Skip to content
54

zigaretten

Worth a look

Shows low returns (0.4%), but weak search conversion (0.7%) keeps it on the watch list.

Market size 10Growth 19Conversion 8Competition 81Returns 98Price range 61Avg price 58Brand share 95Review moat 45Quality gap 92

Returns

Incredible0.4%

return rate — above 6% kills the launch gate

Brand share

Incredible39%

top-5 brand share — no brand owns this niche

Quality gap

Great4.0★

avg incumbent rating — lower means beatable quality

Competition

Great34%

top-5 click share — an open shelf

Price range

Good€3.36–€33.25

cheapest to priciest tracked listing — scored on the share inside $15–$100

Avg price

Good€12.95

avg listing price — sweet spot $15–$100

Review moat

Okay2,049.83

avg incumbent reviews — the moat a new listing must climb

Growth

Bad-12.0%

90-day search growth — must beat 0% to launch

Market size

Bad€39K

€39K/yr · 460K searches

Conversion

Bad0.7%

search→purchase rate — share of searches ending in a sale

Competition

Clicks spread well past the top 5 (34% combined) — an open shelf where new products get seen.

Brands

37 flat

Sellers

78

Top-5 brand share

39%

Open market

55%

  • Pall Mall11%
  • Rbleote8%
  • Gizeh7%
  • p'tit clown7%
  • Śląskie Oblaty6%
  • champracer6%

Product shelf

Each bubble is one product — market share against review moat; bubble size tracks estimated sales, color grades how beatable the incumbent looks.

0%2%€7864%€2K6%€2K8%€3K1101001K10K100K Reviews — right = deep review moat Market share (90d) ≈ est. sales
Beatable (≤4.3★) Contested Strong incumbent (>4.7★)3 products missing review or click data not plotted

All 48 tracked products in this niche — three views at once, no toggling.

Demand & seasonality

Weekly Amazon search volume, last 74 weeks — -12.0% search growth over the last 90 days.
10K6KPrime Day '25MarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJun

No pronounced peak months · busiest ÷ quietest = 1.3×

Reviews

What buyers praise and complain about, mined from review topics.

What buyers love

Qualität insgesamt23%

“Super Produkt”

Benutzerfreundlichkeit15%

“Solide, einfaches Handling”

Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis11%

“Preis/Leistung super”

beworben Vs Tatsächliches Produkt9%

“siehe Fotos.”

Effizienz6%

“funktionier”

Stärke6%

“Super robust”

Gesamtgröße4%

“Passt”

Funktionalität insgesamt3%

“Läuft fehlerfrei”

Haltbarkeit2%

“Lange Haltbarkeit”

Design insgesamt2%

“Elegant und praktisch”

What buyers complain about

Qualität insgesamt20%

“Müll”

Filterung13%

“Defekte Filter”

Haltbarkeit11%

“Leider nach paar Wochen schon direkt defekt”

Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis7%

“Die Preise sind gestiegen”

Funktionalität insgesamt7%

“Stopft nicht richtig”

Gesamtgröße5%

“FürSelbststopfer ungeeignet”

beworben Vs Tatsächliches Produkt5%

“Irreführende Artikelbeschreibung”

Benutzerfreundlichkeit5%

“Unbrauchbar”

Materialqualität4%

“Dünnes Material”

Aufladen2%

“Dann muss man nochmals laden”

Top return reasons

Funktionalität insgesamt25%
Gesamtgröße18%
Qualität insgesamt8%
Defekt Material/Teile8%
Filterung5%
Benutzerfreundlichkeit4%
beworben Vs Tatsächliches Produkt3%
Haltbarkeit3%
Aufladen3%
Auslaufsicher2%