How Ingredient Branding Fuels Consumerism and Limits Originality in Beauty

In recent years, ingredient branding has become a dominant force in beauty marketing. Brands frequently push single, trendy ingredients like retinol, vitamin C, or hyaluronic acid to create a sense of trust and attract consumers. But while this strategy can lead to short-term success, it brings up deeper questions about long-term brand identity and originality. Ingredient branding also often contributes to fear-mongering, as brands demonize certain ingredients to position their alternatives as safer or superior.

How the Beauty Industry Relies on Ingredient Branding

Ingredient branding allows beauty companies to market their products around a single, hero component. This simplifies the messaging for consumers, as they can focus on one key benefit tied to an ingredient. For example, The Ordinary’s entire brand strategy revolves around transparency in ingredients, allowing consumers to select single-component products such as retinol, squalane, or niacinamide. By breaking products down into these elements, brands can create the perception of efficacy and reliability through science.

This trend mirrors what we see in other industries. For instance, Intel’s "Intel Inside" campaign convinced consumers that the quality of their computers was determined by the microchip. Similarly, in beauty, the perceived power of the "right" ingredient drives purchasing decisions.

The Downside: Limiting Originality and Brand Identity

However, the over-reliance on ingredient branding limits creativity and dilutes brand identity. When companies tie themselves solely to an ingredient, they run the risk of becoming interchangeable with competitors who use the same component. Countless serums contain hyaluronic acid or retinol, making it difficult for consumers to differentiate between them. At that point, the product’s effectiveness becomes less about the brand and more about the ingredient itself.

This is where Mike Cessario, CEO of Liquid Death, offers an interesting perspective. He argues that focusing too much on ingredients—like why aluminum cans are better than plastic bottles—can end up promoting your competitors, who may offer the same materials. Cessario highlights that "the brand is what you can own," meaning that a strong, unique brand identity is far more difficult to replicate than an ingredient. Anyone can copy a formula, but replicating a distinct brand personality or story is far more challenging.

Fear-Mongering and Demonization of Ingredients

An unfortunate byproduct of ingredient branding is the rise of fear-mongering in marketing. Brands often position their products as "clean," "natural," or "toxin-free" by demonizing other ingredients. Ingredients like parabens, sulfates, and silicones have been subject to intense scrutiny, often without sufficient scientific backing. By labeling their products as free from these "harmful" ingredients, brands elevate their offerings at the expense of rational discourse.

This tactic is not exclusive to beauty. In the food industry, "organic" and "non-GMO" labels create similar consumer anxieties around ingredients that are often safe in controlled quantities. Fear-mongering fosters a cycle where brands manipulate consumer insecurities to promote their products as safer, but this approach can backfire as consumers become more educated and skeptical.

Ingredient branding can give beauty brands an edge, but it often relies on demonizing perfectly safe components in order to prop up trendy alternatives. A common example is the rise of "clean beauty," which is built on the premise that certain natural ingredients are better, while chemicals or synthetic ingredients are bad. This feeds into consumers' fear of the unknown—scientific-sounding names—and helps brands position themselves as safer or more "ethical."

However, as Cessario emphasizes, focusing solely on the benefits of ingredients may diminish the unique essence of a brand, as competitors can easily replicate formulas.

Chasing the "Next Big Thing"

Ingredient branding fosters an endless cycle of consumerism. As trends shift, brands scramble to discover and market the next breakthrough ingredient. Bakuchiol, a plant-based alternative to retinol, has emerged as one of the latest "clean beauty" sensations. But once the novelty wears off, brands and consumers will inevitably search for the next big thing. This pattern keeps consumers constantly buying new products, even if the core benefits are marginally different from older formulations.

This relentless pursuit of the next "hero" ingredient exists in other industries too. In tech, smartphone companies routinely market new models by highlighting small, often negligible improvements in camera technology or battery life, fueling the desire for constant upgrades. While these incremental innovations keep customers engaged, they also create a sense of dissatisfaction with previous products.

Mike Cessario's insight about Liquid Death is particularly relevant here. Rather than focusing on ingredients or materials—like aluminum cans versus plastic—Cessario built Liquid Death’s brand around humor, rebellion, and an eco-conscious message. This deep emotional connection with consumers has made the brand stand out, even in a crowded market where competitors use the same materials. The lesson is clear: brands that anchor their identity in something deeper than ingredients or features can build longer-lasting consumer loyalty.

Does Ingredient Branding Truly Last?

While ingredient branding may drive short-term sales, its longevity is questionable. Consumers often flock to products with trending ingredients, but without a solid brand identity, these products can easily lose momentum once trends shift. Brands that rely solely on a single ingredient to define their identity run the risk of losing relevance when consumer tastes inevitably change.

Iconic beauty brands like Estée Lauder or Nivea have created lasting relationships with their customers not by chasing ingredient trends but by building consistent brand experiences over time. These brands focus on trust, quality, and emotional connection, which transcends any single ingredient or product trend.

Ingredient Branding and Consumerism

Ingredient branding drives consumerism by promoting the idea that the latest ingredient is superior to what came before. Consumers are conditioned to believe that in order to achieve better results, they must constantly upgrade their beauty routine with new products featuring the latest ingredient craze. This approach feeds into a larger cycle of overconsumption, where brands continue to churn out new products with slightly different formulations, and consumers feel the pressure to keep up.

This never-ending cycle of consumerism is not sustainable for brands or consumers. Eventually, consumers will begin to question whether these ingredient-focused products deliver meaningful results, or if they are simply pawns in the beauty industry’s marketing machine.

The Future of Ingredient Branding

Ingredient branding has reshaped the beauty industry, offering a straightforward way to communicate product benefits and build trust with consumers. However, it comes with limitations. While it can generate short-term excitement, ingredient branding may restrict originality, encourage fear-mongering, and contribute to the relentless cycle of consumerism.

In industries like beauty, tech, or beverages, brands that rely too heavily on ingredients or features to drive sales often struggle with long-term identity. As Mike Cessario of Liquid Death has shown, a brand’s story, values, and emotional connection with its audience are far more important than any single material or ingredient. To build lasting loyalty, brands must transcend ingredients and offer something more meaningful—because while ingredients can be replicated, a unique brand cannot.