Traced Database · Category 05
David / Attia departure Feb 2026 · RXBar Kellogg's 8 years in · Clif 3 years post-Mondelēz

Protein
Bars

Every protein bar brand that achieved meaningful scale has been acquired by a conglomerate. This is not a coincidence. It is the category's defining structural condition — and the reason Traced has no green profile to award here.

5 Brands Traced
4 Low Transparency
1 Mixed Transparency
0 High Transparency
Category Finding

"Protein bars are the only Traced category with no green profile. Not because the standard is too high — but because the acquisition pipeline absorbed every brand that came close to meeting it."

Acquisition Timeline — The Pattern Made Visible
2000
Clif Bar rejects Quaker Oats
Gary Erickson walks away from $120M offer. Brands independence as core identity.
2008
KIND — VMG Partners minority stake
First outside capital. Company later buys VMG out in 2014.
2017
RXBar → Kellogg's, $600M
"No BS" brand acquired by the maker of Froot Loops and Pop-Tarts. Founders say "nothing is changing."
Kellogg's (now WK Kellogg / Kellanova)
2017
KIND — Mars minority stake, ~$3–4B valuation
The M&M's and Snickers maker takes 40% of the "healthy snack" company. Full acquisition follows in 2020 for ~$5B.
Mars, Inc.
2019
Quest → Simply Good Foods, $1B
SPAC-formed PE vehicle — parent of Atkins Nutritionals — acquires Quest for $1 billion. Founder Tom Bilyeu had already left in 2016.
Simply Good Foods (Nasdaq: SMPL) / Atkins
2022
Clif Bar → Mondelēz, $2.9B
After 30 years and multiple rejected offers, Gary Erickson finally sells. Mondelēz now owns Clif, Hu chocolate, and Cadbury — simultaneously.
Mondelēz International (Nasdaq: MDLZ)
2024
David — $10M seed, Attia + Huberman as investors
Peter Rahal (RXBar founder) launches new brand. Series A of $75M follows in May 2025. Attia departs CSO role Feb 2026.
VC-backed — Valor Siren, Greenoaks
Before You Buy

What to Look For in Protein Bars

🧪 Protein source in bars is almost always a blend — ratios almost never disclosed
  • Most bars mix whey concentrate, soy isolate, milk protein isolate, and collagen to hit the gram count at lowest cost
  • Collagen inflates the number without providing complete protein (PDCAAS 0)
  • The bar that says "20g protein" may deliver meaningfully less functional protein depending on the undisclosed blend
Red flag — Protein blend with collagen and no ratio disclosure
🍬 "Net carb" math doesn't reflect digestive reality
  • Many bars subtract sugar alcohols from total carbs. Maltitol (common in bars) has a glycemic index of ~52 — nearly half of glucose — and raises blood sugar meaningfully
  • Erythritol is lower-GI but causes GI distress at bar-sized doses for many people
  • "Net carbs" is a marketing construct with no regulatory definition
Red flag — "Net carbs" claim with maltitol as primary sweetener
📊 The full macro ratio tells you what the bar is actually for
  • 20g protein + 25g carbs + 8g fat = meal replacement
  • 20g protein + 5g net carbs + 12g fat = keto snack
  • 12g protein + 28g sugar = candy bar with protein branding — most bars show only the protein number prominently
Ask — is this protein-first, or candy-with-protein?
🏢 Every independent brand that built toward clean ingredients has been acquired
  • RXBar → Kellogg's (2017, $600M). Quest → Simply Good Foods. Kind → Mars (2020). Clif → Mondelēz (2022).
  • The "clean" positioning survived the acquisitions. The ownership accountability did not
  • This is the only Traced category with no green-zone brand
Red flag — Independent heritage brand now owned by a major food conglomerate
🎨 Where the ingredient list lives on the package is a transparency signal
  • RXBar put ingredients on the front: "3 egg whites. 6 almonds. 4 cashews. 2 dates." — a deliberate transparency statement
  • Most bars lead with the protein gram count and bury the ingredient list in small print on the back
  • A long ingredient list isn't automatically disqualifying. A brand that hides it usually has something to hide.
Ask — how many ingredients, and where are they disclosed?
📣 Heavy ad spend signals a commoditized formula trying to build a brand premium
  • Heavy social rotation means significant VC or conglomerate spend subsidizing growth — that cost lives in margins or formula quality
  • The best-tasting bar and the best-formula bar are regularly different products
  • Focus on the ingredient list and protein source first — then taste
Ask — is the marketing spend competing with the formula budget?
Transparency Spectrum — Protein Bars
David
5R
RXBar
4R·1Y
Clif
4R·1Y
KIND
3R·2Y
Quest
2R·3Y
Brand Profiles — 5 Brands Scored
VC-backed · $75M Series A
David
Founded 2024 · Peter Rahal (ex-RXBar founder)

David is the investor-endorser conflict in concentrated form. Peter Attia served as Chief Science Officer and equity investor while endorsing the product to his 2M+ longevity-focused podcast audience — until stepping down in February 2026 without public explanation. Andrew Huberman remains both investor and public endorser. The product's 28g protein claim is technically accurate but structurally misleading: a meaningful portion derives from collagen, an incomplete protein that cannot substitute for whey, casein, or egg white in muscle protein synthesis. The bar also contains EPG — a novel modified fat with no long-term safety data in humans — and acesulfame potassium, despite early marketing claiming "no artificial sweeteners."

OwnershipRed
Marketing AlignmentRed
Revenue ModelRed
Ingredient IntegrityRed
Scientific BackingRed
Label ClaimsRed
Safety TransparencyYellow
Full analysis
Ownership & Funding
Founded by Peter Rahal (RXBar) and Zach Ranen in 2024. $10M seed round led by Rahal with participation from Valor Siren Ventures, Dr. Peter Attia (also Chief Science Officer), and Dr. Andrew Huberman. $75M Series A closed May 2025 led by Greenoaks Capital (also an investor in Stripe, Canva, Discord). Company is on track for $100M+ first-year revenue. Attia listed as CSO in December 2025 archived pages; removed from website by February 2026 with no public explanation from the company.
The Conflict Structure
Both Attia and Huberman held equity in David while serving as primary public voices recommending the product. Attia's entire brand is built on evidence-based longevity medicine and dispassionate scientific evaluation. His CSO title and equity stake made independent evaluation of David's claims structurally impossible — and his audience could not distinguish between scientific endorsement and financial self-interest. Huberman's equity relationship follows the same playbook as his AG1 arrangement.
The Collagen Protein Problem
David's 28g protein comes from a four-protein blend: milk protein isolate, collagen, whey concentrate, and egg white. Collagen is an incomplete protein — it lacks tryptophan, an essential amino acid, and has a lower PDCAAS/DIAAS score for muscle protein synthesis than complete proteins. The company claims a perfect 1.0 PDCAAS for the blend, which is technically achievable by combining collagen with complete proteins — but the label does not disclose individual protein ratios, making independent verification impossible.
EPG & "No Artificial" Claim
David uses EPG (Epoxidized Propoxylated Glycerol) — a modified plant fat derived from rapeseed oil that provides 92% fewer calories per gram than conventional fat. EPG is FDA-approved but has minimal long-term human safety data. The bar also contains acesulfame potassium (Ace-K), a synthetic artificial sweetener, despite early marketing claiming the product had no artificial sweeteners. This claim was updated after launch without explicit consumer notification.
Attia Departure — February 2026
An archived version of David's website from December 2025 listed Peter Attia as Chief Science Officer. By February 2026, Attia's name, title, and photograph had been removed from the site. Rahal confirmed the departure but offered no explanation. A CSO equity holder who builds a brand on science-backed nutrition, then quietly exits a science-officer role, is a signal worth watching — particularly given the unresolved questions about collagen protein claims and EPG safety data.
Kellogg's · $600M · 2017
RXBar
Founded 2012 · Acquired by Kellogg's 2017

RXBar built its brand on a single promise: radical ingredient transparency. The front of the package lists the ingredients — "3 Egg Whites, 6 Almonds, 4 Cashews, 2 Dates" — before anything else. In 2017, that brand was acquired by Kellogg's for $600 million. Kellogg's is the maker of Froot Loops, Pop-Tarts, Frosted Flakes, and Eggo waffles. The formula has held. The mission has not — it now serves the growth objectives of a company whose core business is the antithesis of what RXBar was built to represent.

OwnershipRed
Marketing AlignmentRed
Revenue ModelYellow
Ingredient IntegrityGreen
Scientific BackingYellow
Label ClaimsGreen
Safety TransparencyYellow
Full analysis
Origin & Acquisition
Founded in Chicago in 2012 by Peter Rahal and Jared Smith, initially for the CrossFit community. Whole-food ingredients listed prominently on the front of the package — a genuinely differentiated transparency move in a category dominated by ingredient-hiding. Kellogg's acquired Chicago Bar Co. (RXBar's parent) for $600M in October 2017. At acquisition, RXBar was on track for ~$120M in annual sales. Founders said publicly: "Nothing is changing."
The Mission Contradiction
RXBar's founding premise was no BS — no B.S. ingredients, no B.S. labeling, no hiding behind marketing. Kellogg's business model is built on precisely what RXBar defined itself against: highly processed products with long ingredient lists, marketed to children, carrying health halos their formulas don't support. RXBar's "No BS" front-of-package claim now exists inside a corporation that has never applied that standard to its core brands. The brand promise is structurally impossible to keep under current ownership.
Formula Watch
The original formula has been largely maintained post-acquisition. RXBar's ingredient list remains short, whole-food-based, and front-facing. This is the category's best ingredient integrity score — and the reason for the yellow revenue model score rather than red. The formula is the only thing holding the brand together. Any change to the ingredient sourcing or processing would complete the acquisition arc. Eight years in, the formula holds. Watch conditions: date sourcing, egg white quality standards, and cost-reduction pressure as Kellogg's (now Kellanova, acquired by Mars in 2024) integrates further.
Kellanova — One More Layer
In 2024, Kellogg's spun off its cereal business (WK Kellogg) and renamed its snacking division Kellanova. Mars then acquired Kellanova for $36B in 2024 — making Mars the owner of both KIND and RXBar simultaneously, through different corporate structures. The two brands that defined the "clean bar" category now share the same ultimate parent: the maker of Snickers, M&Ms, and Twix.
Mars Owns Both Kind and RXBar
The two brands most associated with clean-label protein bar transparency — KIND (acquired by Mars directly in 2020 for $5B) and RXBar (acquired by Kellogg's in 2017, then rolled into Kellanova, then into Mars in 2024 for $36B) — are now both subsidiaries of the same privately held candy conglomerate. Neither brand's packaging reflects this. This is the category's structural condition in a single fact.
Mondelēz · $2.9B · 2022
Clif Bar
Founded 1992 · Acquired by Mondelēz 2022

For 30 years, Clif Bar was the category's best argument that independence was possible at scale. Gary Erickson walked away from a $120M buyout offer in 2000, took the company into debt to stay independent, and built a business that reached $1B in revenue without selling. In 2022, he sold to Mondelēz for $2.9B. Mondelēz owns Oreo, Cadbury, Ritz, and — through simultaneous acquisitions — Hu chocolate and Grenade performance bars. Clif Bar, the company that once defined itself against everything Mondelēz represents, is now a Mondelēz brand.

OwnershipRed
Marketing AlignmentRed
Revenue ModelYellow
Ingredient IntegrityYellow
Scientific BackingYellow
Label ClaimsRed
Safety TransparencyRed
Full analysis
The 30-Year Independence Story
Erickson literally went into personal debt to avoid selling in 2000, buying out co-founder Lisa Thomas's 50% stake for $60M when she wanted to accept the Quaker Oats offer. He called it "the gamble of the century." He built a mission-first company — Five Aspirations model covering people, community, planet, brands, and business — and turned down acquisition offers for three decades. The company reached $1.5B in revenue and launched an employee stock ownership plan in 2010 giving employees 20% equity. When Mondelēz paid $2.9B in 2022, approximately $580M went to employees.
Why He Finally Sold
The pandemic disrupted impulse-channel sales (gyms, convenience stores). The company laid off 125 people in 2021 — a shock to a culture known for exceptional employee treatment. Erickson clashed with professional management. Revenue growth had stalled at ~1% CAGR over three years heading into the sale. The independence story ended not with an ideological surrender but a practical one: the business had stopped growing and the founder was exhausted.
Mondelēz Conflict Portfolio
Mondelēz acquired Clif Bar (organic energy bars), Hu chocolate (clean-label chocolate, 2021), and Grenade (UK performance nutrition, 2021) — all simultaneously with continuing to operate Oreo, Cadbury, Chips Ahoy, and Ritz. The company's stated strategy is "reshaping its portfolio toward well-being snacking." Owning both the clean-label brand and the processed-food brand creates the same structural conflict documented in the Hu chocolate profile: two competing standard-sets, one owner, zero incentive to hold the premium standard when margin pressure arrives.
Label Claims Under Watch
Clif Bar's energy bar formula uses organic rolled oats and organic brown rice syrup — a legitimately whole-food base. But the "organic" claim is most prominent on the traditional Clif Bar line. Extended product lines (Clif Kid, Clif Builders, Luna) carry varying ingredient integrity. Brown rice syrup — Clif's primary sweetener — has been flagged in independent research for elevated inorganic arsenic content. No formula changes have been documented post-Mondelēz, but cost-reduction pressure is the watch condition, not current ingredient quality.
The Mondelēz Protein Bar Empire
Through its 2021–2022 acquisition spree, Mondelēz assembled a "well-being snacking" portfolio that includes Clif Bar, Hu chocolate, Grenade, and Perfect Snacks — while simultaneously owning Oreo, Cadbury, Chips Ahoy, Ritz, Triscuit, and Sour Patch Kids. No consumer looking at a Clif Bar wrapper knows that the same company made the Oreo they ate for dessert. This is the conglomerate acquisition pattern at full scale.
Mars, Inc. · ~$5B · 2020
KIND
Founded 2004 · Acquired by Mars 2020

KIND's origin story is one of the most compelling in American snacking: Daniel Lubetzky, the son of a Holocaust survivor, built a company around the belief that business could be a force for human good. The KIND Promise — that the first and predominant ingredient in every product would be a nutrient-dense food — is a genuine, auditable commitment. Mars acquired 40% in 2017, then the remainder for ~$5B in 2020. Mars also owns Snickers, M&Ms, Twix, Milky Way, and — since 2024 — RXBar. KIND operates as a distinct subsidiary. The KIND Promise remains in effect. The ownership conflict is structural, not yet operational.

OwnershipRed
Marketing AlignmentYellow
Revenue ModelYellow
Ingredient IntegrityYellow
Scientific BackingRed
Label ClaimsRed
Safety TransparencyYellow
Full analysis
The KIND Promise — What It Actually Says
The KIND Promise specifies that the first and predominant ingredient in every product must be a nutrient-dense food — whole nuts, whole grains, or whole fruit. This is a real, auditable commitment and it has held post-acquisition. The original KIND bar's ingredient list leads with almonds, dates, or other whole foods, not refined sugar or isolates. This is the basis for the yellow ingredient integrity score rather than red — the promise is documented, public, and so far maintained.
FDA "Healthy" Warning — 2015
In 2015 the FDA sent KIND a warning letter requiring removal of the word "healthy" from four bar varieties. The issue: FDA regulations at the time required a "healthy" food to contain 1g or less of saturated fat, but KIND bars — built on whole nuts — have naturally higher saturated fat from the nuts themselves. KIND challenged the FDA's definition and the FDA ultimately acknowledged its definition needed updating. KIND was in the right scientifically; the regulatory framing was outdated. But the label claims dimension scores red because FDA scrutiny on claims is a documented risk.
Why Lubetzky Sold
Lubetzky told the New York Times he needed an international partner to prevent competitors from taking KIND's brand into new markets first. The Mars minority stake in 2017 was framed as a partnership, not a sale. The full acquisition in 2020 was always structurally likely — Mars had been granted a right of first acquisition in the original 2017 deal. Lubetzky retains a financial stake and advisory role. He has donated a majority of his proceeds to The KIND Foundation.
The Mars Portfolio Conflict
Mars operates KIND under a separate business unit with its own leadership. The candy business and the health business have not visibly contaminated each other's formulas. But Mars is a privately held company with no public disclosure obligations and no external accountability structure. KIND's formula integrity depends entirely on Mars's internal decision not to apply margin pressure. No Mission Lock, no golden share, no legal protection equivalent to what Tony's Chocolonely built.
The Best Acquisition Story — Still Not Enough for Green
KIND has the most defensible post-acquisition story in the protein bar category. The KIND Promise is real. Lubetzky remains involved. The formula holds. The FDA dispute was one KIND mostly won. It scores yellow across multiple dimensions — the best outcome in this category — but cannot score green under current ownership. Mars is the world's largest candy company, privately held, with no accountability mechanism to enforce KIND's stated values if financial incentives ever shift.
Simply Good Foods (SMPL) · $1B · 2019
Quest
Founded 2010 · Acquired by Simply Good Foods 2019

Quest is the category's mixed transparency — better positioned than most on ingredient transparency, meaningfully compromised on label accuracy. The core issues are the net carb math and fiber source legitimacy questions. Quest bars use soluble corn fiber (formerly isomalto-oligosaccharides / IMO) as the primary fiber source, allowing a substantial reduction in "net carbs" through fiber subtraction. Independent tests and a class action lawsuit both raised questions about whether IMO/soluble corn fiber behaves metabolically the way the net carb math assumes.

OwnershipRed
Marketing AlignmentYellow
Revenue ModelYellow
Ingredient IntegrityYellow
Scientific BackingRed
Label ClaimsYellow
Safety TransparencyYellow
Full analysis
The Net Carb Math Problem
A standard Quest bar shows 21–25g total carbohydrates and 4–5g "net carbs" after subtracting 17–20g of fiber. The fiber primarily comes from soluble corn fiber (formerly IMO) — a synthetic fiber manufactured by applying enzymes to corn starch. IMO/soluble corn fiber is legally classified as dietary fiber, but research indicates it does not behave like inulin or other prebiotic fibers in the gut. A 2012 blood sugar study by a diabetes support group found significant glycemic response in some participants. Quest changed from IMO to soluble corn fiber in 2016 after reformulation complaints, but the metabolic math question persisted. The "net carb" claim is legal. Whether 4g net carbs accurately represents the metabolic impact for diabetic or keto consumers is an open question.
Sucralose & Sweetener Stack
Quest bars use a layered sweetener approach: erythritol, stevia, and sucralose (Splenda) across most SKUs. Sucralose is an artificial sweetener with ongoing research debate about gut microbiome impact, potential DNA alteration effects in high doses (animal studies), and possible digestive discomfort. It appears at the end of the Quest ingredient list — indicating small quantities — but its presence alongside erythritol (a known GI disruptor in some consumers) means the sweetener stack carries digestive risk for sensitive consumers. Quest's historical reformulation from IMO to soluble corn fiber already demonstrated the company's willingness to swap fiber sources under commercial pressure.
Simply Good Foods — The SPAC Structure
Simply Good Foods was formed in 2017 via a SPAC (Special Purpose Acquisition Company) from a Centerview Capital offshoot. SPACs exist specifically to acquire and consolidate consumer brands for financial return — not brand mission. Simply Good Foods already owned Atkins Nutritionals (diet bars, shakes) before acquiring Quest. The parent company explicitly stated its goal is to "become a broader nutritional snacking company" through ongoing acquisitions. Quest's "active lifestyle" and low-carb positioning serves the PE portfolio thesis, not an independent mission. Founder Tom Bilyeu left in 2016 — before the acquisition — to launch Impact Theory.
The Class Action & Reformulation Record
A class action lawsuit alleged Quest understated calories and overstated dietary fiber in its bars. Quest disputed the claims. The company has also reformulated twice: from IMO to a different soluble corn fiber in 2016 (causing customer complaints about texture), and ongoing formula adjustments across flavors. The reformulation history is a yellow signal, not red — companies update formulas for legitimate reasons. But in the context of fiber-math-dependent health claims, undisclosed formula changes are a transparency failure for consumers who made purchasing decisions based on specific nutritional math.
Why Quest Is Yellow, Not Red
Quest scores better than the other four brands on ingredient integrity because: the ingredient list is disclosed in full, individual component amounts are partially visible (protein, fiber, fat), and no active investor-endorser conflict has been documented. The net carb math issue is real but is an industry-wide problem with the FDA's fiber classification system — not a Quest-specific deception. The ownership conflict is structural (SPAC/PE parent with no mission alignment), not formula-level. Quest is the category's least-bad option — which, in this category, is a damning thing to be.
Who Actually Owns the Protein Bar Category
Mars, Inc. (Private)
KIND RXBar* Snickers M&Ms Twix Milky Way
Mondelēz International (MDLZ)
Clif Bar Hu Chocolate Grenade Perfect Snacks Oreo Cadbury Ritz
Simply Good Foods (SMPL)
Quest Atkins SimplyProtein

*RXBar via Kellogg's → Kellanova → Mars (2024 $36B acquisition). Highlighted brands traced in this category.

Quick Check — All 5 Brands
Dimension
David
RXBar
Clif
KIND
Quest
Ownership
VC / opaque
Mars (via Kellogg's)
Mondelēz
Mars
SMPL / Atkins PE
Marketing Alignment
Attia/Huberman equity
"No BS" → Kellogg's
Mission → Mondelēz
Promise holds, Mars
No major conflict
Ingredient Integrity
Collagen as primary, EPG, Ace-K
Whole food, fully disclosed
Organic base, watch list
KIND Promise holds
Full list, net carb math issue
Scientific Backing
No independent trials
Simple formula, low risk
Organic/whole food base
FDA "healthy" warning 2015
Fiber efficacy disputed
Label Claims
Collagen protein; "no artificial" changed
Ingredients listed on front
Organic emphasis; extension lines vary
FDA scrutiny on "healthy"
Net carbs legal but contested
Safety Transparency
EPG novel ingredient, limited data
No third-party batch COA
Brown rice syrup arsenic; no COA
No third-party batch COA
Sucralose/erythritol GI risk
Editorial Context
Why There Is No Green Profile

In every other Traced category, at least one brand scores green. Proteins has Momentous. Electrolytes has LMNT. Greens has Ritual. Chocolate has Tony's. Protein bars has no equivalent.

This is not because the standard is impossibly high. It's because the acquisition pipeline has been faster than the founding pipeline. Every brand that developed the kind of ingredient integrity, ownership transparency, and marketing alignment required for a green score was acquired before it could consolidate that identity at scale.

RXBar came closest — and was acquired at exactly the moment it was demonstrating proof of concept. The founder who built David specifically to do better has introduced new ingredient integrity questions (collagen fraction, EPG) and the investor-endorser conflict the category's green benchmark would need to avoid.

The absence of a green profile is the editorial finding. It tells you more about the category than any individual brand score does.

What to Watch For

David / Attia departure fallout. Peter Attia's quiet exit from the CSO role in February 2026 is unresolved. If the departure relates to disagreements over ingredient claims or EPG safety data, it will surface eventually. The collagen protein fraction question has not been answered publicly.

Mars / RXBar + KIND consolidation. Mars now owns both brands. Whether they maintain separate supply chains, separate brand standards, and separate ingredient commitments — or whether cost synergies eventually compress the gap — is the watch condition for the next 3–5 years.

Clif's Five Aspirations under Mondelēz. The 2022 acquisition is only 3 years old. Clif's organic sourcing standards and sustainability commitments have not visibly degraded yet. They may not. Or 2025 earnings pressure may produce the same outcome seen in every prior acquisition of a values-first food brand.

The next independent bar brand. The category creates a business opportunity: a protein bar built with full dose transparency, no investor-endorser conflict, NSF certification, and founder-controlled governance. That brand does not currently exist at meaningful scale. When it does, it will score green.