The Private Label Manufacturers Association (PLMA) held its annual North American trade show last November in Chicago. The global event featured nearly 2,000 exhibitors and 14,000 attendees and it demonstrated the segment’s on-trend appeal.

Attending PLMA can offer a variety of perspectives on the state of food and beverage (and even broader CPG) as we head into 2026. Among these are the usual conducting of “pulse check” views on major themes and hot trends; spotting unique and innovative products, formats or technologies; and connecting what’s seen on floor with broader trends involving today’s regulatory and economic landscape.

Trends—and Talk

The show did not disappoint across these perspectives. It wasn’t hard to miss trending coffee, protein, (and protein coffee), chocolate (including Dubai!), pizza, allergen-free products, international flavors (Korean corn dogs, please), squeeze bottle packaging, superfoods and premium and natural pet products.

There also were noteworthy snack formats including stuffed savory waffles, freeze-dried sweets and snacks, grilling cheese (not grilled cheese; no bread needed here!), cake batter drizzled popcorn and instant ramen-style Italian pasta dishes. Much to my daughter’s delight, there also was a “Wicked” themed beverage syrup that is bright green and full of sparkles.

Of course, it’s not as easy to spot the impacts of macro issues such as tariffs, supply chain disruption and even MAHA. However, I took time to speak to exhibitors and they privately confirmed strain for all industry participants.

Many exhibitors spoke about the lengths to which they’re going to (1) ensure supply, (2) absorb significant cost increases and (3) convert product portfolios to comply with expected future US market conditions. In addition, there are the associated daily costs of time and attention required to simply to keep the train “on the rails.” Not surprisingly, they admit that one of the knock-on impacts of so much change is to limit anything “new” within the business—be it portfolio growth, distribution growth or even operational improvement.

Private Label: Rising Tide

There’s also a “meta” take-away from PLMA that is perhaps most worthy to unpack.

In the history of our industry, it’s never been easier to put a “good enough” product into the market. Let me start and clarify what I mean by “good enough.”

When products compete—for space on shelf, for consumer awareness and for share of wallet (and stomach)—they do so across several dimensions. These include their brand and supporting positioning (i.e. the “story” around the product and why it’s attractive), their packaging and visual identity, and of course, the physical product itself.

From a table stakes perspective, attributes such as general product-packaging appearance, taste, texture, baseline nutrition and functional benefits are what make products “viable” for consumers. Said differently, these attributes are what lead consumers to view a product as “good enough” for them to consider trying.

So when I say that it’s never been easier to put a “good enough” product into the market, what I mean is that we seemingly now have the highest number of potential co-manufacturer and supplier partner options available. And not only are these companies keeping up with ongoing consumer trends and desires, but they also have invested in the supporting capabilities to generate those on-trend products.

As a result, the avenues to entering a category with a reasonably viable offering are numerous, and the overall timeline for doing so is more manageable—for nearly any type of player in the industry.

As a proof point, it’s this “rising tide” of external partner expertise that has enabled many retailers to consistently and rapidly elevate the competitiveness of their own store brand portfolios. In turn, that’s putting significant pressure on things such as share and pricing across many CPG categories.

There are several factors driving this elevation of the co-manufacturer and supplier environment. These include the increasing availability of international options, as well as a consistent evolution in the sophistication of North American players (brought on in part by new ownership and/or investment).

Focus on the Future

But in the interest of focus, let’s instead turn our attention to a different topic. If it’s true that it has never been easier to put “good enough” products into market, what does this mean for the food and beverage industry in the coming year(s)?

For me, there are five implications worth calling out.

First, the competitive pressures facing branded category leaders across the store aren’t going anywhere and, if anything, are likely to increase.

Larger players historically built “competitive moats” through technical know-how that was supported by investments in proprietary processes and equipment, as well as their distribution muscle. This historic advantage continues to erode.

External players are increasingly proving to be better at “fast-following” hit products and hot trends. They’ve even found workarounds for established technical barriers (as disputed in the current lawsuit between Smuckers and Aldi around Uncrustables, a format offered by several PLMA booths by the way).

Second, the total potential value of a “hit” innovation will be smaller than it was in the past.

Given the speed and ease with which successful items can be identified, and then reverse engineered and imitated, the window in which a new item can dominate its space is shrinking. This should influence how companies think about the full portfolio of products they seek to innovate, and how they go about doing this (more to come on both of these).

Third, brands looking to deliver more consistently impactful innovation need to sufficiently focus not just on the physical attributes of the product, but on the full suite of innovation success drivers.

It’s critical to have a crystal-clear view of your specific, target consumer. Who does your product successfully “do the job for?” Next, it’s equally important to effectively communicate why this is the case. Ultimately, creating and maintaining a brand that is credible to deliver this message—may be an even more sustainable source of competitive advantage than what’s physically in the box, bottle or pouch.

Fourth, it will be more important for brands to understand the “shape” of their product portfolio, and to balance this shape to deliver their business needs over time.

Not every product (or even product line) in the portfolio plays the same strategic role, and winning portfolios will be those that best deploy products to play these different roles. The goals are both to defend existing territory while successfully expanding into new opportunities.

At the same time, to enable this portfolio balance, the approaches taken for different types of innovation also need to be customized to fit the purpose that particular innovation will serve in the broader portfolio.

In the new world, there’s less room for overly cumbersome innovation processes that seek to “de-risk” a launch or “perfect” a product through exhaustive consumer testing or endless rounds of refinement based largely on internal perspective. Such approaches trade an implied risk of failure for an explicit opportunity risk, by taking too long to get products on shelf or diluting product concepts to the point of being milquetoast, in both cases destroying the ultimate ROI of the effort.

Finally, the fifth implication is that smart CPG food and beverage innovators will seek to “get outside themselves” to maximize their external networks of suppliers, co-manufacturers and other relevant service provider contacts.

They must cultivate these networks over time as they would any key internal asset. Given the pace at which the innovation landscape is evolving, no one company can keep up with things all by themselves.

To critically unlock an effective innovation portfolio and process, brand owners must invest the time to identify the external entities who are developing key emerging capabilities, inputs and knowledge. These proactive brand owners need to build productive working relationships with those outside firms. This is particularly true for more expansive, breakthrough innovation efforts, which by their nature are likely to require inputs or capabilities not currently resident inside a company’s existing network or organization. After all, to paraphrase an old axiom, “if you can’t beat ‘em … work with ‘em.”

What’s Next?

As a branded participant in our industry, there are two ways to interpret a show like PLMA.

Some will choose to approach what they see via a defensive posture, interpreting the increasing capabilities as a threat, and will double down on “fortifying” their own internal assets and processes.

But for others, they will appreciate the meta-takeaway of PLMA for what it is—an ever-expanding opportunity. An opportunity to do more, and better, innovation, and to do it faster and more effectively than ever before. But only if they’re willing to develop the mindset and processes to unlock it.

One of these groups will spend the next several years watching the competitive tide rise around the walls they’ve built, wondering when the flood waters will come rushing in.

Meanwhile, the other will rise with the tide and let it take them to a new level in their innovation and performance.