VOL. XCIV, NO. 247
★ MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★
PRICE: 5 CENTS
Tuesday, December 23, 2025
Mondelez International, Inc.
MDLZ · Nasdaq Global Select Market
Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.
Request update
Spot something outdated? Send a quick note and source so we can refresh this profile.
Overview
Mondelez International, Inc. is a global snacking company led by biscuits & baked snacks and chocolate. The moat is mainly brand equity supported by sustained marketing and wide distribution/route-to-market coverage. Trademark and trade secret protections help preserve product identity across geographies. Commodity volatility (especially cocoa), retailer bargaining power, private label, and fast-moving challengers are the main forces that can pressure margins and share.
Primary segment
Biscuits & Baked Snacks
Market structure
Oligopoly
Market share
—
HHI: —
Coverage
5 segments · 6 tags
Updated 2025-12-23
Segments
Biscuits & Baked Snacks
Branded biscuits, cookies, crackers and baked snacks
Revenue
48.9%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Chocolate
Branded chocolate confectionery
Revenue
30.9%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Gum & Candy
Gum and sugar confectionery
Revenue
11.1%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Beverages
Powdered beverages and drink mixes
Revenue
3%
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
weak
Share
—
Peers
Cheese & Grocery
Branded cheese and packaged grocery products (selected markets)
Revenue
6.2%
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
weak
Share
—
Peers
Moat Claims
Biscuits & Baked Snacks
Branded biscuits, cookies, crackers and baked snacks
Revenue share computed from FY2024 net revenues by product category in FY2024 Form 10-K (Note 18). Source: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1103982/000110398225000030/mdlz-20241231.htm
Brand Trust
Demand
Brand Trust
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 3 evidence
Category-leading brands plus sustained marketing/trade promotion support consumer preference and reduce price sensitivity versus lesser-known labels.
Erosion risks
- Private label trade-down
- Shift to 'better-for-you' snacks
- Taste/fad cycles
Leading indicators
- Organic net revenue pricing vs volume/mix
- Brand share in key biscuit/cracker markets
- Marketing ROI/share of voice
Counterarguments
- Switching costs are low; consumers can easily trial alternatives
- Retailers can allocate shelf space to private label or emerging brands
Distribution Control
Supply
Distribution Control
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Dense, multi-channel route-to-market supports on-shelf availability and in-store execution with large retailers and digital partners.
Erosion risks
- Retailer consolidation increases bargaining power
- E-commerce changes merchandising economics
- Distributor disruption/service-level issues
Leading indicators
- On-shelf availability/OTIF metrics
- Promotional intensity/trade spend rate
- Channel mix shift to e-commerce
Counterarguments
- Large retailers can neutralize some execution advantages via centralized distribution terms
- Third-party logistics can narrow execution gaps
IP Choke Point
Legal
IP Choke Point
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Trademarks, recipes, and know-how help preserve product identity and brand distinctiveness across geographies.
Erosion risks
- Counterfeiting/parallel imports
- Weaker IP enforcement in some markets
Leading indicators
- Brand infringement litigation volume
- Trademark renewal/registration coverage by market
Counterarguments
- Trademarks protect names, not consumer preference if quality/innovation lags
- Private label can mimic product attributes without infringing branding
Chocolate
Branded chocolate confectionery
Revenue share computed from FY2024 net revenues by product category in FY2024 Form 10-K (Note 18). Source: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1103982/000110398225000030/mdlz-20241231.htm
Brand Trust
Demand
Brand Trust
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 3 evidence
Strong brand recognition and loyalty support repeat purchase and price/mix management in chocolate, though competition remains intense.
Erosion risks
- Cocoa-driven price shocks reduce affordability
- Premiumization fatigue/consumer trade-down
- Regulatory and health scrutiny on sugar
Leading indicators
- Cocoa cost inflation vs pricing realization
- Volume/mix trend in chocolate category
- Gross margin in chocolate-heavy markets
Counterarguments
- Chocolate is highly substitutable; promotions can shift share quickly
- Private label and local brands can undercut on price
Supply Chain Control
Supply
Supply Chain Control
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Global procurement plus hedging/pricing levers help manage cocoa and other key inputs, reducing short-term volatility versus smaller players (but not eliminating structural risk).
Erosion risks
- Structural cocoa supply tightness (climate/geopolitics)
- Hedging basis risk/hedge ineffectiveness
- Supplier concentration in cocoa origins
Leading indicators
- Cocoa futures levels vs realized pricing
- Disclosures on hedging and forward purchasing coverage
- Gross margin sensitivity to cocoa
Counterarguments
- Even large buyers cannot control cocoa supply in a tight market
- Hedging can only delay, not eliminate, margin pressure
Distribution Control
Supply
Distribution Control
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Route-to-market breadth and retailer relationships support shelf presence and merchandising for seasonal and everyday chocolate.
Erosion risks
- Retailer private label push
- Shift to direct-to-consumer gifting/specialty brands
Leading indicators
- Seasonal sell-through rates
- Promotional intensity/trade spend
- Retailer share of shelf
Counterarguments
- Retailers can re-balance shelf space rapidly based on promotion funding
- Specialty brands can grow via premium channels and online
IP Choke Point
Legal
IP Choke Point
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Trademark and trade secret protection supports consistent product identity and helps defend against look-alike branding.
Erosion risks
- Counterfeits and gray-market imports
Leading indicators
- IP enforcement actions in key markets
Counterarguments
- Brand/IP does not prevent commodity-driven parity products from competing on taste/price
Gum & Candy
Gum and sugar confectionery
Revenue share computed from FY2024 net revenues by product category in FY2024 Form 10-K (Note 18). Source: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1103982/000110398225000030/mdlz-20241231.htm
Brand Trust
Demand
Brand Trust
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 3 evidence
Recognized brands support repeat purchase in gum and candy, though switching and promotion sensitivity are high.
Erosion risks
- Input cost inflation (sugar/sweeteners)
- Regulatory limits on marketing to children
- Shift away from sugary treats
Leading indicators
- Volume/mix trend in gum & candy
- Promo intensity/price pack architecture changes
Counterarguments
- Brand loyalty is weaker than in core biscuit/chocolate; consumers switch based on price and novelty
- Category fragmentation enables regional challengers
Distribution Control
Supply
Distribution Control
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Broad retail channel reach supports impulse placement and high-frequency replenishment in gum and candy.
Erosion risks
- Checkout/impulse aisle redesign (self-checkout)
- Retailer merchandising changes
Leading indicators
- Checkout display penetration
- Convenience channel share trend
Counterarguments
- Retailers can sell competing candy in the same impulse locations based on trade spend
- Alternative channels (online) weaken impulse advantage
IP Choke Point
Legal
IP Choke Point
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Trademarks and proprietary recipes/know-how protect brand identifiers, supporting differentiation where tastes are similar.
Erosion risks
- Counterfeiting in emerging markets
Leading indicators
- Trademark disputes/enforcement actions
Counterarguments
- IP does not prevent fast followers from competing on format/flavor innovation
Beverages
Powdered beverages and drink mixes
Revenue share computed from FY2024 net revenues by product category in FY2024 Form 10-K (Note 18). Source: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1103982/000110398225000030/mdlz-20241231.htm
Brand Trust
Demand
Brand Trust
Strength: 2/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence
Brand recognition supports baseline demand in powdered beverages/drink mixes, but differentiation is limited versus beverage incumbents.
Erosion risks
- Commoditization/private label
- Consumer shift to ready-to-drink and 'health' beverages
Leading indicators
- Category volume trend vs price increases
- Distribution expansion in priority markets
Counterarguments
- Beverage leaders can outspend and out-distribute in core channels
- Taste/format innovation can be copied quickly
Distribution Control
Supply
Distribution Control
Strength: 2/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence
Access to broad retail channels and distributors supports availability, though execution advantage is smaller than in core snacks.
Erosion risks
- Channel conflict with large beverage suppliers
- E-commerce substitution
Leading indicators
- Store count/numeric distribution in key markets
Counterarguments
- Large beverage incumbents have stronger systems where relevant
- Retailers can shift shelf space quickly in low-loyalty segments
IP Choke Point
Legal
IP Choke Point
Strength: 2/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Trademarks and formulations provide some defensibility but do not create high switching costs in beverages.
Erosion risks
- Formula imitation
- Trademark dilution
Leading indicators
- Brand renovation cadence/innovation pipeline
Counterarguments
- Most value comes from distribution and price points, not protected IP
Cheese & Grocery
Branded cheese and packaged grocery products (selected markets)
Revenue share computed from FY2024 net revenues by product category in FY2024 Form 10-K (Note 18). Source: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1103982/000110398225000030/mdlz-20241231.htm
Brand Trust
Demand
Brand Trust
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 3 evidence
Established brands in selected cheese/grocery lines support repeat purchase, but competition from local staples and private label is strong.
Erosion risks
- Private label expansion
- Reformulation/health trends
- Local incumbents with cost advantage
Leading indicators
- Volume/mix trend in cheese & grocery
- Price realization vs dairy input inflation
Counterarguments
- Many grocery categories are price-led with low switching costs
- Retailers can substitute store brands in commoditized items
Distribution Control
Supply
Distribution Control
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence
Retail and distributor coverage supports availability across multiple channels.
Erosion risks
- Retailer consolidation
- Distributor renegotiations
Leading indicators
- Channel mix/distribution points
Counterarguments
- Competitors can reach the same channels with similar logistics
- Retailers can allocate shelf space based on trade spend
IP Choke Point
Legal
IP Choke Point
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Trademark and know-how protections support brand identity in packaged grocery products.
Erosion risks
- Counterfeiting in lower-enforcement markets
Leading indicators
- Trademark disputes/enforcement actions
Counterarguments
- Legal protection does not prevent functional substitutes; preferences can shift quickly
Evidence
We compete based on product quality, brand recognition and loyalty, service, product innovation, taste, convenience, nutritional value, the ability to identify and satisfy consumer preferences, effectiveness of our digital and other sales and marketing strategies, routes to market and distribution networks, promotional activities and price.
Shows that brand, marketing effectiveness, and route-to-market execution are core competitive dimensions.
We continue to invest in advertising and consumer promotions, talent and digital capabilities. Our marketing initiatives are categorized in three principal sets of activities: (i) consumer marketing and advertising including digital and social media, on-air, print, outdoor and other product promotions; (ii) consumer sales incentives such as coupons and rebates; and (iii) trade promotions to support price features, displays and other merchandising of our products by our customers.
Evidence of ongoing spend and trade promotion to sustain brand demand and in-store execution.
Net revenues increased in 2024, driven by higher net pricing and incremental net revenue from our acquisition of Evirth, partially offset by unfavorable currency-related items, the impact of our 2023 divestiture of the developed market gum business and unfavorable volume/mix. In 2024, Organic Net Revenue increased due to higher net pricing, partially offset by unfavorable volume/mix.
Supports that pricing actions are a key lever in growth and margin management.
Our product distribution network encompasses direct store delivery, company-owned and satellite warehouses, distribution centers, third party distributors and other facilities. Additionally, we leverage the services of independent sales offices and agents in various international locations. Through our global digital commerce organization and capabilities, we pursue online growth with partners in key markets around the world, including both pure e-tailers and omni-channel retailers.
Evidence of broad physical distribution and an explicit push into digital commerce with partners.
We generally sell our products to supermarket chains, wholesalers, supercenters, club stores, mass merchandisers, distributors, convenience stores, gasoline stations, drug stores, value stores and other retail food outlets. We also sell products directly to businesses and consumers through various pure play e-retail platforms, retailer digital platforms, our direct-to-consumer websites and social media platforms. No single customer accounted for 10% or more of our net revenues from continuing operations in 2024.
Supports key customer channels and indicates low customer concentration.
Showing 5 of 8 sources.
Risks & Indicators
Erosion risks
- Private label trade-down
- Shift to 'better-for-you' snacks
- Taste/fad cycles
- Retailer consolidation increases bargaining power
- E-commerce changes merchandising economics
- Distributor disruption/service-level issues
Leading indicators
- Organic net revenue pricing vs volume/mix
- Brand share in key biscuit/cracker markets
- Marketing ROI/share of voice
- On-shelf availability/OTIF metrics
- Promotional intensity/trade spend rate
- Channel mix shift to e-commerce
Curation & Accuracy
This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).
Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.