Skip to content
54

toyota rav4 engine air filter

Worth a look

Shows searches that convert (8.7% search→purchase), but a small market ($60K/yr) keeps it on the watch list.

Market size 15Growth 51Conversion 82Competition 64Returns 80Price range 68Avg price 81Brand share 67Review moat 48Quality gap 21

Conversion

Great8.7%

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

Avg price

Great$17.35

avg listing price — sweet spot $15–$100

Returns

Great1.8%

return rate — above 6% kills the launch gate

Price range

Good$8.02–$29.87

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

Brand share

Good65%

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

Competition

Good46%

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

Growth

Good+21.4%

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

Review moat

Okay1,711.21

avg incumbent reviews — the moat a new listing must climb

Quality gap

Bad4.7★

avg incumbent rating — lower means beatable quality

Market size

Bad$60K

$60K/yr · 40K searches

Competition

The top 5 products take 46% of clicks — established leaders, but buyers still shop beyond them.

Brands

18 rising

Sellers

51

Top-5 brand share

65%

Open market

30%

  • Capume21%
  • EPAuto17%
  • K&N13%
  • RVgolf8%
  • Toyota6%
  • A-Premium5%

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%4%$2K8%$5K12%$7K16%$10K101001K10K100K Reviews — right = deep review moat Market share (90d) ≈ est. sales
Beatable (≤4.3★) Contested Strong incumbent (>4.7★)

All 39 tracked products in this niche — three views at once, no toggling.

Demand & seasonality

Weekly Amazon search volume, last 97 weeks — +21.4% search growth over the last 90 days.
3K2KSpike '24Holiday '24Spike '26SepDecMarJunAugNovMarMay

Peak months: Jan, Mar, Apr, Dec · busiest ÷ quietest = 2.7×

Reviews

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

What buyers love

Size-Overall36%

“Perfectly fit on my car”

Quality-Overall14%

“The build quality feels solid”

Value For Money13%

“Great value”

Filtration12%

“Best Filters”

Assembly/Installation9%

“Installation took only a few minutes”

Advertised Vs Actual Product5%

“Exactly as advertised”

Ease Of Use2%

“Easy peasy”

Efficiency2%

“Keeps the air clean”

Material Quality1%

“actually better material too than stock air filters”

Durability1%

“Easy to use and durable”

What buyers complain about

Compatibility-Overall22%

“Not compatible”

Size-Overall20%

“It is too big”

Filtration13%

“Ryvclim filters did not fit”

Advertised Vs Actual Product5%

“Inaccurate description”

Smell4%

“Foul smell”

Quality-Overall2%

“Its cheap”

Value For Money2%

“A few bucks more than FRAM”

Assembly/Installation2%

“Second problem purchase- item to assemble without any instructions”

Strength2%

“easy to break”

Defective Material/Parts1%

“Auto parts”

Top return reasons

Size-Overall51%
Compatibility-Overall26%
Filtration9%
Advertised Vs Actual Product3%
Value For Money3%
Defective Material/Parts1%
Product Condition1%
Quality-Overall1%
Shape/Style1%
Functionality-Overall1%