Grain-free can still sell well, yet shoppers can still feel unsure. Brands often read the wrong signal and change the wrong SKU. The result is wasted inventory and confused messaging.
The post-2019 story is not “grain-free disappeared.” The defensible story is “re-tiering.” Attitudes split faster than habits, and the category mix shifted toward more specific, benefit-led subsegments. The clearest way to prove the shift is to measure belief, purchase behavior, and mix separately.
Build shelf-life stability for sensitive pet food SKUs with the right pouch system →
The DCM debate became a market event because it compressed trust. After 2019, many shoppers stopped treating “grain-free” as an automatic upgrade. Some stayed loyal. Others traded back to grain-inclusive. Many became “cautious grain-free” buyers who only choose it in narrow situations. The measurable question is not whether grain-free is “good” or “bad.” The measurable question is which demand pockets stayed, which moved, and why.
What exactly should be measured: attitude shift, purchase shift, or mix shift?
Many teams argue using a single chart. That almost always misleads. The solution is to split the question into three measurable curves and keep them separate.
The most common mistake is treating sales dollars as “proof” of loyalty. Dollars can rise from price inflation, pack-size changes, or premium tiering. Unit share and household penetration can move the opposite way. Attitude can also move without immediate behavior change, especially for habitual staple items like kibble.
How to structure the measurement so the debate becomes testable
| Metric |
What it answers |
Best data source |
Common misread |
| Attitude (belief) |
Who trusts grain-free now, and why |
Consumer survey with reasons + trust sources |
Assuming beliefs equal purchases |
| Behavior (purchase) |
Who reduced, switched, or restricted occasions |
Panel data or survey with “what did you buy instead” |
Calling any decline “category death” |
| Category mix (structure) |
Where share moved by tier, channel, and format |
Retail scan: unit + dollar + promo + channel |
Using dollars only, ignoring unit share |
Evidence (Source + Year): U.S. FDA CVM public update on diet-associated DCM communications and investigation status (FDA, 2022).
What did regulators and veterinary sources actually say after 2019?
The DCM debate had a clear timeline marker in 2019, but the public signal did not stay constant. The strongest evidence-first move is to separate the market reaction from the evolving communication environment.
Regulatory updates changed how the topic was framed. Early attention included case reports and broad diet patterns. Later updates emphasized the limits of available evidence and the need for continued research. That matters because shopper attention follows “information supply.” When new official updates slow down, public attention often cools even if uncertainty remains. This does not mean the risk is “solved.” It means the category narrative becomes more fragmented and brand-led.
Why the “signal change” matters for shopper trust
| What shoppers see |
What it can do to beliefs |
What brands often do wrong |
What to measure instead |
| High media intensity (2019) |
Fast concern spike |
Over-correct the full portfolio |
Which SKUs are questioned (kibble vs treats) |
| Fewer official updates later |
Concern becomes segmented |
Assume “everything normalized” |
Trust sources (vet vs brand vs social) |
| Ongoing scientific debate |
Cautious buying behavior |
Make absolute safety claims |
Switching pathways and restrictions by occasion |
Evidence (Source + Year): FDA CVM DCM update page noting its investigation status and that it does not plan to provide further updates in the same format (FDA, 2022).
How did shopper beliefs split: who became cautious, and who stayed loyal?
Attitudes rarely move as one block. After 2019, shoppers tended to split into segments that behave differently and need different proof. A “loyalist” may still buy grain-free as a default. A “cautious” shopper may only buy grain-free for specific dogs or specific needs. A “return-to-grain” shopper may trade back to grain-inclusive formulas but still pay for other premium cues.
That segmentation matters because “grain-free” often stood in for several different motivations. Some shoppers used it as a shortcut for “clean label.” Some used it as a perceived digestive or allergy solution. Others followed social trends. If the DCM debate weakened the halo, demand often moved toward claims that feel more specific and verifiable, such as limited-ingredient positioning, sensitive digestion cues, or veterinarian-led narratives.
Segment logic that turns opinions into testable hypotheses
| Shopper segment |
Belief pattern |
Purchase behavior |
Most likely substitute |
| Loyalist |
Trusts brand and stays consistent |
Keeps grain-free as default |
Other grain-free within brand family |
| Cautious grain-free |
Concern exists, but needs still matter |
Buys grain-free only for specific occasions |
Limited-ingredient or sensitive digestion SKUs |
| Return-to-grain |
Seeks certainty and lower perceived risk |
Moves staples back to grain-inclusive |
Grain-inclusive premium or vet-adjacent claims |
Evidence (Source + Year): AKC Canine Health Foundation summary of diet-associated DCM context and ongoing uncertainty in mechanisms (AKC CHF, 2024).
What does category mix suggest: stagnation, decline, or re-tiering?
Category mix answers a different question than attitudes. Mix asks where the money and units moved across tiers and channels. A realistic post-2019 outcome is “two-direction movement”: value grows in staples while premium continues in “visible-benefit” niches. That pattern can exist even if grain-free itself slows in the mass middle.
To avoid false conclusions, mix should be read using unit share, dollar share, and promo intensity together. A stable dollar share can hide a falling unit share. A rising promo rate can hide weaker baseline demand. Channel mix also matters. If shoppers shift purchases toward mass, club, or private label heavy retailers, grain-free positioning can face more pressure in everyday staples, while premium grain-free can still hold in specialty or direct-to-consumer niches.
How to read “mix” without getting trapped by one chart
| Signal |
What it might mean |
What would confirm it |
What would contradict it |
| Dollar share steady, unit share down |
Re-tiering or price inflation effect |
Premium tier grows while mid shrinks |
Units also steady across tiers |
| Promo share up |
Value pressure and trade-down behavior |
Higher discount depth supports units |
Units grow without promo expansion |
| Private label growth |
Value channels regain share |
Private label penetration rises in staples |
Premium specialty channels dominate growth |
Evidence (Source + Year): Circana discussion of private label growth dynamics in pet care categories and value-channel context (Circana, 2025).
If your mix is re-tiering, packaging must re-tier too—match barrier and shelf risk to each tier →
Where did grain-free demand go: limited-ingredient, sensitive digestion, functional, or fresh?
The cleanest way to explain “grain-free after 2019” is to track what replaced its job. Grain-free often served as a broad signal for “better.” After the debate, many shoppers looked for more specific signals that feel tied to a visible benefit. That is why the “demand destination” question matters as much as “grain-free share.”
In practice, three demand jobs tend to appear. The “health halo” job can shift to higher-meat narratives, simpler labels, or functional claims. The “sensitivity” job can shift to limited-ingredient and sensitive digestion positioning. The “trend” job can shift to fresh or novel formats. A brand does not need to win all three. The brand needs to prove which job its buyer is hiring the product to do, and then align claims, channel placement, and pack format to that job.
A demand-destination map that can be validated
| Old demand job |
Why grain-free fit |
Likely destination |
What to measure |
| Health halo |
“No fillers” shortcut |
High-meat, clean label, functional claims |
Claim preference and repeat by claim type |
| Sensitivity |
Perceived digestion/allergy help |
Limited ingredient, sensitive digestion |
Switching path for sensitive dogs |
| Trend/identity |
Premium identity cue |
Fresh/frozen, novel formats |
Trial-to-repeat and occasion use |
Evidence (Source + Year): FDA CVM DCM communications as the triggering context for label-trust fragmentation (FDA, 2022).
When does packaging become the hidden reason shoppers “switch back”?
Category shifts do not happen only because of beliefs. Many repeat decisions are driven by “failure avoidance.” If a product clumps, oxidizes, or molds in a humid home or warehouse-like storage area, the buyer does not debate nutrition claims. The buyer simply switches. Packaging performance can therefore amplify or hide the post-2019 segmentation.
As a flexible packaging manufacturer, we focus on the practical link between category mix and shelf risk. Premium and functional SKUs often have higher fat, stronger aroma, or more sensitive inclusions. Those products need stronger oxygen and moisture control, plus better seal consistency. Value tiers may tolerate simpler structures, but they often face longer dwell times and wider channel conditions. That makes seal integrity and moisture barrier consistency critical even in “basic” pouches.
Packaging-driven failure modes that look like “attitude change” in the market
| Shopper complaint |
Likely root cause |
What to test first |
Typical packaging lever |
| Rancid/off odor |
Oxidation during storage |
Headspace O₂ trend + sensory checks |
Lower OTR + stronger seals |
| Softening or clumping |
Moisture pickup |
Pack weight gain vs RH cycling |
Lower MVTR + seal integrity |
| Mold concern |
Humidity ingress or micro-leaks |
Leak screening + storage simulation |
Seal window control + barrier match |
Evidence (Source + Year): Packaging barrier and shelf-life fundamentals linking oxygen/moisture ingress to product stability (Robertson, 2013).
A decision map: how can brands prove the “since 2019” shift without guessing?
Most brands can answer the question with a small research design if they stop asking vague questions. The key is to force a substitution answer and an occasion tag. One question can separate “return-to-grain” from “cautious grain-free.” Another question can reveal whether grain-free is still a staple or only a special-case purchase.
On the retail side, the decision map is simple. If premium and value are both growing, the middle is being squeezed. If value and private label are growing while premium is flat, the market is trading down. If premium grows in specific “visible-benefit” segments while staples soften, the market is re-tiering. Each scenario implies different product and packaging priorities. The proof is not a slogan. The proof is consistent movement across unit, dollar, promo, and channel.
A practical scoring model to classify what is happening
| Signal you observe |
Most likely story |
First metric to check |
Next action |
| More “DCM safe?” questions |
Attitude split is widening |
Trust source and reason codes |
Clarify claim language and proof boundaries |
| Staple SKUs lose units |
Value pressure / channel shift |
Unit share + promo depth |
Rebuild pack-price architecture |
| Premium niche grows |
Re-tiering, not collapse |
Tier mix within subsegment |
Protect repeat with shelf-life consistency |
Evidence (Source + Year): FDA CVM DCM update and ongoing uncertainty framing (FDA, 2022).
Validation plan: what is the smallest research design that answers “since 2019” clearly?
Many teams wait for perfect syndicated data. That delay creates expensive guesswork. A lightweight validation plan can produce a clear answer within weeks, even without paid databases.
A brand can run two simple surveys and one data pull. The first survey is a substitution question: “If you did not buy this grain-free product today, what would you buy instead?” The second is an occasion tag: “Is this for everyday feeding, sensitive stomach support, or a rotation/variety choice?” Those two questions turn opinions into a map of demand destinations. Then the brand pulls three internal metrics: units by tier, promo intensity, and channel mix. When those signals align, the brand can state a defensible conclusion about re-tiering.
Minimal plan with pass/fail logic
| Hypothesis |
Metric |
Pass/Fail |
Next step |
| Grain-free is being restricted to special occasions |
Occasion tag distribution |
Pass if “everyday” share drops |
Rebuild claim clarity and pack formats |
| Demand is moving to substitutes |
Substitution answers |
Pass if substitutes cluster (LID, sensitive) |
Adjust portfolio and messaging by job |
| Mix is re-tiering |
Unit + dollar + promo by tier |
Pass if premium and value rise vs mid |
Match packaging specs to tier risks |
Evidence (Source + Year): Veterinary context on DCM debate and ongoing research needs, supporting why beliefs can remain split (AKC CHF, 2024).
Conclusion
Since 2019, grain-free did not vanish. It re-tiered. The most defensible answer comes from measuring belief, behavior, and mix separately, then aligning product and packaging to the real demand job.
Talk to JINYI about pet food packaging that protects repeat purchase →
About Us
Brand: Jinyi
Slogan: From Film to Finished—Done Right.
Website: https://jinyipackage.com/
Our Mission:
JINYI is a source manufacturer specializing in custom flexible packaging solutions. The team aims to deliver packaging that is reliable, usable, and execution-ready, so brands can reduce communication cost, achieve predictable quality, and keep timelines clear.
About JINYI:
JINYI is a source manufacturer specializing in custom flexible packaging solutions, with over 15 years of production experience serving food, snack, pet food, and daily consumer brands.
We operate a standardized manufacturing facility equipped with multiple gravure printing lines as well as advanced HP digital printing systems, allowing us to support both stable large-volume orders and flexible short runs with consistent quality.
From material selection to finished pouches, we focus on process control, repeatability, and real-world performance. Our goal is to help brands reduce communication costs, achieve predictable quality, and ensure packaging performs reliably on shelf, in transit, and at end use.
FAQ
- Did the DCM debate eliminate grain-free? The evidence-first view is that it drove re-tiering and segmentation, not a full collapse.
- What is the fastest way to detect a real mix shift? Track unit share, dollar share, promo intensity, and channel mix together.
- Why do beliefs change faster than purchases? Feeding routines are sticky, so shoppers often restrict occasions before they fully switch staples.
- What substitutes most often absorb “grain-free” demand? The common destinations are limited-ingredient, sensitive digestion, and other benefit-led premium claims.
- How can packaging affect repeat purchase in this category? Packaging that controls oxygen and moisture and maintains seal integrity reduces rancidity, clumping, and mold complaints that trigger switching.
