Competitive Share-Shift Explainer

Example output

Share-shift explanation — Meridian Snacks kettle chips vs. CrunchPeak and SaltRow, 26 weeks:

Headline: the loss concentrates in the final 8 weeks and lines up with CrunchPeak's flavor launch window more than with SaltRow's promotional activity — this looks like a distribution and trial story, not a price story.

Ranked causes, checked against your data

1. CrunchPeak new-flavor distribution gain (high confidence)
Your data shows CrunchPeak's share climb beginning in the same window their new flavor would have hit shelf, and the timing matches your share loss closely enough that this is very likely the primary driver. Evidence: the inflection point in both lines falls in the same week range. What would raise confidence further: CrunchPeak's actual distribution or ACV data for the new flavor, if available, to confirm it's a distribution story rather than pure velocity on existing items.

2. SaltRow promotional activity (low-to-moderate confidence)
Your pasted data shows SaltRow's promotional weeks did not shift meaningfully within the 26-week window, so this is a weaker explanation for a loss concentrated in the last 8 weeks specifically. It may be a background contributor to gradual share pressure across the full period, but it does not explain the recent acceleration.

3. Your own distribution or availability (investigate — data not provided)
The pasted data doesn't include your own out-of-stock or distribution trend, which means this cause cannot be ruled in or out yet. Given how concentrated the loss is in 8 weeks, a look at your own availability during that window is a necessary check before finalizing the story — a self-inflicted distribution gap would change the narrative entirely.

4. Price gap movement (low confidence)
Nothing in the pasted data suggests a meaningful price-gap shift against either competitor during the loss window. Treat this as a ruled-out cause for now, pending confirmation from a dedicated price audit.

What the data cannot yet explain
Whether CrunchPeak's gain is coming disproportionately from your shoppers specifically, or from the category's growth more broadly with your share loss being a relative rather than absolute effect. Your data shows share, which is inherently relative — pulling absolute category dollar growth for the same period would clarify whether this is "CrunchPeak took our shoppers" or "the category grew and CrunchPeak captured more of the growth than we did," which call for different responses.

Follow-up questions to chase
- Pull your own distribution/ACV and out-of-stock trend for the same 8-week window before ruling out a self-inflicted cause.
- Get CrunchPeak's actual distribution data for the new flavor if your syndicated data source provides item-level detail.
- Check category total dollar growth for the period to separate relative from absolute share loss.

Leadership-ready explanation

Meridian Snacks lost 1.8 share points in kettle chips over 26 weeks, with the loss concentrated in the last 8 weeks. The timing lines up most closely with CrunchPeak's new flavor launch, making a distribution and trial story the leading explanation — SaltRow's promotional activity does not show the same timing correlation and is a weaker driver. Before finalizing this story for the board, we need two data pulls: our own availability during the loss window, to rule out a self-inflicted cause, and total category growth, to confirm whether this is share lost to a competitor or share diluted by category growth we didn't capture.

Want me to draft the two toughest questions leadership will ask about this, with suggested answers?