Cannabis drinks are small but surging. Headset has long tracked beverages as a 1–3% share category with rapid growth spurts, and recent reporting shows the format holding up even as other categories slide. In California, for example, drink sales grew while total cannabis sales fell year over year—an indicator that beverages are pulling in new consumers and occasions rather than simply cannibalizing existing demand.

That momentum isn’t isolated. BDSA’s 2025 view shows triple-digit growth in some emerging adult-use states—Michigan beverages more than doubled Q1 2025 vs. Q1 2024, with strong gains in Ohio and Illinois—suggesting the format scales quickly once distribution and awareness click. Meanwhile, Whitney Economics estimates U.S. THC beverage sales topped $1.1B in 2024 across dispensaries, DTC, and alcohol distributors, a threshold that tends to attract retailer interest and capital.

Regulatory tailwinds are also making beverages uniquely “sharable.” Minnesota’s hemp-derived THC framework has put drinks on tap at bars and breweries, normalizing the category in familiar on-premise channels and reducing packaging and distribution costs. As Minnesota launches adult-use sales, its beverage-friendly environment is poised to accelerate cross-channel discovery and trial.

Technology is another catalyst. Nano-emulsion has materially improved onset and consistency versus traditional edibles, making 10–30 minute effects realistic and repeatable—exactly the benefit profile consumers expect from social beverages. The science behind nano-emulsified cannabinoids (smaller particles, better absorption, reduced first-pass metabolism) supports the format’s “alcohol alternative” positioning without the hangover.

So why does this specifically favor private label? First, the broader CPG backdrop: NIQ reports private label continues to gain share globally as value-seeking shoppers reward trusted retailers; retailers, in turn, lean into own brands to differentiate, drive loyalty, and improve margins. That playbook ports neatly into cannabis where retailers increasingly control discovery (menus, endcaps, digital recommendations) and can place their names—and guarantees—on approachable, sessionable drinks.

Second, beverages are naturally “brandable” to a retailer’s identity: flavor systems, dose tiers, and pack sizes can be tuned to local preferences and price points. Because drinks are bought by occasion (after-work wind-down, brunch, tailgate), retailers can create tiered private-label lines (e.g., low-dose social seltzers and higher-dose nightcaps) that map to real-world use, then earn repeat traffic through exclusivity and loyalty programs—tactics shown to strengthen private-label flywheels in other categories.

Third, the economics improve as volume rises. While co-manufacturing and compliance add complexity, the combination of rising category demand, on-premise expansion in certain states, and the ability to leverage existing beverage supply chains (canning, cold-chain, route-to-market where permitted) supports retailer margin structures similar to mainstream grocery private label. Add the proof point that beverages are a rare growth pocket in tough markets like California, and the case for retailer-owned offerings becomes compelling.

The caution: growth is uneven (e.g., declines in legacy markets like Arizona and Colorado), and rules differ dramatically across states and between hemp-derived and marijuana-derived products. Retailers need disciplined partner selection, reliable emulsion tech, and clear consumer education to avoid mis-dosing confusion and to build trust at the shelf. Even so, the direction of travel—more occasions, faster onset tech, normalizing on-premise experiences, and retailer focus on own brands—points to private-label beverages moving from experiment to core strategy.