When Top Skincare Brands Lose Relevance

Brand decline in beauty rarely happens all at once. It tends to unfold gradually, first appearing as small shifts in positioning, creative direction, and audience response before becoming fully visible in performance data and, eventually, in rankings.

Each of the five brands in this analysis was previously among the most relevant in the category, consistently ranking at the top of Instagram-based momentum and, at times, reaching the top 50. These rankings are based on Mintoiro’s Brand Trend Index, a proprietary model that measures sustained brand momentum across Instagram and TikTok by combining followers, engagement and growth into a single composite score. These were not niche or emerging brands, but widely recognized names that shaped conversation within skincare.

Today, all five have consistently dropped significantly in the rankings over multiple years. This post looks at what changed and why, examining how shifts in identity, product strategy, and execution have led to that decline in relevance.

Truly: From Playful Identity to Visual Neutrality

Truly built its early success on a highly recognizable formula: bright, playful visuals paired with dessert themed fragrances and a focus on product texture. Previously the brand also frequently created collab collections with widely recognized IP like SpongeBob SquarePants and The Powerpuff Girls, which are all very nostalgic for millennials especially.

In recent years, that identity has been diluted. The brand’s visual output on Instagram has shifted toward a more toned-down and generic aesthetic, losing much of the distinctiveness that previously drove attention. On a platform where visual identity plays a central role in performance, this shift has had clear consequences. Growth has been weak and engagement rates remain low, pointing to a declining connection with the audience rather than healthy expansion.

Truly continues to perform relatively well on TikTok, where the content has always been more focused on product demonstrations showing off the texture of their products. This divergence highlights a growing disconnect between platform strategies, where the brand’s original strengths translate in short-form content but are no longer reflected in its Instagram presence.

Retail developments further reinforce the decline. Truly was widely distributed through Sephora globally as recently as 2025, but has since been dropped across all regions, alongside removal from other key retail partners. This level of contraction signals a broader loss of confidence beyond social performance alone.

The issue is not that Truly lacked a strong foundation, but that the elements that once made it distinctive, including its sensorial appeal and playful cultural positioning, have been gradually stripped back without a clear or compelling replacement.

Paula’s Choice: From Founder-Led Integrity to Brand Drift

Paula’s Choice was historically defined by a strong sense of clarity rooted in founder Paula Begoun’s personal authority and integrity. They built trust through direct, often contrarian messaging around skincare, grounded in ingredient transparency and functional efficacy and consumer education. This created a tightly aligned identity where product development, communication, and positioning all reinforced the same no-nonsense philosophy.

Following investment from TA Associates and the subsequent acquisition by Unilever in 2021, the brand entered a phase of accelerated expansion that introduced inconsistencies in the brands positioning. Product output increased significantly, alongside price increases, but many of the newer launches felt misaligned with the brand’s original logic. The assortment became broader and less focused, including products that contradicted earlier messaging, which weakened the sense of coherence that had previously defined the brand.

This shift is reflected in performance. Growth has been slow and underwhelming, while engagement rates have declined, indicating that the brand is no longer resonating with its audience in the same way. At a business level, estimated sales have fallen from earlier peaks, accompanied by a drop in overall valuation, suggesting that the issue extends beyond social performance into broader brand health.

The underlying challenge is not expansion itself, but the loss of a clearly defined internal logic. Paula’s Choice was built on a foundation of strong opinions and consistency, and as that foundation has softened, the brand has become less distinctive. What was once a tightly controlled, founder-driven system now reads as a more conventional product-led brand, without the same level of authority that originally set it apart.

Supergoop!: From Category Leader to Follower

Supergoop! played a central role in redefining sunscreen within the US market, helping shift SPF from a seasonal, beach-focused product into a year-round everyday, lifestyle-integrated essential. For years, the brand benefited from being early to this positioning, combining functional credibility with a more approachable, consumer-friendly image.

However, the category has evolved rapidly. The global rise of Korean sunscreen innovations has raised expectations around texture, finish, and formulation, while US brands like Vacation making sunscreen fun with their “best smelling sunscreen”. Against this backdrop, Supergoop! no longer appears to be setting the direction of the category but instead reacting to it.

Following Blackstone’s majority investment in 2021, the brand entered a phase of aggressive expansion, significantly increasing its rate of product launches. While this contributed to short-term growth, it did not translate into sustained momentum. The growing assortment lacks a clear sense of progression, and the increase in output has not strengthened the brand’s positioning in a more competitive landscape.

This loss of clarity is particularly visible on Instagram, where creative execution has declined noticeably. Visual output feels less distinctive, posting frequency has gradually decreased, and engagement rates remain low alongside slow, underwhelming growth. TikTok performance has remained relatively stable, but this alone has not been enough to offset broader stagnation.

Supergoop! now suffers from a loss of differentiation and an increasingly bloated product portfolio. In a category that has continued to advance in both formulation and branding, the brand no longer holds the same leadership position it once did.

Drunk Elephant: Identity Breakdown in Real Time

Drunk Elephant was once one of the most culturally dominant skincare brands, defined by a bold, instantly recognizable visual identity and one of the early pioneers of the fear mongering clean beauty movement. Its early success was built on clear positioning, but also on messaging that leaned heavily into fear-based narratives around ingredients, an approach that has lost traction as consumer understanding has become more nuanced.

Over time, additional tensions have compounded this shift. The brand’s social media presence has often been perceived as combative, creating friction with its audience rather than reinforcing community, which gradually eroded goodwill. The most visible disruption came in 2024 with the emergence of the “Sephora Kids” phenomenon, where pre-teen consumers would make a mess of testers in Sephora stores, especially ones from Drunk Elephant. As a brand already losing relevance at this point the brand attempted to half heartedly lean into this new potential audience, which instead mostly alienated their base.

In early 2026 the brand overly course corrected with their “No Kids Allowed” campaign which was intended to reassert an adult, results-driven positioning, but ultimately highlighted the issue rather than resolving it. The execution felt awkward and reactive, underscoring how unclear the brand’s current identity has become.

This instability is reflected across performance. The brand is losing followers on Instagram year over year, engagement rates are low, and TikTok growth has stalled, while sales have declined, particularly in the US market. At the same time, its visual identity, once a key strength, has become noticeably less compelling, shifting from vibrant and distinctive to more muted and generic.

Drunk Elephant’s decline is not the result of a single misstep, but of a broader breakdown in strategic consistency, where shifts in messaging, audience, and execution have gradually disconnected the brand from what originally made it resonate.

Farmacy: The Loss of Founder-Led Identity

Farmacy’s early strength was closely tied to its founder-led positioning through co-founders Mark Veeder and David Chung. The brand was not only defined by its farm-to-face concept and ingredient storytelling, but also by the visibility and credibility of its founders, with Mark Veeder in particular frequently acting as a public voice for the brand. This created a clear sense of authorship and intent, allowing Farmacy to connect with consumers in a more personal and narrative-driven way.

That foundation began to shift following a series of ownership changes. Mark Veeder exited the company in late 2019 after its acquisition by DAOL Private Equity, and David Chung departed in late 2021 when the brand was acquired by Procter & Gamble. With both founders no longer involved, the brand lost a key part of its identity, transitioning from a founder-driven story to a more conventional corporate structure.

Unlike some of the other brands analysed, this shift has not resulted in a visible decline in aesthetic quality. Farmacy’s visual identity remains consistent and well-executed, and there is no clear deterioration in its creative output. However, the brand’s performance suggests a deeper issue. Instagram metrics show a gradual decline in followers alongside low engagement rates, indicating weakening audience connection, while TikTok growth provides only partial compensation for broader stagnation.

The underlying challenge is not execution but meaning. Without the founder presence that originally anchored the brand, Farmacy has struggled to maintain the same level of emotional and narrative resonance. In a category where consumers increasingly respond to clear points of view and identifiable brand voices, the loss of that founder-led identity has made the brand feel less distinctive over time.

Final Thoughts

Across all five brands, the pattern is less about isolated mistakes and more about a gradual loss of clarity. Each was originally built on a strong, highly legible core, whether sensorial play, founder-led authority, category leadership, or a clear ideological stance. Over time, that coherence has weakened through overexpansion, inconsistent product logic, loss of founder influence, or failure to keep pace with category evolution. Notably, in four out of five cases, this decline coincides with acquisition by global corporations or private equity firms, often followed by accelerated scaling and structural shifts that dilute the original brand logic. The result is brands that feel less intentional, less distinctive, and ultimately less relevant.

What this highlights is that decline rarely comes from a weak starting point. In every case, the original concept was strong enough to drive cultural impact and sustained growth. The issue is drift. As positioning softens and differentiation erodes, performance follows, first in engagement, then in growth, and eventually in retail and sales. In a saturated market, maintaining relevance requires not being mid and having solid viewpoint. Without that, even the most dominant brands become easy to replace.