Brand Finance data shows growth shifting from inflation-led gains to health, convenience and consumer trust
LONDON, 27 August 2026 – For the past two years, food and drinks brands have relied heavily on price increases to navigate inflationary pressures and protect margins. However, as inflationary conditions begin to ease, the basis of competition is shifting. According to a new report from Brand Finance, the world's leading brand valuation consultancy, leading brands are increasingly differentiating themselves through innovation, health credentials, portfolio expansion and consumer trust.
The world’s 100 most valuable food brands are collectively worth USD278.3 billion in 2026, while the top 50 non-alcoholic drinks brands account for a combined USD170.4 billion and the top 10 dairy brands for USD50.8 billion. While pricing strategies supported growth in recent years, the latest rankings highlight a transition towards more sustainable drivers of brand value, with brands investing in product innovation, high-protein and better-for-you formats, and broader category opportunities as consumers become increasingly selective.
Nestlé (brand value up 23% to USD24.6 billion) remains the world’s most valuable food brand, while Coca-Cola (brand value down 1% to USD46.1 billion) retains its position as the most valuable non-alcoholic drinks brand. However, maintaining brand leadership increasingly requires continued investment in brand strength. Coca-Cola’s brand value declined slightly this year and has been surpassed on brand strength by Nongfu Spring (brand value up 38% to USD15.3 billion). The Chinese bottled water and tea brand now leads the ranking ahead of last year's champion, Coca-Cola, across measures of consumer trust and familiarity. The brand recorded a Brand Strength Index score of 89.8/100 and a prestigious AAA+ brand strength rating. A similar trend is evident in food, where Sadia (brand value up 35% to USD2.9 billion) and Amul (brand value up 22% to USD5.0 billion) rank as the sector’s strongest brands. The brands scored 93.5/100 and 93/100 respectively, and an AAA+ brand strength rating as well.
This shift, where brand strength leadership is evolving even as value rankings remain stable is a defining theme of this year’s rankings. Chinese brands are playing an increasingly prominent role across food and beverage categories. Yili (brand value up 29% to USD14.5 billion) retains its position as the world’s most valuable dairy brand, while Eastroc (brand value up 62% to USD5.0 billion) is among the fastest growing non-alcoholic drinks brands in the ranking, increasing by 62% as it expands beyond energy drinks into electrolyte and functional beverages. Mengniu also continues to strengthen its position against established Western competitors.
Growth is also emerging beyond the traditional category leaders. Within non-alcoholic drinks, Canada Dry records the fastest brand value growth in the ranking, increasing by 116% to USD1.1 billion, demonstrating the continued relevance of heritage soft drink brands when supported by effective brand management and innovation. Juice brand Innocent (brand value up 60% to USD1.6 billion) also stands out, achieving the highest brand value growth in its sub-category, reflecting the growing importance of better-for-you positioning in shaping consumer preferences.
Category dynamics are also reshaping value creation within non-alcoholic drinks. Functional Drinks now represent a combined USD33.4 billion, with Red Bull (brand value up 27% to USD12.3 billion) the undisputed category leader, followed closely by Monster (brand value up 4% to USD9.1 billion) and Gatorade (brand value up 21% to USD9.0 billion). In Coffee and Tea, worth a combined USD19.4 billion, Nescafé (brand value up 20% to USD5.6 billion) remains the most valuable brand, while Yorkshire Tea (brand value up 32% to USD751 million) leads on brand strength with a BSI score of 83.1/100.
Henry Farr, Global Sector Head of Food & Drinks, Brand Finance, commented:
“The global food and beverage sector is changing rapidly. After two years in which price increases led to revenue growth without meaningful increase in profitability, brands now need to show where long-term value will come from. Those pulling ahead are using broad, flexible portfolios to capture growth and defend market share across categories against upstart challenger brands, rather than relying only on historically strong positions. Diversification will become even more important as trends such as GLP-1 weight-loss drugs begin to reshape consumer demand. Brands that build flexibility into their portfolios now will be better placed as these shifts accelerate.”"
Across food, non-alcoholic drinks and dairy, the 2026 rankings demonstrate that long-term brand value growth is increasingly shaped by the ability to anticipate and respond to changing consumer expectations. While scale and heritage remain important advantages, the strongest performers are those combining trusted brand foundations with innovation, portfolio diversification and relevance in fast-growing areas such as functional nutrition, healthier choices and convenience-led consumption. As competition intensifies and market conditions remain uncertain, brands that continue to invest in consumer trust, adaptability and meaningful differentiation will be best positioned to strengthen their value and sustain growth in the years ahead.
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, 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.
