Brand Finance’s latest Food & Drink report reveals health-focused brands climb while others decline
TOKYO, 21 August 2025 – Japan’s leading food and beverage brands saw a year of contrasting fortunes, with some climbing up the global rankings while others faced value declines, according to the Food & Drink 2025 report by Brand Finance, the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy.
The mixed results reflect a market in transition, with health-focused brands gaining ground while others slow down and yet, Japanese household favourites remain firmly among the world’s most valuable.
In the food ranking, performance was mixed. Nissin (brand value down 10% to USD1.7 billion) held steady in 48th place, demonstrating brand stability despite challenging market conditions. Yakult (up 3% to USD1.7 billion) advanced 13 positions to 49th, supported by steady demand in Japan, despite growing competition overseas.
Ajinomoto (down 20% to USD 1.6 billion) slipped five places to 50th, while Kikkoman (down 61% to USD 1.6 billion) experienced one of the sharpest declines in the table, falling to 53rd from ranking 14th in 2024. In contrast, Meiji delivered the year’s standout improvements among Japanese brands in the ranking, leaping 21 spots to 79th with a 10% uplift in brand value to USD1.0 billion.
Within the Food & Drinks report, the non-alcoholic drinks ranking reflected a similar pattern of gains and setbacks for Japanese brands ranked. Kagome (up 36% to USD780 million) recorded some of the largest upward movement among brands globally, climbing 11 places to 28th.
Oi Ocha (up 16% to USD484 million) improved its ranking by nine spots to 41st, backed by a robust Brand Strength Index (BSI) score of 89.75/100 and an AAA+ brand strength rating, underscoring its strong consumer connection. Meanwhile, Tennensui faced a 42% drop in brand value to USD333 million and fell 13 places to 50th but still maintained a solid brand strength profile with a BSI score of 89.81/100 and an AAA+ rating.
All three Japanese non-alcoholic drink brands, Tennensui, Oi Ocha, and Kagome, also emerge among the top 10 strongest brands in the rankings. Their respective brand strengths are fuelled by strong domestic perceptions, according to Brand Finance’s market research data, with each scoring well on reliability and recommendation.
Alex Haigh, Managing Director, Brand Finance Asia Pacific, commented:
“This year’s Food & Drink rankings reflect both the resilience and the challenges facing Japanese brands. Those aligned with health and wellness trends have gained ground, while others are navigating more difficult conditions. It’s a clear sign that adaptability will define the leaders of Japan’s food and beverage industry in the years ahead.”
The performance of the nation’s food brands mirror Japan’s wider standing on the global stage, where its culinary heritage and brand appeal remain powerful drivers of recognition.
According to Brand Finance’s Soft Power Index 2025, Japan ranks second globally for “Brand the world loves” and fourth for “Food the world loves,” underscoring the country’s global reputation for quality and innovation in cuisine. This combination of strong international appeal and evolving consumer preferences presents both challenges and opportunities for Japanese brands, as they adapt to shifting tastes at home and abroad.
Global Insights
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organisations make strategic decisions.
Headquartered in London, Brand Finance operates in over 25 countries. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 6,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on 6,000 brands, surveying more than 175,000 respondents across 41 countries and 31 industry sectors. By combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database — the largest brand value database in the world — Brand Finance equips ambitious brand leaders with the data, analytics, and the strategic guidance they need to enhance brand and business value.
In addition to calculating brand value, Brand Finance also determines the relative strength of brands through a balanced scorecard of metrics evaluating marketing investment, stakeholder equity, and business performance, compliant with ISO 20671.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm and a committed leader in the standardisation of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.
Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.
Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.
Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.
Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.
The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.
Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.
The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance's proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.
