Shared research study link

Zevia Zero-Sugar Soda Perception Study

Understand consumer perception of stevia-sweetened sodas vs other zero-sugar options, and whether natural positioning resonates

Study Overview Updated Jan 12, 2026

Research question: How consumers perceive stevia-sweetened sodas vs other zero-sugar options, whether “natural” positioning builds trust, and if a 50% premium is acceptable. Research group: n=6 US adults (ages 41–49), health-conscious soda drinkers who manage sugar; diverse geographies and incomes. What they said: Stevia is a small improvement over aspartame/sucralose but still leaves a persistent grassy/bitter aftertaste, the line “Naturally delicious, not suspicious” reads as defensive and prompts label-checking, and a 50% premium is rejected; acceptance rises only for ice-cold trial, flavors that mask off-notes (citrus/ginger), and a much smaller premium, with “no artificial colors” adding little value compared with taste. Main insights: The decisive barrier is sensory finish by sip 2–3; trust is earned through plain, ingredient-level transparency (what sweetener, what “natural flavors” means), not vague “natural” claims; serving context (ice-cold) and flavor strategy materially improve acceptability. Clear takeaways: Retire the defensive tagline; lead with citrus/ginger and deprioritize cola; mandate ice-cold single-can sampling; cap shelf premium at ≤10–15% with periodic parity promos; add a concise transparency panel/QR; and adopt a “sip-three” sensory gate pre-launch. Decision next: Pilot cold trial and pricing architecture on citrus/ginger SKUs, track trial-to-repeat and aftertaste mentions, and only scale (or revisit cola) once clean-finish and repeat targets are met.

Participant Snapshots

Stack all

6 profiles

Martha Machuca

Martha Machuca is a 49-year-old public-sector supervisor in San Diego who runs a bilingual, single-parent household with a teen and a rescue dog. She balances stable income and union-backed benefits with careful budgeting and time efficiency. She values rel…

Rhonda Stull

Bilingual, community-focused public-sector analyst in San Jose. Married, childfree, mortgage-holder. Values reliability, transparency, and time savings. Balances demanding work with faith, family support, and practical routines. Privacy-conscious and outcom…

Amber Mansour

Bilingual education leader in rural North Carolina, 43, married with one child. Values equity, reliability, and time efficiency. Pragmatic, community-focused, and tech-savvy. Household wealth from spouse’s solar business; prioritizes durability, clear commu…

Carey Parra

Carey Parra is a bilingual 43-year-old Hispanic Jewish solutions analyst in Manchester, NH. Married, no kids, mortgage, frugal but quality-minded. Values privacy, community, simple routines, and dependable support. Chooses mid-tier, energy-efficient, repair…

Charity Musselman

1) Basic Demographics

Charity Musselman is a 49-year-old Brazilian-American woman living in Jacksonville city, Florida, USA. She is married, Catholic, born in the United States, and speaks English at home (with affectionate bursts of Portuguese o…

Jeralyn Reid

Warm, resourceful 41-year-old in rural Georgia, living on disability benefits with a rescue cat. Comfort-first, community-minded, tech cautious, and budget savvy. Loves porch time, crochet, slow cooking, clear pricing, and low-maintenance solutions.

Martha Machuca

Rhonda Stull

Amber Mansour

Carey Parra

Charity Musselman

1) Basic Demographics

Jeralyn Reid

Overview 0 participants

Sex / Gender

Race / Ethnicity

Locale (Top)

Occupations (Top)

Demographic Overview No agents selected

Age bucket	Male count	Female count

Participant locations No agents selected

Participant Incomes US benchmark scaled to group size

Income bucket	Participants	US households

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 1-year (Table B19001; >$200k evenly distributed for comparison)

Media Ingestion

Connections appear when personas follow many of the same sources, highlighting overlapping media diets.

Questions and Responses

Stack all

3 questions

Response Summaries

Stack all

3 questions

Word Cloud

Persona Correlations

Overview

Across the sample, stevia-based zero-sugar sodas are perceived as a modest sensory improvement over aspartame/sucralose but not a sugar-equivalent: a persistent grassy/bitter aftertaste on sip 2–3 is the primary barrier to repeat purchase. ‘Natural’-forward positioning (e.g., “Naturally delicious, not suspicious”) reads as defensive and drives label scrutiny rather than trust. Price sensitivity is high - a ~50% premium is unacceptable to most unless the product delivers clear sensory proof (especially when served ice-cold) or a specific flavor format (citrus, ginger, or culturally familiar flavors) effectively masks off-notes. Ingredient transparency and an opportunity to verify taste quickly (a cold sip or in-store sampling) are stronger levers than broad natural claims.

Total responses: 18

Key Segments

Segment	Attributes	Insight	Supporting Agents
Older, late-40s professionals	age range late 40s (~49) locations San Diego San Jose Jacksonville occupations Project Manager Data Analyst Dermatologist income examples $100k–$149k $200k–$299k $500k–$1M	Ritualistic buyers who perform a quick sensory check (label + cold sip) and prioritize verifiable sensory proof over marketing claims; unwilling to pay a premium if aftertaste persists.	Martha Machuca, Rhonda Stull, Charity Musselman
Rural, mid-40s, budget-constrained	age range 41–43 locations Rural GA Rural NC occupations Volunteer Caregiver Public Relations Manager income examples $10–24k $50–74k	Highly price-sensitive and skeptical of marketing; will try stevia only when situationally optimal (ice-cold, on sale) and will not accept a premium for marginal sensory gains.	Jeralyn Reid, Amber Mansour
Higher-education professionals	occupations Dermatologist Public Relations Manager Business Analyst Data Analyst education examples Bachelor Graduate	Demand clear ingredient-level transparency and see slogans as gimmicks; higher income does not predict willingness to pay without sensory or ingredient proof.	Charity Musselman, Amber Mansour, Carey Parra, Rhonda Stull
Hispanic / bilingual respondents	language Spanish Bilingual cues ethnicity examples Hispanic or Latino	More likely to accept stevia when presented in flavors or formats with cultural familiarity (e.g., guaraná) or flavor profiles (citrus/ginger) that mask off-notes; shorthand bilingual dismissal indicates quick heuristics unless taste aligns.	Carey Parra, Rhonda Stull, Amber Mansour, Martha Machuca
Health/utility-oriented consumers	occupations Volunteer Caregiver Nonprofit Data Analyst preferences sparkling water unsweet tea	Prefer straightforward low-sugar alternatives over premium 'natural' diet sodas and are likely to default to water/tea rather than pay for a stevia-sweetened soda that still shows off-notes.	Jeralyn Reid, Rhonda Stull

Shared Mindsets

Trait	Signal	Agents
Stevia seen as modest sensory upgrade	Across respondents stevia is generally preferred to harsher artificials but not experienced as 'real sugar'; it narrows the gap but does not close it.	Amber Mansour, Jeralyn Reid, Carey Parra, Charity Musselman, Martha Machuca, Rhonda Stull
Aftertaste is the decisive purchase breaker	Grassy/bitterness/licorice aftertaste on repeat sips is the main reason consumers decline to stock or pay more.	Jeralyn Reid, Amber Mansour, Carey Parra, Martha Machuca, Rhonda Stull, Charity Musselman
Skepticism toward broad 'natural' claims	Defensive-feeling taglines prompt label inspection and demand for ingredient-level clarity rather than delivering trust.	Jeralyn Reid, Amber Mansour, Carey Parra, Martha Machuca, Rhonda Stull, Charity Musselman
High price sensitivity without clear sensory or ingredient proof	Most will sample once but are unwilling to accept a significant premium unless taste and transparency are demonstrably better.	Jeralyn Reid, Amber Mansour, Carey Parra, Martha Machuca, Rhonda Stull, Charity Musselman
Context matters - cold service and flavor mask	Ice-cold serving and certain flavors (citrus, ginger, culturally familiar profiles) materially improve acceptability by masking stevia off-notes.	Amber Mansour, Carey Parra, Rhonda Stull, Martha Machuca

Divergences

Segment	Contrast	Agents
Higher-income professionals vs. budget-constrained rural consumers	Both are skeptical of marketing claims, but professionals demand ingredient transparency and sensory proof as a hygiene factor for paying more, while rural consumers link rejection more directly to price and are only open to trial under discount/ice-cold conditions.	Charity Musselman, Martha Machuca, Rhonda Stull, Jeralyn Reid, Amber Mansour
Hispanic/bilingual respondents vs. general sample	Hispanic respondents show conditional acceptance when flavor or cultural format masks off-notes (e.g., guaraná, citrus), whereas others judge stevia more holistically across formats.	Carey Parra, Rhonda Stull, Amber Mansour, Martha Machuca
High-income skeptics (anomaly) vs. expected income effect	At least one high-income, medically trained respondent resists paying a premium despite resources, indicating that sensory/format issues can override disposable-income tendencies.	Charity Musselman, Carey Parra

Recommendations & Next Steps

Overview

Stevia-based zero-sugar sodas are perceived as a modest upgrade over aspartame/sucralose but suffer a grassy/bitter aftertaste by sip 2–3. "Naturally delicious, not suspicious" reads as defensive and triggers label-scrutiny, not trust. A 50% price premium is rejected; consumers might accept a ≤10–15% premium only if taste is clean and trial is ice-cold. Acceptance improves with ice-cold service and citrus/ginger flavors; cola is weakest. Focus on sensory finish, plain-language transparency, cold trial, and value-aligned pricing.

Quick Wins (next 2–4 weeks)

#	Action	Why	Owner	Effort	Impact
1	Retire the defensive tagline and switch to plain-language claims	“Naturally delicious, not suspicious” triggers distrust; shoppers want ingredient-level clarity.	Brand/Comms	Low	High
2	Mandate ice-cold trial and callouts	Ice-cold service masks off-notes and improves acceptance at first purchase.	Sales/Trade Marketing	Med	High
3	Lead with citrus/ginger; de-emphasize cola in displays	Citrus/ginger mask stevia better; cola magnifies aftertaste.	Product/Category	Med	High
4	Reset price architecture (cap premium ≤15%) and add single-can trial	50% premium is DOA; single-can promo enables low-risk trial.	Revenue Management/Sales	Med	High
5	Add a concise transparency panel + QR	Shoppers want exact sweetener and what “natural flavors” means.	Digital/Regulatory	Low	Med
6	Adopt a “sip-three” internal sensory gate	Aftertaste emerges by sip 2–3; use it as a release criterion.	R&D/QA	Low	High

Initiatives (30–90 days)

#	Initiative	Description	Owner	Timeline	Dependencies
1	Sensory Optimization for Clean Finish	Run fast formulation sprints to reduce grassy/bitter linger by sip 3 in priority flavors. Tune flavor-acid balance, carbonation, and serving-temp guidance. Use an internal sip-three score as a gate. Focus: citrus/ginger first; pause cola until pass. Consumer CLTs with ice-cold samples only.	R&D	0–90 days sprints; 90–120 days in-market pilot	Supplier flavor support, Sensory panel scheduling, QA protocols
2	Flavor Portfolio Focus + Cultural Pilot	Make citrus and ginger the hero SKUs; test a guaraná pilot in Hispanic-leaning doors where cultural familiarity may offset off-notes. Stage-gate on velocity and finish scores.	Product Marketing	60–150 days (pilot launches by day 150)	Sensory Optimization for Clean Finish, Distributor alignment, Localized insights
3	Trust-by-Transparency Comms System	Replace defensive slogans with plain language: “Sweetened with stevia leaf extract. No artificial sweeteners or colors.” Add a back-panel mini-glossary and QR to an ingredient page. Create a copy style guide banning negations and vague “natural” fluff.	Brand/Comms + Regulatory	0–60 days messaging; 60–90 days packaging/asset updates	Legal/regulatory review, Printer/pack lead times, Digital landing page
4	Cold Trial Engine (Sampling + Fridge-First)	Drive ice-cold single-can trial via refrigerated placement, cafe/fitness partnerships, and field sampling scripts. Use BOGOs and QR coupons to encourage repeat within 2 weeks. Include a 3-can variety mini-pack for home trial.	Growth/Trade Marketing	45–180 days across top doors	Budget approval, Retailer programs, Sampling logistics
5	Pricing & Promo Architecture	Set EDLP index at ≤15% over Coke/Pepsi Zero; align promo cadence to reach parity quarterly. Prioritize single-can and variety mini-pack offers; avoid case-size premiums until repeat is proven.	Revenue Management	0–45 days design; 60–120 days rollout	Finance sign-off, Retailer negotiations, Promo calendar
6	Measurement & Rapid Learning Loop	Instrument trial→repeat, aftertaste mentions, message recall, cold placement coverage, and sampling ROI. Run A/B on pack claims and landing pages; iterate monthly.	Insights/Analytics	Set up in 30 days; monthly reads at 30/60/90	POS/loyalty data access, Survey partner, Field reporting

KPIs to Track

#	KPI	Definition	Target	Frequency
1	Trial-to-Repeat Conversion (30 days)	% of first-time buyers who purchase again within 30 days (loyalty/panel matchback)	≥25% (citrus/ginger), ≥15% (cola pilot)	Monthly
2	Aftertaste Complaint Rate	% of feedback/reviews mentioning grassy/bitter/licorice aftertaste	<5% by day 90 per SKU	Monthly
3	Message Clarity & Trust	% of shoppers who correctly recall sweetener and no artificial sweeteners/colors; % calling copy defensive	≥70% correct recall; ≤10% defensive sentiment	Quarterly
4	Cold Placement Coverage	% of priority doors with refrigerated single-can placement	60% of top 200 doors by day 120	Monthly
5	Price Index vs Big Zeroes	Shelf single-can price premium over Coke Zero/Pepsi Zero	≤15% premium; parity in promos 1 of 4 weeks	Monthly
6	Sampling ROI	Incremental units sold within 14 days per sample distributed	≥1.5x	Monthly during activations

Risks & Mitigations

#	Risk	Mitigation	Owner
1	Aftertaste persists despite optimization, limiting repeat	Stage-gate SKUs on sip-three score; prioritize citrus/ginger; pause cola; run fast CLTs before scale	R&D
2	Transparency fails if wording remains vague or defensive	Ban negations; publish ingredient glossary; add QR details; pre-test copy A/B for trust lift	Brand/Comms + Regulatory
3	Retailers resist refrigerated or single-can placement	Offer data-backed sell stories, intro allowances, and small-footprint coolers; seed on-premise partners first	Sales/Trade Marketing
4	Margin pressure from lower premium and trade spend	Optimize COGS (pack/format), focus on high-velocity SKUs, gate promotions to ROI ≥1.5x	Finance/Revenue Management
5	Over-focusing on niche flavors reduces mainstream appeal	Maintain a single mainstream profile only after sensory pass; set velocity thresholds to continue	Product Marketing
6	Small qual sample misguides national moves	Run quick quant (n≥300) and 2-market pilots before broad rollout	Insights

Timeline

0–30 days: Retire tagline; launch transparency copy/QR; set KPIs; design pricing architecture; start sensory sprints; line up cold trial pilots.

31–90 days: Packaging/asset updates; execute refrigerated single-can trials; roll out citrus/ginger with sensory pass; A/B message tests; first KPI read.

91–180 days: Expand cold placement to top doors; launch variety mini-pack; regional guaraná pilot; refine pricing/promo cadence; iterate formulas as needed.

6–12 months: Scale winning SKUs/channels; reassess cola viability; optimize trade spend to profitable repeat; refresh comms with validated claims.

Research Study Narrative

Zevia Zero-Sugar Soda Perception Study: Executive Synthesis

Objective: Understand how consumers perceive stevia-sweetened sodas versus other zero-sugar options, and whether a “natural” positioning resonates enough to drive trial, stocking, and premium pricing.

What we heard across questions

Stevia is a modest upgrade vs. aspartame/sucralose, not a winner. Many preferred stevia’s “less chemical” association yet remained lukewarm: “Better, but I still don’t love it.” (Amber Mansour).
The decisive barrier is the stevia finish by sip 2–3. A grassy/bitter/licorice aftertaste consistently limits enjoyment and repeat: “That stevia aftertaste rolls in…” (Jeralyn Reid). Several will not stock at home (Martha Machuca).
Context materially shifts acceptance. Ice-cold serving masks off-notes (“If it’s ice-cold, I’ll tolerate it.” – Rhonda Stull). Citrus/ginger flavors help; cola tends to expose flaws (Carey Parra).
“Naturally delicious, not suspicious” backfires. The negation plants doubt: “Sounds defensive.” (Jeralyn Reid); “‘Not suspicious’ plants suspicion.” (Rhonda Stull). Shoppers instead want ingredient-level clarity on sweeteners and “natural flavors.”
Price premiums are rejected at 50%. Taste outweighs label benefits; consumers reallocate spend to other categories and opt for seltzer/water. “Halo tax on the word ‘natural.’” (Charity Musselman). Conditional openness exists only with clean taste, ice-cold trial, masking flavors, and a far smaller premium (~10–20%; Carey Parra).

Persona correlations and nuances

Older, late-40s professionals (San Diego/San Jose/Jacksonville): ritual “label + cold sip” testers; will not pay more if aftertaste persists (Martha Machuca, Rhonda Stull, Charity Musselman).
Rural, budget-constrained (GA/NC): highly price-sensitive; open only when on sale and ice-cold; default to sparkling water/unsweet tea (Jeralyn Reid, Amber Mansour).
Higher-education professionals: demand transparent ingredients; dismiss slogans as gimmicks; income does not overcome sensory doubts (Charity Musselman, Amber Mansour, Carey Parra, Rhonda Stull).
Hispanic/bilingual respondents: more accepting when flavors align culturally (e.g., guaraná) or mask off-notes (citrus/ginger); quick bilingual dismissal if not convinced (Amber Mansour, Martha Machuca, Carey Parra, Rhonda Stull).

Implications and recommendations

Retire defensive copy. Replace the tagline with plain language: “Sweetened with stevia leaf extract. No artificial sweeteners or colors.” Add a mini-glossary and QR for details.
Engineer the finish. Prioritize formulation sprints to reduce grassy/bitter linger by sip three; tune acid, flavor, carbonation; gate launches on a “sip-three” score.
Lead with flavors that mask off-notes. Make citrus and ginger hero SKUs; de-emphasize cola until finish scores pass. Pilot guaraná in Hispanic-leaning doors.
Cold-first trial. Ensure refrigerated single-can placement and ice-cold sampling; introduce a 3-can variety mini-pack for low-risk home trial.
Value-aligned pricing. Cap everyday premiums at ≤10–15% vs. Coke/Pepsi Zero; use promos to reach parity periodically. Avoid asking shoppers to “pay extra for a rhyme.”

Risks and mitigations

Aftertaste persists → Stage-gate SKUs on sip-three pass; prioritize citrus/ginger; pause cola.
Transparency still reads defensive → Ban negations; pre-test copy A/B; publish ingredient glossary via QR.
Limited cold placement → Offer small-footprint coolers, intro allowances, and on-premise seeding to build a sell story.
Margin pressure from lower premium → Focus on high-velocity SKUs, optimize COGS, and gate trade to ROI ≥1.5x.

Next steps (0–180 days)

0–30 days: Replace tagline with plain-language claims; set KPIs; design ≤15% price architecture; begin sensory sprints; plan cold sampling and single-can trials.
31–90 days: Update packaging/assets and QR; execute refrigerated single-can trials; launch citrus/ginger SKUs that pass sip-three; A/B test copy.
91–180 days: Expand cold placement; launch variety mini-pack; pilot guaraná regionally; refine formulas and promo cadence based on first KPI read.

Measurement guardrails

Trial-to-repeat (30 days): ≥25% for citrus/ginger; ≥15% for cola pilot.
Aftertaste complaint rate: <5% of reviews mentioning grassy/bitter/licorice by SKU within 90 days.
Message clarity/trust: ≥70% correct recall of sweetener and “no artificial” claim; ≤10% call copy “defensive.”
Cold placement coverage: 60% of top 200 doors with refrigerated single-can placement by day 120.
Price index vs. Big Zeroes: ≤15% everyday premium; promo parity 1 in 4 weeks.

Recommended Follow-up Questions Updated Jan 12, 2026

Among these attributes of zero-sugar sodas, which are most and least important to you? Attributes: upfront taste, no lingering aftertaste, "no artificial sweeteners" claim, ingredient transparency, flavor variety, price, brand trust, caffeine level, carbonation bite.

maxdiff Prioritize product and messaging focus by quantifying the importance of aftertaste versus “natural” claims and price.
Which flavor families would you be most likely to buy in a stevia-sweetened soda? Rank your top five: lemon-lime, grapefruit, ginger/ginger beer, orange, citrus mix, cola, root beer, cream soda/vanilla, cherry, berry, tropical, grape.

rank Guide flavor roadmap toward profiles that mask off-notes and de-prioritize low-interest flavors.
How would each sweetener approach affect your likelihood to try/buy a zero-sugar soda? Rate each on a 5-point scale from "much less likely" to "much more likely": stevia leaf extract only; stevia + monk fruit; stevia + erythritol; monk fruit only; allulose only; allulose + monk fruit; sucralose; aspartame; ace-K blend.

matrix Inform formulation and labeling by identifying sweetener systems that increase trial likelihood.
Which on-pack details would increase your trust enough to try a stevia-sweetened soda? Select all that apply: lists specific natural flavor sources (e.g., lemon oil), explains what "natural flavors" means, names exact sweeteners used, states "no artificial sweeteners (aspartame/sucralose/ace-K)", Non-GMO Project Verified, organic, discloses caffeine amount and source, states "no sugar alcohols", shows full ingredient list front-of-pack, QR code to sourcing details, none of these.

multi select Design transparent packaging claims that build trust without defensive wording.
Assuming the taste is acceptable to you, what maximum price premium (as a percentage) over Coke Zero/Pepsi Zero would you be willing to pay for a single can?

numeric Set pricing and promotion thresholds; quantify acceptable premium to minimize trial barriers.
How would each serving condition affect your willingness to drink a stevia-sweetened soda? Rate on a 5-point scale from "much less likely" to "much more likely": ice-cold from fridge, poured over ice, extra-high carbonation, squeeze of fresh citrus, with spicy/salty food, poured into glass, room temperature.

matrix Codify serving and sampling guidance that materially increases acceptance and repeat purchase.

Include a brief definition/anchor for each scale. Provide a “none of these” option where applicable to avoid forced choices.

Study Overview Updated Jan 12, 2026

News & Media

Source	Weight

Zevia Zero-Sugar Soda Perception Study

Martha Machuca

Rhonda Stull

Amber Mansour

Carey Parra

Charity Musselman

1) Basic Demographics

Jeralyn Reid

Martha Machuca

Rhonda Stull

Amber Mansour

Carey Parra

Charity Musselman

1) Basic Demographics

Jeralyn Reid

Sex / Gender

Race / Ethnicity

Locale (Top)

Occupations (Top)

Summary

Themes

Outliers

Overview

Key Segments

Shared Mindsets

Divergences

Overview

Quick Wins (next 2–4 weeks)

Initiatives (30–90 days)

KPIs to Track

Risks & Mitigations

Timeline

Zevia Zero-Sugar Soda Perception Study: Executive Synthesis

What we heard across questions

Persona correlations and nuances

Implications and recommendations

Risks and mitigations

Next steps (0–180 days)

Measurement guardrails

Distinct Market Research Groups

Marketing Reports Generated

Digital Twin Synthetic Personas

Questions Answered