Selling to an Amazon Aggregator vs a Competitive Sale

This article compares the two paths on the facts. It covers how aggregators value a brand, what the market looks like in 2026, and when each route produces the better outcome. It is written for founders of growing ecommerce businesses who are preparing a sale.

Key takeaways

• An Amazon aggregator buys brands, bundles them, and runs operations through a central platform.
• The aggregator market has consolidated sharply. Thrasio filed for Chapter 11 in early 2024, Razor Group acquired Perch, and deal volume runs well below 2021.
• Aggregators pay roughly 2.5x to 3.5x SDE for Amazon brands in 2026, often with a high earn-out share.
• A competitive process puts several buyer types in parallel and improves both price and structure.
• The number that matters is rarely the headline, it is the share of the price that clears at closing.

Table of contents

1. What an Amazon aggregator is
2. The aggregator market in 2026
3. The competitive sale process
4. Head-to-head comparison
5. The earn-out question
6. When each path fits
7. Worked example
8. Frequently asked questions
9. Sources

What an Amazon aggregator is

An Amazon aggregator is a buyer that acquires many small brands and runs them under one roof. The model rests on scale in sourcing, logistics and marketing, plus central control of ad budgets. Thrasio, Perch, Razor Group and Berlin Brands Group were among the best known.

How aggregators value a brand

Aggregators usually value on SDE, the seller's discretionary earnings after owner add-backs. For Amazon FBA brands, multiples in 2026 typically run 2.5x to 3.5x SDE. The drivers are the stability of rankings, the margin after ad spend, and the dependence on single products.

An aggregator's valuation follows a portfolio logic. It weighs how well a brand fits its existing structure and which costs it can cut centrally. That is why two aggregators can value the same brand very differently.

The difference from the broader buyer pool

Aggregators are one buyer type among several. Strategic acquirers, private equity platforms and family offices value the same brand on other criteria and pay other prices. That range is the reason a single-buyer negotiation rarely finds the ceiling.

The aggregator market in 2026

The aggregator market has changed fundamentally since 2022 and is much smaller. The era of aggressive buying at high multiples is over. An owner selling to an aggregator today is negotiating with a more selective and more cautious counterparty.

The consolidation is well documented. Thrasio filed for Chapter 11 in February 2024 with liabilities above $3 billion. Razor Group acquired the US aggregator Perch in 2024, a sign of the shakeout. Active buyers that remain include Heroes, Berlin Brands Group and Olsam.

Deal volume runs at roughly 10% to 20% of the 2021 pace, per analysis of ecommerce M&A in 2026. For sellers that means fewer bidders, tighter diligence and a stronger focus on real profitability over pure revenue growth. The aggregator-era peak of 6x to 7x has fallen to 3x to 4x for most categories.

The competitive sale process

A competitive sale process puts several buyers in parallel and has them compete for the same business. Instead of negotiating with one aggregator, the seller runs a structured process across strategic acquirers, financial buyers and fitting aggregators at the same time.

Many buyers in parallel

The core of the approach is competition. When several qualified buyers submit offers, price improves and so does structure. Buyers raise the secured cash share and ease earn-out terms to stay in the running.

Head-to-head: aggregator vs competitive process

Both paths have their place, but they differ sharply on speed, price and certainty. The table below sets the main criteria side by side.

The earn-out question

The earn-out is where the two paths differ most. In ecommerce deals, roughly 60% to 75% of the price clears as cash at closing, with the balance as an earn-out over twelve to twenty-four months. The size of that secured share often matters more than the headline number.

The experience of 2021 and 2022 is instructive here. Many founders who sold to aggregators watched central marketing teams pull back the ad budgets on their brand, rankings slip, and the agreed earn-outs go unmet. The performance-based portion hung on decisions the seller no longer controlled after closing.

That points to a clear priority in any negotiation. A high cash share at closing and self-controllable earn-out criteria protect the seller.

When each path fits

The choice depends on size, profile and goals. Some setups suit a direct sale to an aggregator, others clearly favor a competitive process.

When the aggregator path fits

A direct sale to an aggregator can fit when the brand is heavily Amazon-FBA based, has a clear category profile, and the owner is optimizing for speed. Smaller brands with SDE under about $500K can also find the aggregator to be the natural buyer. The condition is a firm negotiation over the cash share.

When a competitive process wins

A competitive process usually wins when the brand has its own channels, a healthy contribution margin, and revenue in the several-million-dollar range. Institutional buyers tend to engage brands from about $4M to $5M in revenue upward. In that band, competition creates the largest lever on price and structure.

Worked example: headline vs expected proceeds

The gap between a high headline price and the amount actually received is best shown with numbers. An Amazon brand with $600K in SDE receives two offers.

The figures are guide values for illustration, not a promise. The realization rates are assumptions and vary by deal. The actual outcome depends on the brand, its channels, margin and negotiation.

What this means for sellers

For sale preparation the guideline is simple. The aggregator is one possible buyer, and rarely the only one. An owner who knows their value range and includes several buyer types negotiates from a stronger position. A competitive sale is most valuable when the brand is healthy and growing.

The focus stays on the structure of the price. A high cash share at closing and fair, self-controllable earn-out criteria protect the outcome better than any high headline multiple.

Last updated on July 27, 2026.