ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO): 5 FORCES Analysis [Nov-2025 Updated]

You're looking for a clear-eyed assessment of this R&D-focused biotech/agtech firm's competitive spot, and honestly, the landscape is a mixed bag. While their proprietary algal IP keeps supplier power low, the market is tough: you face intense rivalry and high substitute threats, which is really showing up in the financials. As of September 30, 2025, TTM revenue was just $209K, yet the nine-month net loss for 2025 hit $6.88 million, meaning customer power is high right now. Let's break down exactly where the pressure points are across all five of Porter's forces so you can see the near-term risks and opportunities clearly.

ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) - Porter's Five Forces: Bargaining power of suppliers

When you look at ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) through the lens of supplier power, the picture is quite favorable for the company, primarily because their most critical input isn't something they buy; it's something they own.

Power is low; ZIVO's core input is its own proprietary algal strain, a unique IP asset. This is the foundation of their competitive moat. ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. holds the intellectual property for the specific strain of microalgae, Zivolife™, which means they control the source material that gives their product its unique nutritional profile. They aren't dependent on external suppliers for the genetic blueprint of their product, which is a massive advantage in the biotech/agtech space. Honestly, this IP control fundamentally shifts the power dynamic away from material suppliers.

Contract manufacturing is outsourced to Alimenta Algae SAC, creating some reliance. You are definitely reliant on Alimenta Algae SAC, their contract manufacturer based in Ica, Peru, to physically grow and process the biomass. This creates a single point of failure, or at least a significant concentration risk. However, ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. has structured this relationship to mitigate some of that leverage. They signed a binding Contract Manufacturing Term Sheet in July 2023, which commits ZIVOLife LLC to purchase all product produced by Alimenta at that site until August 31, 2028. Alimenta Algae has been awarded a 5-year contract manufacturing agreement for exclusive sourcing under what are described as the most favorable terms. Still, reliance on one facility, even with a long-term contract, means supplier power exists, albeit in execution rather than input cost.

Production inputs like water, light, and nutrients are commodity-like, lowering supplier leverage. ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s cultivation model is intentionally designed to use basic, cost-efficient methods, avoiding complex, costly fermentation systems. They favor shallow ponds where water and sunlight are the primary environmental inputs. These are essentially free or very low-cost commodities, meaning the suppliers for bulk items like water or energy have negligible leverage over ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s margins. The company's goal is for the algal strain to flourish in the simplest production environments at the lowest possible cost. That's smart planning.

The company's value chain is heavily weighted on R&D, not raw material costs. This is where the numbers really tell the story. For the trailing twelve months ending September 30, 2025, ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s Research and Development expenses were reported at $3,135K (in thousands of USD). Compare that to the trailing twelve-month Cost of Revenue, which was $108K (in thousands of USD) for the same period, based on the latest available financial data. The R&D spend dwarfs the cost of the actual manufactured product, showing that value creation is almost entirely driven by ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s internal scientific work and IP development, not the cost of the physical inputs. Even looking at the initial purchase commitment, the $16,040 purchased from Alimenta in the entirety of 2023 is small against the TTM revenue of $209K as of September 30, 2025.

Here's a quick look at the supplier landscape and cost structure context:

The key takeaways on supplier power are:

• IP Control: ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. dictates the what (the strain), limiting supplier power over product definition.
• Contractual Lock-in: The 5-year agreement with Alimenta Algae SAC provides supply stability until 2028.
• Low Variable Input Cost: Reliance on natural resources like light keeps basic input costs minimal.
• Value Chain Skew: The $3,135K TTM R&D spend versus $108K TTM Cost of Revenue shows where the real money and risk lie-in science, not sourcing.

If onboarding takes 14+ days, churn risk rises, but for suppliers, the risk is more about Alimenta Algae SAC's ability to scale to the 100,000 kg target by late 2025. Finance: draft 13-week cash view by Friday.

ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) - Porter's Five Forces: Bargaining power of customers

When you look at ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO)'s customer landscape, the bargaining power leans heavily toward the buyer side, and that's a direct consequence of who they are trying to sell to and how small their current revenue base is. Honestly, this dynamic is something you need to factor into any valuation model you're building.

The power is high because ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. is targeting the big players in the market. They are aiming for large global animal health and food/supplement companies. We see evidence of this strategic focus in their recent activities, such as the June 20, 2025 press release mentioning an advancement of their compounds with a 'Leading Global Animal Health Company' in the poultry sector. The company's stated applications are broad, covering Human Dietary Supplements & Nutraceuticals, Food Ingredients, Animal Feed, Dietary Supplements & Drug Development, and Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, all areas dominated by established, large-scale buyers.

To be fair, customers in these sectors definitely have strong alternatives. They are not locked into ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s proprietary ingredients; they can easily source existing feed additives or nutraceutical ingredients from established suppliers. This ease of switching, especially when ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. is still scaling, gives the customer significant leverage in price and contract negotiations. It's a classic supplier-customer power imbalance when the buyer has many options.

Here's the quick math that really drives this point home: ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s Trailing Twelve Months (TTM) revenue as of September 30, 2025, was only $209K. That low sales volume translates directly into weak negotiation leverage for ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. For context, their revenue for the third quarter ending September 30, 2025, was $0.065625 million (or $65,625). When your total annual revenue is this small relative to the potential customers you are courting, you are definitely taking the price they offer. What this estimate hides is the potential value of their IP licensing, but on a pure sales basis, the leverage is minimal.

Furthermore, ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s business model seems geared toward facilitating customer control. The company aims to private-label its ingredients or solutions. This strategy inherently cedes control over branding, final consumer pricing, and market positioning to the larger marketer-the customer. They become a component supplier rather than a brand owner, which further solidifies the buyer's power over ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s margins.

We can summarize the key factors contributing to high customer bargaining power:

• Targeting large, established global animal health firms.
• Availability of numerous existing ingredient alternatives.
• Very low TTM revenue of $209K as of 30-Sep-2025.
• Business model emphasizing private-label arrangements.
• High net loss for the TTM period at -$8.49M.

You can see the financial reality reflected in the stock's metrics too; the TTM Diluted EPS Loss was -$2.27. Small revenue and large losses mean customers know ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. needs the deal more than they do.

Finance: draft a sensitivity analysis showing margin impact if the largest potential customer demands a 20% price reduction by next Tuesday.

ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) - Porter's Five Forces: Competitive rivalry

You're looking at the competitive landscape for ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) right now, and it's definitely a pressure cooker. The rivalry is intense because ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. isn't just fighting in one arena; it's spread thin across multiple, distinct markets: biotech, agtech, and nutraceuticals. Honestly, this diversification is a double-edged sword in a high-stakes rivalry.

The competition ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. faces comes from established players who have significantly greater resources. Think about companies in the broader health supplement space or large biopharma firms that can easily outspend ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. on clinical trials and market penetration. For instance, ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. is competing in segments where the poultry vaccines market alone is projected to reach $4.2 billion by 2032, a massive pool of capital ZIVO needs to tap into.

ZIVO's key advantage, which it must aggressively market to counter this rivalry, is its proprietary algae's superior bioactive compound activity. While I can't give you the exact comparative number for Superoxide Dismutase (SOD) activity right now, the internal claim is that its activity is nearly double that of a competitor. This technological edge is what ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. is banking on to carve out market share from incumbents like 180 Life Sciences (ATNFW) or larger entities like USANA Health Sciences Inc. (USNA).

The financial reality of ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. adds another layer of pressure, driving the need for rapid market entry and success. The company posted a nine-month net loss of $6.88 million for the period ending September 30, 2025, on revenue of only $119,025. This high burn rate, coupled with significant R&D costs, forces ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. to fight harder and faster than its better-capitalized rivals. Management has clearly stated they estimate needing $6.0 million over the next 12 months to fund operations, which underscores the urgency.

Here's a quick look at the financial pressure driving this competitive intensity. The net loss for the first nine months of 2025 is substantial, even though it represents an improvement over the prior year's loss. What this estimate hides is the rapidly deteriorating liquidity position.

The high R&D costs, which ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. incurs across both its biotech and agtech arms, are a constant drain that competitors with deeper pockets can absorb more easily. This financial strain directly translates into aggressive competitive behavior, as ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. must secure commercial traction to survive. The current cash balance of only $57,222 as of September 30, 2025, is a stark indicator of this reality, down significantly from $1,542,442 at the end of 2024.

The competitive rivalry is further shaped by the nature of ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s product pipeline and market entry strategy:

• Rivalry spans human nutrition and animal health segments.
• Pressure to commercialize quickly due to low cash reserves.
• Need to defend proprietary algal strain intellectual property.
• Competition from established firms with massive marketing budgets.
• Focus on reducing antibiotic use in animal health is a key differentiator.

The market entry pressure is real; if onboarding takes 14+ days, churn risk rises. ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. must execute flawlessly to convert its scientific advantage into sustainable revenue streams before its cash runs out.

ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) - Porter's Five Forces: Threat of substitutes

The threat of substitutes for ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO)'s proprietary algal compounds is definitively high. You see this clearly when you look at the company's current financial standing; as of September 30, 2025, ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. reported revenue of only $0.119025 million for the nine months ended, and the company is currently in pre-revenue status. This indicates that established, readily available alternatives dominate the target markets for human nutrition and animal health applications.

Traditional, non-algae-based antibiotics and feed additives represent a massive, entrenched substitute base. For instance, in the poultry sector alone, the coccidiosis market, which ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. is targeting with its non-antibiotic approach, was valued at $1.5 billion annually. Furthermore, the broader livestock vaccines market was valued at $6.01 billion in 2024, and the companion animal vaccines market stood at $5.43 billion in the same year. These figures illustrate the sheer scale of the existing solutions ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s platform must displace or integrate with.

Other plant-based proteins, vitamins, and anti-inflammatories are also readily available substitutes for both human and animal use. While the algae-based animal feed market itself is growing-projected to be valued at US$ 4,832.5 Mn in 2025-this segment is still competing against much larger traditional feed ingredient markets.

Here's a quick comparison mapping the scale of the established substitute market versus ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s current revenue base in the animal health space:

The company's unique value proposition is what attempts to shift this balance. ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. is positioning its product platform as a new, plant-based, non-GMO, antibiotic-free, and sustainable source of protein, fiber, and micronutrients. This focus directly counters the regulatory pressure against antibiotic overuse and the consumer demand for 'clean' livestock solutions, which are major drivers in the market transformation.

• Non-GMO sourcing is a key differentiator against many commodity ingredients.
• Antibiotic-free positioning addresses regulatory risk for producers.
• Sustainability claims appeal to modern consumer preference trends.
• Proprietary algal strains offer unique bioactive molecules.

ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) - Porter's Five Forces: Threat of new entrants

The threat of new entrants for ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. (ZIVO) hovers in a space between moderate and high, really depending on which specific market segment you are looking at-be it a high-barrier therapeutic area or a lower-barrier nutritional ingredient space. It's not a simple one-size-fits-all answer here.

Intellectual Property as a Moat

ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. has built significant barriers through its intellectual property (IP) portfolio. This portfolio isn't just one patent; it's a collection covering proprietary algal and bacterial strains, biologically active molecules and complexes, production techniques, and cultivation techniques. These are all covered by existing patents or are currently patent-pending inventions aimed at human and animal health applications. For a new player, replicating this depth of protected, validated biological assets is a major undertaking.

R&D and Regulatory Hurdles for High-Value Applications

When a new entrant targets ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s therapeutic candidates, the costs and timelines become substantial. You see this reflected in ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s own spending. For instance, in the three months ended June 30, 2025, the Company incurred approximately $480,000 in research and development expenses. This is down significantly from the $2.3 million spent in the comparable quarter of 2024, showing a shift in spending focus, but the historical investment is still relevant. For the year ended December 31, 2023, external clinical study expenses alone were approximately $900,000, with internal staff costs adding another $1.2 million.

Regulatory pathways for novel therapeutics or New Dietary Ingredients (NDI) are time-consuming and expensive. While ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. self-affirmed GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) back in November 2018, and updated the dossier in May 2023, new ingredients face scrutiny. Based on older industry estimates for a single NDIN (New Dietary Ingredient Notification), costs could approach $500,000, factoring in toxicology studies that might range from $178,000 to $328,000 plus consultant fees. Plus, the FDA is still working on its guidance, with a draft document on NDINs and Related Issues planned for its 2025 schedule. That regulatory uncertainty adds risk for any new entrant.

Capital Intensity of Scaling Production

Honestly, the capital needed varies wildly based on the chosen technology. Basic, small-scale algae cultivation using open raceway ponds might only require an initial outlay between $50,000 and $200,000. However, scaling up to commercial, high-quality production is where the real capital barrier hits. Moving to medium-scale using closed photobioreactors (PBRs) can jump to a range of $500,000 to $2,000,000. For truly large-scale biofuel applications, investments can exceed $10 million.

ZIVO Bioscience, Inc. attempts to navigate this by favoring low-cost, basic covered pond systems over complex PBRs. Still, even for a PBR system, a baseline Total Installed Capital Cost was estimated at $84,900,000 in one preliminary model. This difference in required capital for quality and scale is a major hurdle for potential competitors.

Here's a quick look at the cost spectrum for different cultivation approaches:

The market itself seems to favor the lower-cost route for bulk applications; open ponds are anticipated to hold the largest revenue share, around 56.0% in 2025, in the algae biofuel segment.

New entrants must contend with ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s established IP position and the high sunk costs associated with regulatory approval in the therapeutic space. The low bar for basic cultivation is deceptive; achieving ZIVO Bioscience, Inc.'s quality and scale requires serious capital.

• Proprietary IP covers strains, molecules, and processes.
• NDI submission costs estimated up to $500,000 (2016 data).
• ZIVO Q2 2025 R&D spend was approx. $480,000.
• Scaling to commercial quality demands capital over $1 million typically.

Finance: draft 13-week cash view by Friday.