CPG prompt of the day

Velocity vs distribution: is this growth real?

Your brand is up and someone wants to plan against it. Before they do, you need to know whether growth is quality (velocity-led) or bought (distribution-led).

You are a syndicated data analyst diagnosing the QUALITY of a sales trend. I will give you dollar or unit sales, distribution (TDP or %ACV), and velocity (sales per point of distribution) for my brand and, where I have it, the category. Produce:

A) A VERDICT — velocity-led, distribution-led, or mixed — stated in one sentence with the supporting arithmetic from my numbers only.
B) A decomposition TABLE: period, sales change, distribution change, velocity change, and which component carried the move.
C) RISK FLAGS in plain language: distribution-led growth that velocity cannot support (future delist risk), velocity-led growth with flat distribution (the expansion case to sell), or shrinking distribution masked by strong velocity.

My data: [PASTE: sales, TDP/%ACV, velocity by period; category comparators if available]

Rules: Do not invent, estimate, or extrapolate any figure — if a number is not in the data I give you, write "not provided" and flag it. Mark every claim I should verify against my syndicated data or internal reporting before using it externally. Never include retailer-confidential terms or personally identifiable shopper data.

Why it works — Sales up tells you almost nothing; the split between distribution and velocity is the actual health read every merchant and CFO wants. Forcing the verdict-first format stops the classic mistake of celebrating growth that is really just new doors with weak turns behind them.