The paradox of beauty industry trends: Less innovation, more consumption

Hundreds of thousands of beauty products are pumped into the market by a glut of beauty brands globally every year. On the surface, the beauty industry is on a relentless roll. Yet, a closer look at beauty industry trends reveals a story of stagnation, replication, and uncertainty. A Mintel Global New Products Database Report stated that beauty innovations hit a 10-year low in 2024. This signals a worrying dip in beauty industry trends worldwide, raising questions about whether the market is prioritising hype over true innovation.

The early 2010s was an exciting time for the beauty industry globally. A brand-new wave of indie beauty brands emerged. Social media-driven beauty industry trends and aesthetics began to take centre stage and the homegrown beauty segment saw more takers. Japanese and Korean beauty catapulted to new heights, and the use of active ingredients was normalised. Today, however, innovation has taken a backseat. With social media hype cropping up as the biggest driver of beauty purchases, products are meticulously made to look Instagrammable—even if that means prioritising aesthetics over innovation and efficacy. The future of the beauty industry, therefore, is paradoxically glossy to the eye but humdrum in taste. We speak to opinion leaders from the industry to investigate this innovation slowdown.

Comebacks, dupe culture, shut downs: Stagnancy is headlining beauty industry trends 

In the past few years, the beauty industry has been successful at spoiling consumers for choices. For instance, you can pick between a plush matte lipstick that costs ₹7,000 and a high-shine lip oil priced at ₹800—or choose both. And then, browse through their dupes as well. Such quick fixes have become dominant in beauty industry trends across India and globally,  indicative of a saturated market. The beauty industry is using this saturation to camouflage critical issues—beauty brand shutdowns, the augmentation of white labelling, a widespread dupe culture, and now, the revival of cult classics from the past.

Just this year, Lancôme relaunched its iconic Juicy Tubes lip gloss while M.A.C Cosmetics released a reformulated version of its Lipglass. While Benefit Cosmetics finally expanded its cult Benetint range with two new shades, Clinique is milking Black Honey’s TikTok hype by creating a whole line of make-up products championing the universal cherry colour. 

According to Mintel's Global New Products Database Report from 2024, 54 per cent of beauty launches have been “renovations”, comprising line extensions, reformulations, improved packaging, or relaunches. Author and  content creator Vasudha Rai highlights the ubiquity of nostalgia marketing across industries. “Retro revival, as a trend, is huge right now. From Fendi’s Baguette Bag to overlined lips, so many trends from the past are coming back. I, for one, am enjoying the revival of niche fragrances.”

Founder of Testament Beauty, Sophia Chabbott, adds, “Nostalgia is fun. Who didn’t obsess over snagging a grape Juicy Tube back in the day? But the beauty reboot trend is wearing thin.” Nostalgia may provide short-term excitement, but sustaining momentum requires resources and risk-taking. Increasingly, brands are finding it difficult to balance commerce with true innovation.

“IN MY OPINION, 90 PER CENT OF THE BRANDS IN THE BEAUTY INDUSTRY AREN’T CREATED FOR THE LOVE OF BEAUTY, BUT BECAUSE BEAUTY HAS ESTABLISHED ITSELF AS RECESSION-PROOF. SO NOT EVERY BEAUTY BRAND PRIORITISES INNOVATION” — Vasudha Rai

According to Mintel’s Global New Product Database (GNPD), between January and May 2024 less than half (46 per cent) of global beauty and personal care launches were genuinely new products—a 10-year low that signals a sharp slowdown in innovation. The consequences are already visible. Recent brand closures underline this tension. The Body Shop filed for bankruptcy in the US and Canada, Revlon emerged from Chapter 11 in 2023, Unilever plans to cease REN Clean Skincare’s operations by Q3 2025, and Becca Cosmetics shut down in September 2021.

Against this background, a handful of brands have managed to thrive,  not necessarily by driving innovation but by leaning into safe strategies like prestige positioning, nostalgia marketing, and the comfort of dupe culture. e.l.f. Cosmetics, Maybelline, and closer to home, Unilever-owned Minimalist, continue to command market share. Data substantiates that 64 per cent of the Gen Z consumers—beauty’s biggest cohort—rely on dupes. This dependence on revivals reflects a cycle in beauty industry trends where originality is fading. “It’s faster and safer to rely on nostalgia or viral moments than to take the risk of creating something fundamentally new,” says Krupa Koestline, a clean beauty formulator and founder of US-based KKT Labs.

Beauty brand innovation failures are being masked by technology

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Augmented Reality (AR) filters, skin-analysing apps—on the surface beauty tech trends appear to drive innovation. In reality, many are superficial add-ons. Brands are more likely to announce a new foundation shade-matching tool than fundamentally re-engineer a formula. Technology may enhance the experience, but it cannot replace efficacy.

Although biotech and AI are transforming formulations, the slowdown still defines current beauty industry trends. According to Rai, innovation isn’t lost; instead, it is submerged under the sea of saturation. “In my opinion, 90 per cent of the brands in the beauty industry aren’t created for the love of beauty, but because beauty has established itself as recession-proof. So not every beauty brand prioritises innovation,” she says. “Even the brands that do innovate become far less visible because of the saturation in the industry. A lack of innovation is a problem for legacy brands, not for the niche or clean beauty industry. Legacy brands like ELCA or Shiseido haven’t been able to keep up with innovations due to multiple levels of approval or top-heavy leadership that’s not in touch with newness.” 

Beauty columnist Parizaad Khan-Sethi shares that while innovations are happening in the beauty industry, “it’s just not coming from the places we have been traditionally expecting it to.” Like Rai, she is invested in what smaller, indie brands with scientific credibility are doing, as opposed to larger legacy brands. “I can’t remember the last time I was thrilled by a launch from a legacy brand, but I’m seeing smaller brands deliver. For instance, Sweet Chemistry, a brand that uses regenerative peptides made from upcycled animal bones, which were discovered by a biomedical technology company focused on tissue engineering.”

Recent launches show that beauty innovation is happening, but often in fragmented ways. Shellworks, a London-based sustainable packaging developer, has created a fully home-compostable pipette dropper for serum bottles. Selena Gomez’s Rare Beauty entered fragrance with a perfume bottled in a disability-friendly falcon, along with fragrance primers. Internationally, Lady Gaga’s Haus Labs relaunched its foundation with a patented skincare-first technology, while homegrown brand Luar debuted foundations with “shade shifters”  for custom-blending. Rai notes an uptick in beauty devices too, from radiofrequency to at-home laser tools. 

Despite these developments, innovations today seem few and far between. Meanwhile, data verifies that in 2015, beauty and personal care launches worldwide were at an impressive 63 per cent. Koestline notes, “While I am energised by the possibilities of biotechnology, green chemistry, and next-gen delivery systems today, I do get bored when I see the same formulas in new packaging being touted as ‘innovation.’ That’s surface-level change, not true progress.” She underscores one of the beauty industry’s dirty secrets: white labelling—when manufacturers sell genetic formulas that brands repackage and market as their own innovations. The global white label cosmetics market size, estimated at $1.01 billion in 2024, is projected to touch $1.57 billion by 2030, growing at a CAGR of 7.8 per cent between 2025 and 2030. 

According to make-up artist and founder of Mokae Beauty, Sandhya Shekar, the beauty industry has picked up pace, at least at the consumer’s end. “This means beauty brands have to quickly adapt to changes and trends, which could sometimes fuel the dupe culture since it can be very challenging [for a brand] to keep innovating that often.” Shekar, too, observes a slowdown in innovation. “Internationally, there are 20-30 major manufacturers with solid R&D infrastructure, and a sizeable chunk of beauty products comes from these handful of laboratories for the global population. While additions can be made to existing categories, creating an altogether new product category every so often isn’t possible.” 

Is it tougher to innovate in beauty today—or are consumers just two steps ahead?

The current momentum in the beauty industry is the result of the consumer-driven shift that began a decade ago, when transparency, indie disruptors, and the rise of social media pushed brands to move faster and focus on ingredient-led marketing.  But whether this momentum will grow or shrink remains questionable, given the visible dip in beauty innovation.

“Product formulations have evolved and improved. We now have access to a much broader palette of raw materials than ever before, because of greater investment in the industry. Biotech, green chemistry, and sustainable sourcing have opened doors to ingredients that simply didn’t exist a decade ago,” says Koestline. “This means that as formulators, we can design more sophisticated systems, with better delivery mechanisms, improved stability, and multi-functional actives that move the needle.” 

Yet, consumer education and awareness around ingredients—sometimes accurate and sometimes misleading—creates a roadblock. “Consumers often arrive at a product already expecting to see certain ‘hero’ ingredients on the label, even if those ingredients aren’t the ones driving the innovation behind the scenes,” states Koestline. “Even when you’ve made a genuine leap in formulation, you’re still expected to build in recognisable actives like hyaluronic acid, niacinamide, or peptides because that’s what resonates in the market. It can be frustrating—it narrows the spotlight onto familiar names rather than the true innovation in the formula.” 

“CONSUMERS OFTEN ARRIVE AT A PRODUCT ALREADY EXPECTING TO SEE CERTAIN ‘HERO’ INGREDIENTS ON THE LABEL, EVEN IF THOSE INGREDIENTS AREN’T THE ONES DRIVING THE INNOVATION BEHIND THE SCENES” — Krupa Koestline

Add this consumer sentiment with high costs and intent that novelty demands, an innovation slowdown seems apparent. “Innovation requires significant investment in R&D, time, and testing. Many brands don’t have the resources or the appetite for that risk, especially when retailers and consumers are rewarding faster, trend-based launches,” says Koestline. “Beauty brands face challenges like 5-10 years of costly R&D, stricter global regulations, and post-pandemic supply chain issues, pushing them toward safer, faster launches,” adds celebrity dermatologist Dr Jaishree Sharad. 

Social media fuels this fast beauty, rewarding virality over research. “Social media loves quick, visually-stunning trends like viral colours, textures, or packaging. Brands can quickly—and cheaply—make a trendy copycat or bring back a classic than invest time and money in developing and testing a new formula,” says Sharad. Koestline agrees: “A formula that takes two years to develop thoughtfully can get overshadowed by a product that goes viral overnight, even if it doesn’t deliver anything new.”

Is the future of the beauty industry discounting what the consumer wants?

As disposable income among Indian consumers ascends in tandem with inflation, beauty products—luxury or otherwise—become accessible, feel-good items notwithstanding.  This has led to a paradox: even with innovation slowdown, overconsumption in the beauty industry continues to grow. Rai believes that a constant pressure on beauty brands to innovate also contributes to hyperconsumerism, there is an obvious need to push for slow innovations over trend-driven product launches.

As of 2023, 56 per cent of Indian consumers (under the age of 35) prefer to purchase beauty products that are cruelty-free and sustainably sourced. Koestline shares, “Beyond the noise of trends, people are looking for efficacy, transparency, and solutions that align with their values. Innovation is about delivering science, safety, and sustainability without compromise.” However, price sensitivity often becomes a hurdle with sustainable products, indicating a pain point yet to be addressed.

The success of brands like d’you in India or Rhode internationally evinces that the more-is-more ideology is dated. Through her consultations, Sharad observes, “Beauty lovers today are looking for more than just pretty packaging or short-lived trends; they want products that show results in real time, with clear ingredient lists and transparent claims. They also want sustainable and eco-friendly products that do multiple things and save time without losing effectiveness.” Rai agrees, “I think consumers want beauty brands to launch products only if they have the depth and adaptability; launching 20-plus SKUs just for the sake of it can be off-putting.” 

The innovation slowdown is, in many ways, both an illusion and a yardstick created by the beauty industry itself. Limited innovation comes along with restricted accessibility and availability, which ends up getting overshadowed by mediocre, uninspiring launches by brands with big marketing budgets to sail through the viral hype test on social media. The fact remains: trends are transient, innovations are timeless. It’s just a question of whether beauty brands will start favouring the latter over the former.