Skip to content
42

orvus quilt soap

Skip it

A concentrated shelf (top 5 take 100% of clicks) — this niche doesn't clear our bar today.

Market size 31Growth 61Conversion 81Competition 0Returns 97Price range 29Avg price 73Brand share 0Review moat 69Quality gap 24

Returns

Incredible0.5%

return rate — above 6% kills the launch gate

Conversion

Great8.4%

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

Avg price

Good$14.81

avg listing price — sweet spot $15–$100

Review moat

Good742.4

avg incumbent reviews — the moat a new listing must climb

Growth

Good+37.6%

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

Market size

Okay$139K

$139K/yr · 111K searches

Price range

Okay$9.15–$17.43

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

Quality gap

Bad4.6★

avg incumbent rating — lower means beatable quality

Competition

Bad100%

top-5 click share — a locked-up shelf

Brand share

Bad100%

top-5 brand share — brand-locked demand

Competition

The top 5 products capture 100% of clicks — a locked-up shelf that new listings rarely crack.

Brands

3 falling

Sellers

32

Top-5 brand share

100%

Open market

0%

  • Retro Clean77%
  • Escentile18%
  • UniClean America5%

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%10%$14K20%$28K30%$42K40%$56K101001K10K Reviews — right = deep review moat Market share (90d) ≈ est. sales
Beatable (≤4.3★) Contested Strong incumbent (>4.7★)

All 5 tracked products in this niche — three views at once, no toggling.

Demand & seasonality

Weekly Amazon search volume, last 104 weeks — +37.6% search growth over the last 90 days.
7K5KSpike '24Spike '25Prime Day '25Black Friday '25Spike '26SepDecMarJunAugNovMarMay

Peak months: Jun, Nov · busiest ÷ quietest = 3.0×

Reviews

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

What buyers love

Quality-Overall18%

“Amazing Results”

Ease Of Cleaning17%

“Retro Clean works”

Color13%

“beautiful colors again”

Product Condition8%

“Looks brand new”

Advertised Vs Actual Product6%

“Worked as promised”

Ease Of Use6%

“Easy to use”

Brightness/Shine/Glow5%

“I feel like the two items became brighter”

Efficiency3%

“Worked very well”

Instructions/User Manual/Troubleshooting3%

“Instructions were clear”

Value For Money2%

“It was more cost effective than some others”

What buyers complain about

Stain Resistance29%

“But it was stained and pretty yellowed”

Color22%

“a lot of the color is gone”

Functionality-Overall5%

“It did not perform as well as I had hoped”

Value For Money4%

“not the $0.94 an ounce for the branding”

Color Fading/Discoloration4%

“Bleeding and fading”

Ease Of Cleaning4%

“I soaked, stirred and rinsed”

Size-Overall3%

“This 4 ounce size is almost comical”

Durability3%

“when I did it fell apart”

Smell1%

“The only thing I wish it did more was helping with the old person smell”

Strength1%

“not strong enough”

Top return reasons

Stain Resistance22%
Advertised Vs Actual Product9%
Functionality-Overall9%
Cleaning Modes8%
Material Quality8%
Size-Overall6%
Leak-Proof6%
Instructions/User Manual/Troubleshooting4%
Ingredients-Overall4%
Value For Money4%