven answer to the critical question: “Are we getting our fair share of the shelf based on our actual sales performance?”

This analysis yields two primary scenarios:

• Trade Share > Shelf Share (Under-Spaced): This indicates the brand is a star performer. Its sales velocity is outpacing its physical presence, meaning it is turning over product faster than its shelf allocation would suggest. This is the single most powerful, data-backed argument a brand can make to a retailer for more shelf space, as it proves that giving the brand more real estate will likely lead to growth for the entire category.²²
• Trade Share < Shelf Share (Over-Spaced): This signals an under-performer. The brand is occupying valuable shelf space that is not justified by its sales. This brand is in a precarious position, facing a high risk of losing space or being delisted entirely in the next planogram reset.¹⁵

3.3 Strategic Benchmarking: Identifying Development Gaps

Another powerful benchmarking technique is to compare a brand’s trade share at a specific retailer against that retailer’s overall market share for the category.⁷

For example, if Target accounts for 15% of all national grocery sales (its category market share), a brand should theoretically also have a 15% trade share at Target to be considered “fully developed.”

• A Brand’s Trade Share > Retailer’s Category Market Share indicates the brand is “highly developed” at that retailer, performing better there than its market average.⁷
• A Brand’s Trade Share < Retailer’s Category Market Share suggests the brand is “under-developed,” signaling either a significant growth opportunity or a major performance issue.⁷

However, these labels are merely the starting point for a deeper strategic inquiry.

Being “under-developed” is not automatically a problem to be fixed.

A retailer may strategically choose to under-develop a national brand if it competes directly with their own high-margin private label.⁷

In this scenario, a pitch for “fair share” is destined to fail.

The brand’s strategy must pivot to proving how it can attract a different type of shopper that the private label cannot reach.

Conversely, a retailer may choose to over-develop a brand that aligns with its corporate strategy, such as a premium, organic brand in a health-focused chain.⁷

This signals a strong partnership and an opportunity for deeper co-investment.

The quantitative analysis of trade share must always be overlaid with a qualitative understanding of the retailer’s specific strategy for that category.

3.4 Challenges in Measurement and Data Integrity

While powerful, this analysis is not without its challenges.

Brands must contend with:

• Data Gaps and Lags: Retailer data can be incomplete, untimely, or provided in inconsistent formats, making integration and timely analysis difficult.³⁵
• The “Mirror Problem”: A fundamental issue in trade statistics where the data reported by the exporter (the CPG company) rarely matches the data reported by the importer (the retailer). These discrepancies can be large and pervasive, distorting the true picture of trade flows.³⁶
• Supply Chain Complexity: In an increasingly interconnected world, tracking the true flow of goods and accurately attributing sales across different countries, channels, and third-party logistics providers is a monumental task.³⁶

Part IV: Shaping the Ecosystem – Strategic Application & Case Studies

Armed with a clear understanding of the ecosystem and the tools to measure its health, brands can move from analysis to action.

The goal is to actively shape the retail habitat to create a sustainable competitive advantage.

4.1 Optimizing the Energy Input (Trade Promotion Optimization – TPO)

A staggering portion of the estimated $500 billion spent globally on trade promotions is wasted, delivering little to no return.³⁹

This is often the result of inertia—what is known as “Same As Last Year” (SALY) planning—and a lack of rigorous, data-driven decision-making.⁴⁰

The solution is Trade Promotion Optimization (TPO), the process of using data analytics and predictive modeling to plan, execute, and measure promotions to maximize their return on investment (ROI).⁴¹

TPO involves analyzing historical performance data to understand which promotional tactics have worked in the past and using simulation tools to forecast the outcomes of future scenarios, allowing for more effective budget allocation.⁴¹

For example, one international soft drinks company found itself in a dire situation: its promotional budget had grown to 25% of its total revenue, yet its market share had simultaneously dropped by 7%.

By implementing a TPO solution that unified e-commerce data with traditional syndicated data, the company was able to optimize its price and promotion strategy.

The transformation resulted in a market share turnaround from decline to 2% growth, all while improving gross margin by 3 percentage points.⁴⁴

4.2 The Attribution Black Box: Linking Spend to Share

The core challenge in TPO is attribution: isolating the impact of a specific promotion on sales from the noise of confounding variables like seasonality, competitor actions, and consumer behavior.³⁵

Common pitfalls include:

• Fragmentation: The modern customer journey spans numerous touchpoints, making it difficult to track influence from initial awareness to final purchase.⁴⁵
• Over-reliance on Last-Touch Attribution: Many organizations give 100% of the credit for a sale to the final touchpoint (e.g., the in-store price cut), ignoring the cumulative effect of all the brand-building advertising that preceded it.⁴⁶
• Data Silos: Sales, marketing, and finance teams often operate with different data sets and goals, preventing a holistic view of the investment and its return.⁴⁸ Moving toward multi-touch attribution models and fostering cross-departmental collaboration are essential for getting a more accurate picture of ROI.

4.3 Case Study in Practice: The Cola Wars at Walmart

The rivalry between Coca-Cola and PepsiCo provides a classic example of competition within a specific, powerful habitat.

Walmart, with its strategic focus on “Everyday Low Prices” (EDLP), created an ecosystem where price is paramount.⁸

The battle between the two cola giants was not just waged on national television, but on the ground, fighting for distribution, favorable pricing, and promotional support within Walmart’s stores.⁵¹

This ecosystem was fundamentally disrupted when Walmart introduced its own private-label “Sam’s Choice” cola.

By offering high quality at a low price, this new “species” steadily eroded the trade share of the two giants, demonstrating how a powerful retailer can alter the competitive dynamics of its own habitat.⁸

4.4 Case Study in Partnership: P&G’s Category Captainship with Target

Procter & Gamble (P&G) exemplifies the evolution from simple competitor to strategic partner.

P&G’s strategy is built on five pillars of “superiority”: product, package, brand communication, value, and, critically, retail execution.⁵²

Instead of just fighting for its own brands, P&G often acts as a “Category Captain” for retailers like Target.

It uses its deep analytical capabilities to help the retailer optimize the entire category—advising on assortment, shelving, and pricing to grow the total pie, not just P&G’s slice.⁵²

This collaborative approach builds immense trust and influence.

By focusing on superior retail execution and providing value to the retailer in the form of category growth, P&G ensures its brands earn their trade share.

For instance, by working with top retailers to implement eye-level brand blocks and dedicated displays for its Nervive brand, P&G grew sales by over 40% where this strategy was executed.⁵³

This is a masterclass in shaping the retail habitat for mutual benefit.

Conclusion: From Street Fighter to Ecosystem Architect

The retail landscape, when viewed through the blurry lens of national market share, appears chaotic and unpredictable.

Brands with dominant positions falter, and strategies that work on paper fail in practice.

This is because market share is vanity; it is an aggregate measure that masks the crucial, ground-level realities of the modern marketplace.

Trade share, however, is sanity.

It is the key performance indicator for the health of a brand within each distinct retail ecosystem.

Viewing the world through this ecological framework transforms strategy.

It demands a shift in mindset from being a reactive “street fighter,” battling for inches of shelf space, to becoming a proactive “ecosystem architect.” This means using data-driven insights not just to win a negotiation, but to collaborate with retail partners to build healthier, more profitable categories for everyone involved—the brand, the retailer, and the consumer.

This was the approach that finally brought success to my clients.

After the failure with the snack brand, I applied the ecosystem model with a struggling beverage company.

Instead of leading with their national market share, we conducted a “Fair Share” analysis for their key retail account.

We discovered they were significantly “under-spaced”—their trade share was double their shelf share.

Armed with this single, powerful data point, we didn’t demand more space; we presented a collaborative plan to the retailer showing how giving our client’s high-velocity products their “fair share” of the shelf would increase sales for the entire beverage category.

It was a win-win proposition, grounded in the reality of that specific habitat.

The strategy worked.

They got the space, sales grew, and the partnership strengthened.

They had stopped looking at a blurry map of the country and started navigating the neighborhood, street by street.

Works cited

1. Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition – PubMed, accessed August 15, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10126156/
2. Market Share: What It Is and Formula – Investopedia, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketshare.asp
3. Understanding Market Share: Definition & Calculation | LinkedIn Ads, accessed August 15, 2025, https://business.linkedin.com/marketing-solutions/success/marketing-terms/market-share
4. Market Share: What it is and How to Calculate it – Skilling, accessed August 15, 2025, https://skilling.com/eu/en/blog/trading-terms/market-share/
5. Market Share | Formula + Calculator – Wall Street Prep, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.wallstreetprep.com/knowledge/market-share/
6. Analyze Market Share – Sales contribution – HPT Pedia, accessed August 15, 2025, http://hptpedia.hyper-trade.com/market-share-sales-contribution/
7. Retailer Market Share as a Strategic Benchmark, accessed August 15, 2025, https://blog.cmkg.org/blog/retailer-market-share_strategic-benchmark
8. Cases For Chapter 2 | PDF | Walmart | Coca Cola – Scribd, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/532058550/Cases-for-Chapter-2
9. Retail Tracking (RMS) Data – Analysis and Interpretation, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.ashokcharan.com/Marketing-Analytics/~rt-analysis-interpretation-retail-tracking.php
10. How Should National Brands Think about Private Labels? – MIT Sloan Management Review, accessed August 15, 2025, https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/how-should-national-brands-think-about-private-labels/
11. Branded vs. Private Label – who is going to come out on top? – NIQ, accessed August 15, 2025, https://nielseniq.com/global/en/insights/analysis/2024/brandbank-branded-vs-private-label-who-is-going-to-come-out-on-top/
12. A turning point for private brands: How retailers can seize the opportunity – McKinsey, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/a-turning-point-for-private-brands-how-retailers-can-seize-the-opportunity
13. The power of private-label brands in distribution – McKinsey, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/industrials-and-electronics/our-insights/the-power-of-private-label-brands-in-distribution
14. Align Shelf Share and Market Share to Drive CPG Growth, accessed August 15, 2025, https://deltasalesapp.com/blog/align-shelf-share-with-market-share-for-cpg-growth
15. What is the share of shelf? | POS Potential, accessed August 15, 2025, https://pospotential.com/en/business-intelligence-and-fmcg-glossary/share-of-shelf/
16. What is Share of Shelf? Why CPG Brands Must Measure it? – ParallelDots, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.paralleldots.com/resources/blog/shelf-share-importance-measuring
17. The Digital Share of Shelf – Flipflow Blog, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.flipflow.io/en/blog-en/digital-share-of-shelf/
18. Digital Share of Shelf: Key to E-commerce Success – PIMworks, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.pimworks.io/blog/digital-share-of-shelf/
19. What Is Share of Search & Why It Matters in E-Commerce – CommerceIQ, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.commerceiq.ai/blog/what-is-share-of-search
20. Digital Shelf Analytics: The Key to Successful Ecommerce – PriceSpider, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.pricespider.com/blog/digital-shelf-analytics/
21. Understanding trade spend and its impact in CPG – Visualfabriq, accessed August 15, 2025, https://visualfabriq.com/knowledge-hub/understanding-trade-spend-impact-cpg
22. How to use share of shelf data to identify growth opportunities – Trax Retail, accessed August 15, 2025, https://traxretail.com/blog/use-share-shelf-data-identify-growth-opportunities/
23. Does Your Shelf Share Match Your Market Share? – Repsly, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.repsly.com/blog/shelf-share-match-market-share
24. Are You Getting Your Fair Share of Distribution with Retailers? – Andavi Solutions, accessed August 15, 2025, https://andavisolutions.com/articles/are-you-getting-your-fair-share-of-distribution-with-retailers/
25. Share of Wallet – Poseidon, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.useposeidon.com/glossary/share-of-wallet
26. What is share of wallet (SOW)? – Mastercard Data & Services, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.mastercardservices.com/en/advisors/consumer-engagement-loyalty-consulting/insights/what-share-wallet-sow
27. Share of Wallet: What It Is and How to Calculate It – HubSpot Blog, accessed August 15, 2025, https://blog.hubspot.com/service/share-of-wallet
28. The 3 biggest trade mistakes that consumer goods companies make – Roland Berger, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.rolandberger.com/en/Insights/Publications/The-3-biggest-trade-mistakes-that-consumer-goods-companies-make.html
29. What is Trade Spend in Retail: Profitability and Success | KORONA POS by COMBASE, accessed August 15, 2025, https://koronapos.com/blog/what-is-trade-spend-in-retail/
30. Managing Trade Spend in Consumer Goods – CPGvision by PSignite, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.cpgvision.com/blog/managing-trade-spend-in-consumer-goods
31. Understanding Trade Spend and It’s Importance in CPG Retail, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.pmidpi.com/our-blog/understanding-trade-spend-and-its-importance-in-cpg-retail/
32. Rethink your Trade Term Strategy now to create a win-win relationship with retailers, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.strategyand.pwc.com/uk/en/insights/rethink-trade-terms-strategy-create-win-win-retailers-relationship.html
33. Market Share, Explained: How to Calculate, Influence & Improve – McCracken Alliance, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.mccrackenalliance.com/blog/market-share-explained-how-to-calculate-influence-improve
34. CPG data insights: Navigating consumer trends and market dynamics – Epsilon US, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.epsilon.com/us/insights/blog/cpg-data-insights
35. Trade spend effectiveness in CPG: 5 KPIs to track – Visualfabriq, accessed August 15, 2025, https://visualfabriq.com/knowledge-hub/trade-spend-effectiveness-in-cpg-5-kpis-to-track
36. Measuring international trade – OECD, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/measuring-international-trade.html
37. Problem with Trade Measurement in International Relations – Oxford Academic, accessed August 15, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/isq/article/67/2/sqad020/7085502
38. Geopolitics and the geometry of global trade – McKinsey, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/our-research/geopolitics-and-the-geometry-of-global-trade
39. How CPG Brands Can Optimize Trade Promotions for Growth – CommerceIQ, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.commerceiq.ai/blog/how-cpgs-can-optimize-trade-promotions
40. 10 CPG Trade Promotion Spending Strategies to Maximize ROI in 2025, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.cpgvision.com/blog/cpg-trade-promotion-spending-strategies
41. Trade Promotion Optimization Strategy for CPG Success – ParallelDots, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.paralleldots.com/resources/blog/trade-marketing-optimization-retail-success
42. Trade Promotion Optimization (TPO) Challenge, accessed August 15, 2025, https://poinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/POI_Challenge_Final.pdf
43. The Power of Data-Driven Trade Promotion Optimization – Shelvz, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.shelvz.com/the-power-of-data-driven-trade-promotion-optimization/
44. Promo Optimization Case Study – CPG – Revenue AI, accessed August 15, 2025, https://revenue.ai/business-cases/bc-cpg2/
45. 5 Common Challenges in Attribution Reporting (And How to Solve Them) | Eleven Writing, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.elevenwriting.com/blog/5-common-challenges-in-attribution-reporting-and-how-to-solve-them
46. Marketing Attribution Modeling: Pros and Cons of the Top 5 Techniques – Invoca, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.invoca.com/blog/marketing-attribution-modeling-techniques
47. Marketing attribution — models and best practices – Adobe Experience Cloud, accessed August 15, 2025, https://business.adobe.com/blog/basics/marketing-attribution
48. Trade spend management 101 – Expensify, accessed August 15, 2025, https://use.expensify.com/resource-center/guides/trade-spend-management
49. Trade Spend Management: Challenges & How to Avoid Them – Bridgepoint Consulting, accessed August 15, 2025, https://bridgepointconsulting.com/insights/trade-spend-management-accounting-cpg-challenges-tips/
50. IB Case Study Solved | PDF | Walmart | The Coca Cola Company – Scribd, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/709266159/IB-Case-Study-Solved
51. Coca-Cola Vs PepsiCo, Dr Pepper, and Nestlé – Marketing Maverick, accessed August 15, 2025, https://marketingmaverick.io/p/the-marketing-case-study-of-coca-cola
52. About P&G – Company Strategy – Procter & Gamble Investor Relations, accessed August 15, 2025, https://www.pginvestor.com/about-pg/company-strategy/default.aspx
53. Superiority to Win with Consumers – Procter & Gamble, accessed August 15, 2025, https://us.pg.com/annualreport2022/superiority-to-win-with-consumers/