La Petite Labs · Research
Pet Supplement Statistics / 2026 edition
Pet Supplement Statistics
2026 editionUpdated October 2026
What’s actually happening inside the pet supplement aisle.
Original research on the ingredients, doses, lab testing, clinical evidence and expert claims behind today’s dog and cat supplements.
Based on 145 dog and cat supplement reviews and a separate audit of 56 brands (May–July 2026), and a census of 2,865 supplements from 195 brands (October 2026).
61%
of reviewed entries didn’t list the amount of every active ingredient.
89 of 145 product reviews
92%
had no public lab report or batch lookup.
133 of 145 product reviews
1 in 145
had a published clinical trial on the actual product being sold.
144 of 145 had none
Find a statistic
63 numbers on the pet supplement aisle, ready to quote.
Search, or pick a topic. Each number comes with the count behind it, a sentence you can paste and a link to the chapter that explains it.
61%
89 of 145 product reviews
of reviewed entries didn’t list the amount of every active ingredient.
74%
40 of 54 all-in-one reviews
of all-in-one reviewed entries didn’t list every amount.
92%
133 of 145 product reviews
of reviewed entries had no public lab report or batch lookup.
77%
111 of 145 product reviews
of reviewed entries said they were made in the USA.
>99%
144 of 145 product reviews
of reviewed entries had no published clinical trial on the product itself.
41%
23 of 56 brands
of brands had gaps in identifying the experts behind their products.
38%
21 of 56 brands
of brands had no named vet, scientist or formulator recorded in the reviewed materials.
31%
17 of 54 product reviews
of cat-category reviewed entries were recorded as marketed to both cats and dogs.
50%
6 of 12 product reviews
of cat skin-and-coat category entries were recorded as marketed to both cats and dogs.
47 of 56
brands audited
brands had no public lab report or lookup.
7 of 56
brands audited
brands had a lab report or lookup tied to a specific batch, so you can match it to what you bought.
73%
143 of 195 brands
of brands sell at least one product with an ingredient from six human-wellness trends: collagen, adaptogens, functional mushrooms, cognitive ingredients, postbiotics and NAD+ precursors.
10 of 10
brands with the largest ranges
of the brands with the most supplements sell at least one of these trend ingredients. So do 31 of the 34 brands that sell 20 or more.
28%
803 of 2,865 supplements
of all supplements contain at least one of these trend ingredients. Most brands add a trend product or two rather than rebuilding their range.
3 of 143
brands selling trend ingredients
also sell supplements for people. Pet brands, not human supplement brands, are bringing these trends to pets.
48%
94 of 195 brands
of brands sell a collagen or connective-tissue ingredient, the most widespread of the six trends.
37%
73 of 195 brands
of brands sell an adaptogen such as ashwagandha.
35%
69 of 195 brands
of brands sell a functional mushroom such as lion’s mane, reishi or turkey tail.
30 of 40
fastest-rising human ingredients, 2016–2025
are already in at least one pet supplement. The other 10, including Urolithin A, Spermidine and Fisetin, haven’t arrived yet.
7 years
17 ingredients dated in both markets
is the typical gap between an ingredient catching on in human supplements and catching on in pet supplements (the first year at least three brands sold it). Pet supplements came second for 16 of the 17, and none came first.
36 of 64
human-wellness ingredients tracked
have no randomised controlled trial in dogs that we could find (19 of the 37 in the six trends).
32 of 64
human-wellness ingredients tracked
have no study in live cats at all (17 of the 37 in the six trends).
16 of 16
ingredients sold by 10 or more brands
of the most widely sold ingredients we tracked have at least one study in live dogs.
23
randomised trials in cats, every tracked ingredient
randomised controlled trials in cats across every ingredient we track, against 134 in dogs. 22 of the cat trials date from 2016 or later.
36%
115 of 317 vs 71 of 295 supplements
of trend-ingredient supplements say “clinically studied” or “science-backed” without naming a study, against 24% of other supplements.
61%
60 of 98 mushroom supplements
of mushroom supplements don’t say whether they use the mushroom itself (the fruiting body) or its root-like mycelium.
2.1%
59 of 2,865 supplements
of supplements claim healthy ageing or longevity as a benefit.
8 of 195
brands
brands sell an NAD+ precursor such as NR or NMN, up from 1 brand in 2023.
1
dog studies of NAD+ precursors
trial in dogs for the whole NAD+ precursor family: a precursor combined with a senolytic, in 70 senior dogs (2024). NMN also has a short safety study in beagles; we found no study of nicotinamide riboside alone in dogs or cats.
2.7%
78 of 2,865 supplements
of supplements name older animals in the product name. Half of those are joint products.
21%
66 of 317 vs 37 of 295 product pages
of trend-ingredient product pages use ageing-biology words such as “cellular”, “mitochondria” or “NAD”, against 12% of other pages.
14%
390 of 2,865 supplements
of pet supplements are made only for cats. 33% are labelled for dogs and cats, and 49% for dogs only.
80%
157 of 195 brands
of brands sell at least one supplement for cats.
7 to 1
430 vs 65 supplements
dog-only to cat-only joint supplements. Dental runs 8 to 1. Hairballs are the one job cats lead: 42 cat-only supplements, 2 dog-only.
9%
55 of 592 dogs-and-cats products
of products labelled for dogs and cats give a dog amount but no cat amount.
5 months
276 brand and ingredient pairs
is how long the cat version of an ingredient takes to follow the dog version within the same brand, at the median. Cats came later in 180 of 276 cases.
14%
13 of 92 cat reviews
of cat owners who say whether their pet ate the supplement report a refusal, against 2% of dog owners.
36 mg
212 ingredient panels that print amounts
is the median printed amount per ingredient in formulas with 11 or more actives, against 200 mg in formulas with 1–5 (vitamins and minerals aside).
33%
ingredients with a printed amount
of the ingredients in formulas with 11 or more actives are printed at under 10 mg, against 4.6% in formulas with 1–5.
50%
full ingredient panels, weighted
of formulas with 11 or more actives use a proprietary blend, against 26% of formulas with 1–5. A blend prints a total, not each ingredient’s amount.
5
438 full ingredient panels
active ingredients in the median pet supplement. 18% list 11 or more; the longest list we counted had 64.
3 of 31
brands with three or more full panels
brands printed every ingredient amount on every product we read. 4 never did; 24 were mixed.
29%
200 supplements coded by hand
of pet supplements are soft chews, the most common format, ahead of powders (22.5%) and liquids or drops (13%).
29%
59 cat-only supplements coded by hand
of supplements made only for cats are powders, against 18% for dogs only. Soft chews are 22% for cats and 42% for dogs.
14%
39 soft chews that print both weights
of a soft chew’s weight is active ingredients, at the median. The rest is what makes it a chew.
93%
318 soft chews that list inactive ingredients
of soft chews include glycerin, which keeps them soft. 78% list an ingredient that’s there for taste, such as liver powder, chicken broth or brewer’s yeast.
13
318 soft chews
inactive ingredients in the median soft chew.
1 of 419
pet probiotics that print a live-culture count
say the count holds through the expiry date. On a sample of US human probiotic labels with a count, 27% do.
23%
671 of 2,865 supplements
of supplements name a disease or diagnosis in their own product description.
74+
product pages from 27 brands
product pages describe the product as acting against a named disease. This is a hand-checked minimum.
1.3%
19 brands’ catalogs, 2022 vs 2026
of product names mentioned a disease in 2026, down from 4% in 2022. The descriptions still do.
33%
940 of 2,865 supplements
of supplements claim to support digestion, the most common job, ahead of skin and coat (27%), immune health (26%) and joints (25%).
$1.00
545 dog supplements priced
a day is the median price for a 50-lb dog at the label amount, about $30 a month.
$0.44
75 cat supplements priced
a day is the median price for a 10-lb cat, about $13 a month.
$0.94–$1.24
median for each format
a day across every format, from oils to powders. Format barely changes the price.
38%
brands with three or more priced supplements
more per day is what brands that use clinical or research wording charge, comparing each brand’s median price.
30 days
545 dog supplements priced
is how long the median pack lasts a 50-lb dog. 31% run out sooner.
85%
907 of 1,071 rated supplements
of supplements rated on the brand’s own site average 4.5 stars or higher. 23% show a perfect 5.0.
40%
269 of 681 products, 19 brands
of the products these brands sold in 2022 were no longer listed in 2026. The same brands added 321 new ones.
63%
879 Google Shopping listings
of Google Shopping listing slots for 54 everyday dog supplement searches went to marketplaces and big retailers.
189
companies behind 195 brands
companies own the 195 brands in our census. The five largest hold 18% of the supplements on sale.
5%
29 of 609 supplements with vet wording
of supplements that say “vet-formulated” or “vet-recommended” name the vet on the product page.
0
121 fully printed panels compared
identical recipes sold by different companies. Brands share suppliers and ingredients, not finished formulas.
What’s actually on the label?
More ingredients don’t necessarily mean more information.
61% of reviewed entries left out the amount of at least one active ingredient. For all-in-one supplements, it was 74%.
61%
89 of 145 product reviews
didn’t list the amount of every active ingredient.
74%
40 of 54 all-in-one reviews
of all-in-one reviewed entries didn’t list every amount.
One product we reviewed
39 active ingredients.
Zero amounts listed.
38 of its 39 active ingredients were grouped into 8 “proprietary blends,” which don’t say how much of each ingredient is inside. The remaining one was listed on its own, also with no amount.
38 in 8 proprietary blends
On its own · 1
What can shoppers actually verify?
“Made in the USA” was easy to find. Lab reports were not.
111
Said “Made in the USA” · of 145 reviews
12
Public lab report or batch lookup · of 145 reviews
For every reviewed entry with a public lab report or batch lookup, about nine said “Made in the USA.”
“Made in the USA” tells you where a product was made. A lab report tells you what’s actually in it.
A country-of-origin claim doesn’t replace a public lab report.
Was the product itself studied?
144 versus 1.
Of 145 product reviews, only one had a published clinical trial on the actual product being sold.
Research on an ingredient isn’t research on the product.
An ingredient can have published research behind it. That doesn’t mean the full formula — at the dose and in the form you’re buying — has ever been studied.
Who is the expert?
“Formulated by vets.” Which vets?
41%
23 of 56 brands
of brands had gaps in identifying the experts behind their products.
38%
21 of 56 brands
had no named vet, scientist or formulator recorded in the reviewed materials.
Examples from the reviewed materials: “Formulated by vets,” or a “team of veterinarians,” with no vet named. The 41% figure uses the report’s unnamed-experts flag; it includes absent expert disclosure and claims without a named expert linked to them.
The cat question
How cat-specific is the cat supplement aisle?
50%
6 of 12 product reviews
of cat skin-and-coat category entries were recorded as marketed to both cats and dogs.
31%
17 of 54 product reviews
of all cat-category reviewed entries were recorded as marketed to both cats and dogs.
Cat skin & coat stood out.
Half of cat skin-and-coat category entries were recorded as marketed to both cats and dogs, compared with about one in four in the other two cat categories.
Share marketed to both species
Cat skin & coat6 / 12
Other two cat categories11 / 42
The all-in-one effect
More in the formula. Less on the label.
All-in-one reviews · 40 of 54
74%
All other reviews · 49 of 91
54%
A 20-point gap.
All-in-one reviewed entries were about 1.4 times as likely as other supplement entries to leave out at least one ingredient amount.
The lab report gap
Most brands don’t show their lab work.
In a separate audit of 56 brands:
47of 56
brands had no public lab report or lookup.
9of 56
had a public lab report or lookup.
7of 56
had a report or lookup tied to a specific batch, so you can match it to what you bought.
The numbers at a glance
Nine findings.
61%
89 / 145
of reviewed entries didn’t list the amount of every active ingredient.
74%
40 / 54
of all-in-one reviewed entries didn’t list every amount.
92%
133 / 145
of reviewed entries had no public lab report or batch lookup.
>99%
144 / 145
of reviewed entries had no published clinical trial on the product itself.
77%
111 / 145
of reviewed entries said they were made in the USA.
41%
23 / 56
of brands had gaps in identifying the experts behind their products.
38%
21 / 56
of brands had no named vet, scientist or formulator recorded in the reviewed materials.
31%
17 / 54
of cat-category reviewed entries were recorded as marketed to both cats and dogs.
50%
6 / 12
of cat skin-and-coat category entries were recorded as marketed to both cats and dogs.
Do pet brands follow human wellness trends?
Most pet supplement brands are following human wellness trends.
We tracked six ingredient trends from the human supplement aisle: collagen, adaptogens such as ashwagandha, functional mushrooms, cognitive ingredients, postbiotics and NAD+ precursors. Then we checked every product from the 195 brands in our 2026 census.
73%
143 of 195 brands
of brands sell at least one product with one of these ingredients.
10 of 10
brands with the largest ranges
of the brands with the most supplements sell at least one of these trend ingredients. So do 31 of the 34 brands that sell 20 or more.
Following human trends is mainstream, not niche.
Big catalogs and small ones sell these ingredients alike. Yet trend products are only 28% of the supplements on the shelf (803 of 2,865): most brands add a trend product or two rather than rebuild their range around it. And it’s pet brands doing it. Only 3 of 143 brands selling these ingredients also sell supplements for people.
Brands selling each trend · of 195
Collagen & connective tissue94 · 48%
Adaptogens, such as ashwagandha73 · 37%
Functional mushrooms69 · 35%
Cognitive ingredients63 · 32%
Postbiotics36 · 18%
NAD+ precursors, such as NR and NMN8 · 4%
“Largest ranges” means the most distinct supplements in our census. Collagen here includes collagen peptides, undenatured type II collagen (UC-II), eggshell membrane and hyaluronic acid.
Which human trends have crossed over?
30 of 40 fast-rising human supplement ingredients are already sold for pets.
We ranked the 40 ingredients growing fastest in US human supplements from 2016 to 2025, then looked for each one in the 2026 pet supplement census.
Pet supplements pick up human trends about 7 years later.
We dated each ingredient twice: the year it caught on in human supplements, and the year it caught on in pet supplements. “Caught on” means the first year at least three brands were selling it. We could date both for 17 ingredients; the rest were already common in human supplements before our records begin, or aren’t yet sold by enough pet brands. Pet supplements came second for 16 of the 17, 1 caught on in both in the same year, and none reached pets first. The typical gap was 7 years. Both dates are the earliest we can find, so treat the gap as approximate; the order held in every check we ran. That makes today’s human supplement trends a fair guide to the pet aisle a few years from now. The 10 fast risers that haven’t arrived yet, such as Urolithin A, Spermidine and Fisetin, are the ones to watch.
First year 3+ brands sold it · people → pets
Lion's mane2012 → 2020 · 8 years
Collagen peptides2017 → 2020 · 3 years
Chaga2012 → 2021 · 9 years
Eggshell membrane2014 → 2020 · 6 years
UC-II collagen2012 → 2024 · 12 years
NMN2020 → 2026 · 6 years
Tremella2012 → 2025 · 13 years
Nicotinamide riboside2018 → 2025 · 7 years
Fastest-rising means the biggest growth from 2016 to 2025 across new US supplement labels (NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database), human clinical trials, public interest and industry trend reports. The human start is the first year three or more brands added the ingredient to new US supplement labels; the pet start is the first year three or more pet brands had it on sale. Dates are the earliest we could confirm from each store’s records and archived copies of its pages, so they show when a product was on sale, not its launch date.
Does the research come with them?
The ingredients crossed over. Much of the dog and cat research didn’t.
We searched PubMed, Europe PMC and OpenAlex for dog and cat studies of all 64 ingredients we track: the six trends from chapter 09 and the fast-rising ingredients from chapter 10.
36of 64
ingredients have no randomised controlled trial in dogs that we could find. In the six trends alone, it’s 19 of 37.
32of 64
have no study in live cats at all (17 of the 37 trend ingredients).
16of 16
of the most widely sold ingredients we tracked (sold by 10 or more brands) have at least one study in live dogs. The gap is between some research and a randomised trial in the animal it’s sold for.
Most brands don’t cite the wrong study. They cite none.
We expected brands to lean on human or lab research as if it applied to dogs. That was rare: of the 21 trend-ingredient supplements that named a study, 12 pointed to research in dogs or cats and only 2 relied solely on other species. The common pattern was research language with no study named at all.
Say “clinically studied” or “science-backed” without naming a study
Supplements with a trend ingredient36% · 115 of 317
Other supplements24% · 71 of 295
134
randomised controlled trials in dogs across every ingredient we track, with a median of 26 dogs each.
23
in cats. 22 of them were published in 2016 or later: cat research is new.
61% of mushroom supplements don’t say which part of the mushroom they use.
The fruiting body (the mushroom itself) and the root-like mycelium are different materials. 60 of 98 pet mushroom supplements don’t say which they contain, and only 10 state their beta-glucan content, the usual measure of a mushroom extract’s strength.
Research counts say which studies exist in each species, not whether an ingredient works or is safe. A study “in live dogs” means the animals themselves were given the ingredient, rather than cells in a lab. Trials of a blend count toward each ingredient in it, and are marked in the data.
Look up an ingredient
64 ingredients from human wellness: who sells them, and what research exists in dogs and cats.
Every ingredient from the six trends and the fast-rising list in chapters 09–11, with how many brands sell it, since when, and the studies we found in dogs and in cats. Sort any column, or tap a row for detail.
| Hyaluronic acidCollagen & connective tissue | 66 | 21 | 2015 | 2 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| TheanineCognitive ingredients · #21 human riser | 49 | 27 | 2017 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera)Adaptogens · #4 human riser | 48 | 25 | 2017 | 4 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| AstragalusAdaptogens | 44 | 21 | 2016 | 2 randomised trials | 2 randomised trials |
| Reishi (Ganoderma)Functional mushrooms | 44 | 23 | 2016 | 2 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| Turkey tail (Trametes versicolor)Functional mushrooms · #19 human riser | 41 | 22 | 2019 | 2 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| Lion's mane (Hericium erinaceus)Functional mushrooms · #7 human riser | 33 | 12 | 2019 | 1 randomised trial | 1 randomised trial |
| Maitake (Grifola frondosa)Functional mushrooms | 32 | 18 | 2019 | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| Shiitake (Lentinula edodes)Functional mushrooms | 32 | 17 | 2019 | 1 randomised trial | None found |
| Collagen peptidesCollagen & connective tissue · #17 human riser | 30 | 14 | 2020 | 3 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| Chaga (Inonotus obliquus)Functional mushrooms · #40 human riser | 24 | 11 | 2016 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| Eggshell membraneCollagen & connective tissue | 24 | 6 | 2019 | 4 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| Ginkgo bilobaCognitive ingredients | 18 | 10 | 2018 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| EleutheroAdaptogens | 15 | 11 | 2017 | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| GinsengAdaptogens | 13 | 6 | 2017 | 2 randomised trials | None found |
| UC-II collagen (undenatured type II)Collagen & connective tissue | 12 | 6 | 2019 | 7 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| PhosphatidylserineCognitive ingredients | 9 | 3 | 2019 | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| SchisandraAdaptogens | 9 | 6 | 2018 | None found | None found |
| Bacillus clausiiOther fast-rising ingredients · #27 human riser | 8 | 4 | 2023 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| Pea proteinOther fast-rising ingredients · #20 human riser | 8 | 2 | 2017 | 1 randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| ElderberryOther fast-rising ingredients · #13 human riser | 6 | 4 | 2022 | None found | None found |
| Fulvic AcidOther fast-rising ingredients · #35 human riser | 6 | 2 | 2015 | None found | None found |
| Bacopa monnieriCognitive ingredients · #15 human riser | 5 | 4 | 2022 | 1 randomised trial | None found |
| MoringaOther fast-rising ingredients · #24 human riser | 5 | 3 | 2016 | 2 randomised trials | Studies, no randomised trial |
| Agaricus blazeiFunctional mushrooms | 4 | 3 | 2021 | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| NMN (nicotinamide mononucleotide)NAD+ precursors · #1 human riser | 4 | 1 | 2024 | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| TremellaFunctional mushrooms | 4 | 2 | 2021 | None found | None found |
| Holy basil (tulsi)Adaptogens | 3 | 2 | 2019 | None found | Studies, no randomised trial |
| LavenderOther fast-rising ingredients · #11 human riser | 3 | 2 | 2022 | None found | None found |
| MacaAdaptogens | 3 | 1 | 2013 | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| Nicotinamide ribosideNAD+ precursors · #38 human riser | 3 | 2 | 2023 | None found | None found |
| Rhodiola roseaAdaptogens | 3 | 1 | 2018 | None found | Studies, no randomised trial |
| ShilajitOther fast-rising ingredients · #8 human riser | 3 | 0 | 2017 | 1 randomised trial | None found |
| Black seed oil (Nigella sativa)Other fast-rising ingredients · #28 human riser | 2 | 2 | 2016 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| Medium Chain TriglyceridesCognitive ingredients | 2 | 0 | 2025 | 7 randomised trials | 2 randomised trials |
| Alpha-GPCCognitive ingredients | 1 | 0 | 2020 | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| KefirOther fast-rising ingredients · #9 human riser | 1 | 0 | 2022 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| Magnesium threonateOther fast-rising ingredients · #12 human riser | 1 | 0 | 2024 | None found | None found |
| NAD+ (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide)NAD+ precursors · #29 human riser | 1 | 0 | 2026 | None found | None found |
| White MulberryOther fast-rising ingredients · #32 human riser | 1 | 1 | 2018 | 1 randomised trial | None found |
| FisetinOther fast-rising ingredients · #10 human riser | 0 | 0 | — | None found | None found |
| LuteolinOther fast-rising ingredients · #34 human riser | 0 | 0 | — | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| NicotinamideOther fast-rising ingredients · #37 human riser | 0 | 0 | — | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| Akkermansia muciniphilaOther fast-rising ingredients · #25 human riser | — | — | — | 1 randomised trial | None found |
| ApoaequorinCognitive ingredients | — | — | — | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| Shatavari (Asparagus racemosus)Other fast-rising ingredients · #31 human riser | — | — | — | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| BerberineOther fast-rising ingredients · #23 human riser | — | — | 2024 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| Beta GlucansFunctional mushrooms | — | — | 2013 | 4 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| CiticolineCognitive ingredients | — | — | — | Studies, no randomised trial | None found |
| CollagenCollagen & connective tissue | — | — | 2015 | 9 randomised trials | 2 randomised trials |
| ColostrumOther fast-rising ingredients · #36 human riser | — | — | 2015 | 2 randomised trials | Studies, no randomised trial |
| CordycepsFunctional mushrooms · #6 human riser | — | — | 2018 | 2 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| GABAOther fast-rising ingredients · #14 human riser | — | — | 2014 | Studies, no randomised trial | Studies, no randomised trial |
| KombuchaOther fast-rising ingredients · #30 human riser | — | — | — | None found | None found |
| Mushrooms (unspecified/blends)Functional mushrooms | — | — | 2018 | 1 randomised trial | 1 randomised trial |
| NADHNAD+ precursors · #18 human riser | — | — | — | None found | None found |
| PostbioticPostbiotics · #2 human riser | — | — | 2014 | 14 randomised trials | 5 randomised trials |
| Prebiotics (unspecified)Other fast-rising ingredients · #33 human riser | — | — | 2013 | 20 randomised trials | 4 randomised trials |
| QuercetinOther fast-rising ingredients · #26 human riser | — | — | 2013 | 1 randomised trial | None found |
| SaffronOther fast-rising ingredients · #16 human riser | — | — | — | None found | None found |
| SeaweedOther fast-rising ingredients · #22 human riser | — | — | 1999 | 4 randomised trials | Studies, no randomised trial |
| SpermidineOther fast-rising ingredients · #5 human riser | — | — | — | None found | None found |
| SpirulinaOther fast-rising ingredients · #39 human riser | — | — | 2014 | 3 randomised trials | 1 randomised trial |
| Urolithin AOther fast-rising ingredients · #3 human riser | — | — | — | None found | None found |
Showing 15 of 64 ingredients
Brands are out of 195; a dash means the count didn’t pass our hand check, so we don’t print it. “On sale for pets by” is the earliest date we could confirm from store records and archived pages. Research columns count studies in the live animal, searched in PubMed, Europe PMC and OpenAlex; they don’t judge whether an ingredient works or is safe.
The rise of pet longevity
Pet longevity is still a small shelf. It’s growing fast.
Only 59 of 2,865 supplements claim healthy ageing or longevity as a benefit. But NAD+ precursors, the ingredients behind the human NAD+ longevity trend, went from 1 pet brand in 2023 to 8 in 2026.
2.1%
59 of 2,865 supplements
of supplements claim healthy ageing or longevity as a benefit.
8 of 195
brands selling an NAD+ precursor, by year
brands sell an NAD+ precursor such as NR or NMN, up from 1 in 2023.
One dog trial so far.
For the whole NAD+ precursor family we found 1 trial in dogs: a precursor combined with a senolytic, in 70 senior dogs (2024). NMN also has a short safety study in beagles. We found no study of nicotinamide riboside alone in dogs or cats.
Ageing language reaches further than ageing products.
Words like “cellular”, “mitochondria” and “NAD” appear on 21% of product pages for trend-ingredient supplements, against 12% of other pages (66 of 317 vs 37 of 295). Yet only 2.7% of supplements name older animals in the product name (78 of 2,865), and half of those are joint products.
Years show when each brand’s first NAD+ product was on sale by, from store records and archived pages.
Cats and dogs
Most brands sell something for cats. Cats still get a seventh of the aisle.
80% of brands sell at least one supplement for cats (157 of 195 brands). But only 14% of supplements are made for cats alone.
Who each of 2,865 supplements is labelled for
Hairballs are the one job cats own.
For every joint supplement made only for cats, there are 7 made only for dogs. Many cats get “dogs and cats” formulas instead, and 9% of those with a readable amount give a dog amount but no cat amount (55 of 592). When a brand sells the same ingredient for both, the cat version arrives later: a median of 5 months after the dog version, and later in 180 of 276 cases. Our product reviews found the same pattern in cat skin and coat: see chapter 05.
Supplements made only for dogs vs only for cats
Digestion455 vs 143 · 3 to 1
Joint430 vs 65 · 7 to 1
Dental126 vs 16 · 8 to 1
Cognition91 vs 15 · 6 to 1
Hairball2 vs 42
Cats are harder to convince.
In customer reviews that say whether the pet ate the supplement, 14% of cat owners say their cat refused it, against 2% of dog owners (13 of 92 cat reviews and 5 of 222 dog reviews, coded by hand and checked by a second coder).
Benefit areas come from each product’s own description; one supplement can claim several. Counts are distinct supplements: a product sold in several sizes or bundles counts once. The cat lag compares the first dated dog or dual product with the first dated cat-only product of the same brand and ingredient.
The everything-supplement
The longer the ingredient list, the less of each ingredient.
In formulas with up to five active ingredients, the median printed amount per ingredient is 200 mg. In formulas with 11 or more, it’s 36 mg.
Median printed amount per ingredient
33%
ingredients with a printed amount
of the ingredients in formulas with 11 or more actives are printed at under 10 mg, against 4.6% in formulas with 1–5.
Every extra ingredient shares the same few grams.
A daily chew or scoop only holds so much, so a longer list leaves less room for each ingredient. Longer lists also show less: 50% of formulas with 11 or more actives use a proprietary blend, which prints a total but not each ingredient’s amount, against 26% of formulas with 1–5.
All-in-ones showed the same pattern in our product reviews: see chapter 06.
5
active ingredients in the median pet supplement. 18% list 11 or more; the longest list we counted had 64.
3 of 31
brands printed every ingredient amount on every product we read. 4 never did; 24 were mixed.
From 438 full ingredient panels transcribed by hand and weighted to the census; amounts from the 212 that print them. Vitamins and minerals are left out of the amount comparison, since they’re dosed in much smaller units. A check sample of 60 supplements from brands added in October 2026 lists slightly more actives (median 6) and prints every amount more often (8 of 12 panels in Supplement Facts or Guaranteed Analysis form); the figures above come from the earlier sample.
From chews to powders and liquids
Nearly a third of pet supplements are soft chews. Most of a chew is the chew.
Soft chews are the most common format at 29%, ahead of powders (22.5%) and liquids or drops (13%). In chews that print both weights, the active ingredients make up a median of 14% of the chew.
14%
of a soft chew’s weight is active ingredients, at the median (39 chews that print both; middle half 6%–22%). The median chew weighs 3 g. The rest is what makes it a chew.
93%
of soft chews that list their inactive ingredients include glycerin, which keeps a chew soft.
78%
list an ingredient that’s there for taste, such as liver powder, chicken broth or brewer’s yeast. 64% also list a flavouring, such as “natural bacon flavor”.
13
inactive ingredients in the median soft chew. The median powder lists 2.
Read a chew’s inactive list as closely as its actives.
Glycerin keeps a chew soft. Liver, broth, yeast and flavourings make pets want to eat it. For a pet with a food sensitivity, those extras can matter as much as the active ingredients.
Share of supplements by format · 95% range
Soft chews29% · 23–36%
Powders22.5% · 17–29%
Liquids and drops13% · 9–18%
Cats get powders. Dogs get chews.
29% of supplements made only for cats are powders and 22% are soft chews. For dogs only, it’s the other way round: 42% soft chews and 18% powders. Liquids and drops are 17% of cat-only supplements, against 10% for dogs. A powder can go into food a cat already eats; a chew has to be eaten on its own, and cats refuse supplements far more often than dogs (chapter 13).
Only 1 of 419 pet probiotics promise their count lasts until the expiry date.
A probiotic’s live-culture count falls over time, so the count on the label means most when it says when it applies. Of 419 pet probiotics that print a count, 1 says it holds through the expiry date and 3 that it applies at manufacture; the rest don’t say. On a sample of 260 US human probiotic labels with a count, 27% promise it through expiry (71 labels).
Format shares come from 200 supplements coded by hand and weighted to the full census; the cat and dog split from 59 more cat-only supplements coded the same way. Inactive ingredients come from 318 soft chews and 122 powders that list them. Human probiotic labels are a seeded sample from the NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database (2020–2025 entries).
What are pet supplements for?
Nearly a quarter of pet supplements name a disease on the product page.
23% of supplements name a disease or diagnosis in their own product description (671 of 2,865 supplements).
23%
671 of 2,865 supplements
name a disease or diagnosis, from arthritis to kidney disease, in their own description.
74+
product pages from 27 brands
describe the product as acting against a named disease. We checked each one by hand, so this is a minimum.
Product names got cleaner. Descriptions didn’t.
In the 19 brands whose catalogs we could compare over time, product names mentioning a disease fell from 4% in 2022 to 1.3% in 2026. The descriptions still name them. In the US, a product sold to treat or prevent disease in animals is regulated as a drug, which is why this wording matters.
What supplements say they’re for · of 2,865
Digestion33%
Skin & coat27%
Immune health26%
Joints25%
Inflammation15%
Calming13%
Digestion, not joints, is the most common job: about a third of supplements claim it. One supplement can claim several benefits. Disease words come from a list we wrote before counting, run on each product’s own description with disclaimers removed.
The price of complexity
Most pet supplements cost about a dollar a day.
At the label’s daily amount, the median supplement costs $1.00 a day for a 50-lb dog, about $30 a month, and $0.44 a day for a 10-lb cat.
$1.00
545 dog supplements priced
a day for a 50-lb dog, about $30 a month.
$0.44
75 cat supplements priced
a day for a 10-lb cat, about $13 a month.
The word “clinical” costs extra.
Brands that use clinical or research wording charge 38% more per day than brands that don’t, comparing each brand’s median price. Within the same format, the most expensive quarter of supplements used the word far more often: 26%, against 8% of the cheapest quarter. What a higher price didn’t buy was a longer ingredient list or a better rating.
Median price per day, 50-lb dog · every format $0.94–$1.24
Liquid oils$1.00
Soft chews$0.94
Capsules and tablets$1.02
Powders$1.07
Functional treats and toppers$1.24
Most packs last a month.
For a 50-lb dog, the median pack lasts 30 days. 31% run out sooner, and only 10% last three months or more. Where a brand offers a subscription, the median discount is 15%.
Price per day is the lowest one-time price on the brand’s own site, in US dollars, divided by the days a pack lasts at the label amount. Listings priced in other currencies were left out, not converted, and brands that sell only through vets or retailers have no price. The clinical-wording comparison uses brands with three or more priced supplements and holds with the largest brand left out.
Ratings and the shelf
On brand websites, almost every supplement rates 4.5 stars or higher.
Of 1,071 supplements with a star rating on the brand’s own site, 85% average 4.5 stars or more, and 23% show a perfect 5.0.
85%
907 of 1,071 rated supplements
average 4.5 stars or higher on the brand’s own website.
40%
269 of 681 products, 19 brands
of the products these brands sold in 2022 were no longer listed in 2026. The same brands added 321 new ones.
A star rating on a brand’s own site tells you very little.
Ratings barely differ by format or by price, because the brand runs the review widget. Shoppers who search Google see a different shelf again: for 54 everyday dog supplement searches, marketplaces and big retailers held 63% of the Google Shopping listing slots.
Catalog changes compare archived copies of 19 brands’ stores from 2022 with their 2026 catalogs; a renamed product counts as one removed and one added.
Who’s behind the brands?
A crowded aisle of independent brands. “Vet” on the label, rarely a vet’s name.
The 195 brands in our census belong to 189 different companies. The five biggest hold only 18% of the supplements on sale.
189
companies behind 195 brands
Only 5 companies own two or more of the brands we counted. The five largest hold 18% of supplements; the ten largest, 29%.
5%
29 of 609 supplements with vet wording
of the supplements that say “vet-formulated” or “vet-recommended” name the vet on the product page. 63 supplements name a vet in all: 31 different people.
No two companies sell the same recipe.
Contract manufacturers make many pet supplements, so we looked for the same formula sold under different brands. Comparing 121 fully printed ingredient panels, ingredient by ingredient and amount by amount, we found no recipe shared by two different companies. Brands share suppliers and ingredients, not finished recipes.
Regulators rarely appear.
We found none of the 180 FDA warning letters about animal drugs or animal food issued since 2015 addressed to any of the 189 companies, and no recall of their supplements among the 63 animal-product notices on FDA’s current recall list. 27 brands display the National Animal Supplement Council quality seal.
Parent companies come from each brand’s own site (its about page, legal notice or footer), then trademark records and press releases; brands with no parent found count as their own company. A vet is “named” when a person with a veterinary degree (DVM, VMD, BVSc or BVMS) is named on the product or brand page. FDA’s recall list mostly covers 2023 onward.
The data
Use the data. Check every number.
Every number on this page comes from La Petite Labs Research’s 2026 product reviews, brand audit and supplement census, and all of it is open.
The census package has every supplement we counted and why, every hand decision, the rules we wrote before counting, the code that produced each number, and a recount anyone can run with nothing but Python.
2026 product reviews and brand audit · chapters 01–08
2026 supplement census · chapters 09–19
Each record has the product’s own URL, its species and its date, so you can check any number yourself. The data dictionary explains every column; the methods document gives every rule, with the date it was written.
Data and methods: CC BY 4.0, please credit La Petite Labs Research. Code: MIT.
How to cite this research
Cite the numbers. Check the methodology.
Suggested citation
La Petite Labs Research. “Pet Supplement Statistics” (2026 edition). La Petite Labs, 2026.
Quoting a single number
Include the count behind it, so readers know what it’s based on. For example:
“According to La Petite Labs Research, 61% of dog and cat supplement entries it reviewed in 2026 didn’t list the amount of every active ingredient (89 of 145 product reviews).”
Every number in Find a statistic copies as a sentence like this one, with a link to its place on this page.
Permanent URL
lapetitelabs.com/pages/pet-supplement-statisticsAbout the research
La Petite Labs Research studies the products, claims, ingredients and evidence shaping the pet supplement category.
Product reviews and brand audit · chapters 01–08
- Product reviews
- 145 reviews across six dog and cat categories, covering 128 distinct product URLs (some appear in more than one category)
- Reviewed
- Product record dates: May 19–July 4, 2026. Category reports first reviewed May 20–22, with source records updated through July 4.
- Brand audit
- 56 pet supplement brands, checked through July 3, 2026
- Scope
- A snapshot of what U.S. shoppers see, not every product on the market
We counted only what a shopper could find. Anything a brand keeps private — unpublished lab results, studies or the vets it works with — isn’t reflected here.
Product figures count category-level reviews, so a product appearing in more than one category can be counted more than once. Brand figures use a separate denominator. The cat skin-and-coat category includes one dog-labelled fish-oil benchmark; cross-species counts require both cat and dog in the source record. Lab-report access includes public reports and lot-number lookups, which may require the number on a purchased bottle. These are historical observations, not a live assessment of a brand’s current website.
The 2026 supplement census · chapters 09–19
- Supplements
- 2,865 dog and cat supplements from 195 brands. A supplement sold in several sizes, flavours or bundles counts once (3,320 store listings in all).
- Read
- Each brand’s own website and every product page, in October 2026. Amazon, Chewy and other marketplaces weren’t included.
- Ingredient panels
- 746 panels transcribed by hand; figures from them are weighted to the census
- Research search
- Dog and cat studies of 64 ingredients in PubMed, Europe PMC and OpenAlex, to October 2026
- Human trends
- The 40 fastest-rising ingredients in US human supplements, 2016–2025, from the NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database, PubMed, Wikipedia interest and industry trend reports
Brands came from our 56-brand audit plus every brand that appeared in at least two general pet supplement searches on Google, never searches for a specific ingredient. Retailers, resellers and store own-labels were left out, and vet-channel brands that don’t sell online were read from their own product pages. We wrote the counting rules before counting, and an independent recount checks the census numbers from the published data.
Prices are in US dollars only; listings shown in other currencies were left out, not converted. Dates show when a product was on sale, from store records and archived pages, not when it launched. Research counts say which studies exist, not whether an ingredient works or is safe.
Source reports
These findings pool category-level review records from six Industry Reports and a separate brand audit. We counted the recorded public-disclosure fields, excluded La Petite Labs benchmarks, and divided each count by its matching review population. Displayed percentages are rounded to whole numbers.
- Best Cat All-in-One Supplements 2026
- Best Cat Longevity Supplements 2026
- Best Cat Skin & Coat Supplements 2026
- Best Dog All-in-One Supplements 2026
- Best Dog Skin & Coat Supplements 2026
- Best Dog Longevity Supplements 2026
- Pet Supplement Brand Transparency Report 2026
The downloads preserve the historical snapshot, with original source URLs and review dates for each record. Individual reports may have newer data. The data dictionary explains the fields, counting rules and known source-data limitations.
Publisher disclosure
La Petite Labs Research is published by La Petite Labs, which makes pet supplements. Our own products aren’t counted in any number on this page. Some ingredients tracked here, including an NAD+ precursor and functional mushrooms, are in our products.
We’re not an independent certifier, and this research doesn’t judge whether any product is safe or effective.
Press contact
Amanda Sterling
Questions about the research, methodology or underlying data are welcome.
