Skip to content
50

john deere fuel filter

Worth a look

Shows low returns (0.5%), but prices mostly outside the sweet spot ($5.19–$13.74) keeps it on the watch list.

Market size 9Growth 66Conversion 96Competition 29Returns 98Price range 0Avg price 20Brand share 54Review moat 80Quality gap 45

Returns

Incredible0.5%

return rate — above 6% kills the launch gate

Conversion

Incredible13.5%

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

Review moat

Great409.81

avg incumbent reviews — the moat a new listing must climb

Growth

Good+46.1%

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

Brand share

Good73%

top-5 brand share — brands hold most of the demand

Quality gap

Okay4.5★

avg incumbent rating — lower means beatable quality

Competition

Okay67%

top-5 click share — leaders hold, buyers still browse

Avg price

Bad$7.26

avg listing price — sweet spot $15–$100

Market size

Bad$35K

$35K/yr · 36K searches

Price range

Bad$5.19–$13.74

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

Competition

The top 5 products take 67% of clicks — established leaders, but buyers still shop beyond them.

Brands

13 rising

Sellers

29

Top-5 brand share

73%

Open market

23%

  • ASSOTS38%
  • John Deere12%
  • YOIASUGH9%
  • Wetenex8%
  • PAOSDKSUI5%
  • JSIERLUOV4%

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%$3K20%$7K30%$10K40%$14K101001K10K Reviews — right = deep review moat Market share (90d) ≈ est. sales
Beatable (≤4.3★) Contested Strong incumbent (>4.7★)

All 16 tracked products in this niche — three views at once, no toggling.

Demand & seasonality

Weekly Amazon search volume, last 104 weeks — +46.1% search growth over the last 90 days.
1K750Spike '25Spike '26SepDecMarJunAugNovMarMay

Peak months: Mar, Apr, May · busiest ÷ quietest = 4.5×

Reviews

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

What buyers love

Size-Overall19%

“Fit great”

Advertised Vs Actual Product14%

“Work as it should”

Value For Money13%

“are an excellent value”

Filtration12%

“Good quality filters”

Quality-Overall12%

“Good quality”

Fuel Efficiency9%

“One thing I really like is the clear design—you can easily see the fuel”

Assembly/Installation6%

“Easy to install”

Efficiency4%

“it worked great”

Leak-Proof3%

“they won't leak”

Maintenance And Repair1%

“no problems so if your looking for a cheap replacement you can make these work”

What buyers complain about

Quality-Overall18%

“these are disposable items so the lower construction quality is not a real concern for me”

Filtration18%

“Filters not made well”

Leak-Proof15%

“Leaked”

Durability5%

“Comes Apart”

Value For Money5%

“Way cheaper”

Fuel Efficiency5%

“After about an hour of use I smelled gas and engine stopped”

Strength4%

“Very brittle plastic”

Size-Overall3%

“because they're pretty small”

Natural Resource Wastage3%

“WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY”

Smell2%

“DANGER Recently went into my garage with a strong smell of gasoline”

Top return reasons

Size-Overall47%
Filtration16%
Compatibility-Overall6%
Defective Material/Parts5%
Advertised Vs Actual Product5%
Leak-Proof4%
Value For Money4%
Quality-Overall3%
Functionality-Overall2%
Connectivity-Overall1%