Last week, the ranking of the biggest confectionery companies was published. Leading the charge is Mars, Inc. In second place, Mondelēz International. So far, so good.
What stands out, is that these companies don’t appear to identify as the world’s biggest names in confectionery. Mondelēz’s tagline is “snacking made right”, and Mars sells some of the industry’s best-known names in treats – from Maltesers to Snickers and, of course, Mars – under its Mars Snacking division.
They’re not alone: Lindt & Sprüngli, too, markets its ‘Pick & Mix’ and ‘Choco Wafer Nut Bundle’ offerings under “snacks” (“chocolate snacks” to be precise). This appears to be part of a broader global industry trend.
Is this a problem? Not in isolation. Their confectionery products are still taxed as such, and the classifications appear to work for the businesses themselves. But it does raise interesting questions around semantics and the perception of “snacks” more broadly. If most of their “snacking” revenue still comes from chocolate and sweets, what does “snacking” actually mean?
A blurring of categories: snacking vs confectionery
Confectionery, a term synonymous with chocolate and sweets, is largely understood to mean discretionary, sugary treats. The definition of snacks, on the other hand, is broader. Snacks can be functional, sometimes they’re nutritious, and often they’re consumed between meals.
Although these traditional definitions are distinct, a blurring of the categories occurs when we completely disregard their nutritional content, and instead focus on the moment of consumption. A crisp is a snack, so is a granola bar, or even a yoghurt. These products have long been consumed to keep hunger at bay between mealtimes, and are eaten daily.
On the confectionery side of things we have chocolate in all its forms, as well as sugar sweets like gummies, lollipops, or marshmallows. But when thought of as snacks, with marketing terms like “snack-sized” or sharing bags to promote “social snacking”, it risks altering consumer perception.
Over time, the guilt associated with eating a “treat” disappears. It’s a “snack”, after all. Slowly but surely, the lines are blurring between what’s an everyday treat and what’s an occasional one.
Confectionery has its place, but call a spade a spade
None of this is to demonise confectionery, quite the opposite. Chocolate and sweets have an important joyful place in the food landscape. But language matters. For consumers, clarity between categories is helpful – it can signal if something’s an after-dinner treat or an 11am snack to get them through to lunch.
So what’s the incentive for industry to change its approach? Firstly, confectionery makers can rest easy: consumers will always seek indulgence; demand for chocolate isn’t going anywhere. But when language shifts, perception can shift with it – and that ultimately shapes how the category is understood, valued, and regulated.
Long‑term growth relies not only on sales, but on credibility. If a product is confectionery, let’s call it confectionery.
One of the biggest food trends of our day? Healthy snacking
Want to know more about this industry megatrend? Join us at Positive Nutrition, a series of broadcast events spotlighting the innovations and technologies central to the evolution of better-for-you food and drink.
On 5 February, we’ll be hosting a session titled Healthy Snacking Trends, welcoming industry experts and thought leaders to our digital stage. Speakers include representatives from Danone, Chobani, Torr FoodTech and Hartman Group
Nearly nine out of 10 consumers snack daily to fuel their busy days, carve out a mindful moment of ‘me time’ and connect with family and friends, according to consumer research. But what they are reaching for is changing along with their motivations. We explore what types of snacks – including categories, flavors, sizes, and nutritional profiles – modern shoppers want.
We also look at what ingredients and diets are gaining traction, how marketing and merchandising is evolving and how brands and retailers are meeting these needs.