⚠ A Recipe Rivals Can ApproximateLow threat

Coca-Cola (KO) — threat to the moat

The taste can be approximated by anyone — only the name is protected.

The honest limit of the formula as a moat is that the taste is not legally protected and not truly secret in any protective sense. Pepsi exists, tastes broadly similar, and has for over a century; countless private-label and regional colas approximate the flavor closely and sell for a fraction of the price. If the moat were the recipe, it would be a shallow one, because the recipe can be approximated by anyone with a lab. What actually protects Coca-Cola is the brand and the trademark, not the chemistry.

Sparkling soft drinks share of unit case volume, 2025 (%)69%Worldwide61%United States70%Outside the U.S.Coca-Cola Form 10-K FY2025
Sparkling drinks, the easiest thing to imitate, are still seven cases in ten.

This matters because it locates the real vulnerability correctly. Coca-Cola is not threatened by someone cracking the formula — that would change little — but it is perpetually pressured at the margin by cheaper near-substitutes that taste close enough, especially when consumers are stretched and trading down, or when a retailer pushes its own-label cola at half the price. The formula's mystique is lovely marketing, but it is the brand doing the defending. Strip the romance away and cola is a commodity taste — which is exactly why the billions spent maintaining the brand, not guarding the vault, are what keep the moat filled — the New Coke episode settled that question in months1.

References
  1. ReportedThe New Coke episode settled the question in months.
    Coca-Cola heritage — first mixed by pharmacist John Pemberton in Atlanta, 1886; the 1985 'New Coke' reformulation and consumer revolt that restored the original formula within months — 1886 / 1985 · source ↗
Sources
Generated September 23, 2026