I've started using OSHUN, an electrolyte concentrate that comes in a pump bottle. You add the liquid to water. What I like about it is how convenient that feels.

Drinking water is already part of my day. The pump fits into that routine with very little extra effort.

That is the way I look at supplement formats: through adherence. How conveniently does the product fit into what someone already does, and how likely are they to keep using it?

Someone already taking protein shakes or creatine may have little appetite for another powder. They might be willing to add a scoop to their existing shake, provided the formula is suitable and they like the taste. Or they might decide that one of the powders they already use has to go.

That gives a founder two quite different propositions: fit alongside an existing habit, or persuade the customer to switch. A new format deserves attention when it makes that choice easier for the customer.

For investors, this is a useful way to examine the repeat purchase in the model. Before asking how often the customer will reorder, understand where the serving will fit in their day.

Heading into 2027, liquids are particularly interesting to me for that reason. Capsules still have a strong place, and there are newer propositions in gels, oral pouches and chocolate worth watching. The opportunity depends on the routine each product can earn, within the limits of what its formulation can actually deliver.

Join our WhatsApp group →

It is tempting to read the category as a succession: capsules, then powders, then gummies, with the next format waiting to replace the last. That would make the founder's job relatively simple. Find the next wave and launch ahead of it.

The channel data gives us a reason to question that sequence. Across the 52 weeks ending 29 December 2024, SPINS recorded capsule growth of 19% on Amazon and a decline of 1% in physical retail. Powders grew 9% in both. These figures cover its broad vitamins and supplements department, including protein and meal replacements.

A founder looking only at physical retail could reach a very different conclusion from one building on Amazon. The format decision starts with the ingredient, customer and channel you intend to serve.

The product-development pipeline points in the same direction. Innova's US launch analysis identifies growth in gummies, powders and capsules over its five-year window. Established formats are still attracting innovation, even as new ways to consume supplements appear.

That leaves founders with a wider set of choices. To make sense of them, look at what changes for the person taking the product.

Twelve groups of supplement and adjacent functional-food formats. Liposomal delivery can sit across physical formats. This is a landscape, not a ranking of market share or effectiveness.

Capsules have familiarity on their side. I don't see them disappearing. For many of us, taking medicines has already made swallowing a capsule or tablet familiar. Supplement brands can build on that familiarity while making the experience more appealing.

I love what Heights, epetōme and Seed have done with their capsule products. The capsule, the bottle and the presentation give an established format a distinctive identity. That is a direction I find interesting: how much better can you make the experience around a form the customer already understands?

Presentation still has to work alongside the serving itself. Size, number of capsules and ease of swallowing all matter when you are asking someone to repeat the action.

Powders may be competing for a routine that is already full. Think about someone who already makes a protein shake. Another powder could fit into that drink, if the serving instructions allow it and the combination tastes good. Asking them to prepare a separate drink creates another task.

My view is that some of this market is a switching game. A brand may be competing to replace an existing powder, rather than adding another purchase to the customer's routine. Both can be viable businesses, but they require different reasons to buy.

Packaging can remove some of the effort. A tub asks the customer to measure; a stick pack supplies a portion. Liquid I.V. offers both presentations. The distinction between home and portable use is useful, but the founder still needs to understand what the customer is already mixing and drinking.

Effervescent tablets such as Immunace Fizz also turn the serving into a drink. Granules broaden the choice again: TSI's FZZR can be formulated for mixing or direct-to-mouth use. Preparation is something the founder designs into the product. It is worth watching a customer complete it before deciding that the experience is easy.

Then consider the formats built around taste and texture. Gummies, chewable tablets and soft chews give the serving a different character. Grüns combines gummies with a daily pack. Concordix's soft chews use a gelled water-and-oil emulsion. These belong in the same conversation about the consumption experience, while presenting different formulation choices.

Here, the whole serving matters. Enjoying one chew tells you little about whether someone wants the recommended portion every day. The development question becomes how the ingredient, serving size, texture and taste work together over repeated use.

Chocolate is a proposition I find particularly interesting. Alice's Nightcap is positioned around the evening, giving a familiar food format a proposed place in the routine.

There is also a practical constraint between the factory and that evening serving: heat. Alice's shipping FAQ explains its summer surcharge for protective packaging and warns that melt-free delivery cannot be guaranteed during peak summer. The appeal of chocolate has to work with the cost and reliability of getting it to the customer in good condition.

Liquids are where I see a particularly useful opportunity. OSHUN makes the appeal concrete for me: a pump into the water I am already drinking. That is a small addition to an existing action.

Drops and tinctures interest me for a similar reason when their directions allow them to be added to water. The customer can use an existing drink as the occasion. Taste still matters, including whether they want a flavoured drink at all; OSHUN itself is sold as unflavoured.

There are different demands within liquids. MaryRuth's liquid multivitamin asks the customer to shake, measure and refrigerate after opening. A shot or ready-to-drink product supplies a prepared portion. A pump, dropper, measured serving and ready-made drink should each be assessed on what the customer actually has to do.

Ready-to-drink liquids grew 11% in physical retail in the SPINS analysis above. That is evidence for prepared drinks in its tracked category, rather than a forecast for pumps or tinctures. My interest in concentrates comes from the convenience of the experience. Every formula still has to earn its suitability for that format.

Gels leave me with more questions about the everyday routine. They have an established exercise occasion in products such as Science in Sport's running gels. I am less certain how readily that experience translates into daily supplement adherence outside exercise.

Cymbiotika's liposomal Vitamin C brings together a gel, a single-serving sachet and a delivery-technology proposition. It is an interesting combination, but I would want to understand whether customers enjoy and repeat the serving over time. The formulation has a separate question to answer: what evidence supports what is inside the packet?

Finally, look at the formats that travel in a pocket. Oral strips, melts and sprays offer ways to take a serving without swallowing a conventional pill. Melts sells dissolving strips; BetterYou offers oral sprays. Functional gum, mints and lozenges bring chewing or slow dissolution into the experience, as Neuro's range illustrates.

Oral caffeine pouches deserve a separate place here. They sit between the lip and gum and are removed after use. Grinds' nicotine-free energy pouch, labelled with 80 mg of caffeine, asks for a different action from a gel sachet emptied into the mouth.

Euromonitor now includes caffeine pouches and gummies in its analysis of competition around coffee. That expands the strategic question beyond the supplement aisle. Which energy occasion is the customer choosing the pouch for, and what would they otherwise have consumed?

Across this landscape, convenience means something specific: which step has been removed, which new step has been introduced, and whether that trade works for the intended customer.

Not every ingredient or formula belongs in every format. Founders need to establish whether the finished serving can deliver the intended dose and remain stable through its shelf life. Convenience has to work within those formulation constraints.

The Cymbiotika example also shows why format and delivery technology need separate attention. Liposomal delivery uses lipid vesicles to carry an ingredient. It can appear in a liquid or gel, but it can also appear inside a capsule.

That matters commercially because innovation can happen within a familiar routine. A product does not have to look radically different to contain a different formulation.

There is research worth examining here. A 2024 randomised crossover trial in 27 adults compared standard and liposomal vitamin C at a 500 mg dose. Both were delivered in capsules. The liposomal formulation produced 21% greater plasma exposure over 24 hours; its supplier, Specnova, funded the study.

The result supports an absorption claim for that formulation. It does not transfer automatically to Cymbiotika or another liposomal product, or establish a better health outcome.

For founders and investors, the job is to connect the evidence to the finished product. A convenient serving and a supported formulation each need to earn their place in the proposition. FMCG Gurus' research on supplement formats identifies both efficacy and ease of use as purchase considerations. The consumer is being asked to care about both.

An appealing product can win a place in the shopping basket and still struggle to find a place in the day.

Mintel's UK research makes that gap visible. Its September 2025 survey reports supplement use among 83% of under-35s, compared with 65% of over-55s. Yet lower daily use among younger consumers limits their value to the market. Interest in the category and consistent use are different things.

This is why I would bring the routine into product development early. If you are building around a morning drink, understand what making that drink involves. If you are proposing an evening serving, understand where it belongs in the evening. The routine has to fit the product's directions and the customer's actual day.

Habit stacking gives you one way to think about that: attach the new action to something the customer already does. A dependable time can also provide a cue. In an 84-day nutrition-behaviour trial, both approaches were associated with increasingly automatic behaviour, with neither significantly outperforming the other. Repeatedly carrying out the planned action predicted stronger automaticity. The study concerned nutrition behaviours rather than a comparison of supplement formats.

My application is practical. Make the serving clear, help the customer identify a suitable moment, and find out whether they can repeat it. A format that removes preparation may help one customer. Another may prefer the familiarity of preparing a drink. Customer behaviour has to settle that question.

Kunle Campbell's framework: format fit → consistent use → habit → replenishment. Replenishment also depends on need, value and experience. The habit research supports the role of repetition and cues; it does not demonstrate a supplement-format effect on paid retention.

Then follow the customer through to the next order. How much have they used? How much remains? Do they want the same product again?

That last question matters even when the routine is established. Innova's US consumer research identifies price and taste ahead of brand among purchase influences. A customer can develop a habit around a type of product and still choose a different brand to supply it.

For founders and investors looking at UK and US consumer brands, I would organise the opportunity around three decisions.

First, understand the routine you are entering. Capsules, powders and gummies remain part of the innovation picture, with measured channel growth for capsules and powders. A powder brand needs to know whether it is adding to a shake or competing to replace something already in it. A capsule brand can improve the presentation and serving experience around a familiar action. Those are specific opportunities to examine.

Second, look closely at liquids that fit an existing drink. Pumps and suitable drops interest me because they can ask very little extra of the customer. That is my strongest convenience-led interest for 2027, supported by my own experience rather than a claim that concentrates will lead market share. Gels, strips, sprays, oral caffeine pouches and chocolate deserve their own assessment of routine, formulation and delivery.

A pouch competing for an energy occasion has a different job from chocolate positioned around the evening. Each needs its own explanation of why the customer would choose it repeatedly. That is where I would spend time with the founder.

Third, ask to see the path from first use to replenishment. A clear serving, a routine the customer can maintain, a formulation with appropriate evidence, and economics that accommodate the packaging and delivery. Then observe whether people use what they bought and choose to buy it again.

Those are the connections I want a format strategy to explain. A customer already has a day full of routines and products. The opportunity is to understand where yours makes sense within it.

If the novelty disappeared tomorrow, would your customer still prefer taking the product this way?