The feed additive market continues to grow, with products promising improvements in gut health, immunity, growth and overall calf performance. Yet with dozens of options available, deciding which products deserve a place in a nutrition program can be challenging.
During a recent webinar, Tana Dennis, senior director of innovation at Actus Nutrition, outlined a simple framework she uses when evaluating additives. Rather than focusing on marketing claims, Dennis encourages producers to start with four practical questions.
1. What Problem are You Trying to Solve?
The first step is identifying a specific and measurable objective.
“First and foremost, what is the problem that additive is supposed to solve in the context of your operation?” Dennis asks.
That may sound obvious, but it’s common to evaluate additives before clearly defining the challenge to be addressed. An operation struggling with calf scours may need a different solution than one focused on improving average daily gain or reducing respiratory disease treatments.
Dennis recommends establishing measurable benchmarks before considering any product.
“Do you have specific measurable outcomes you want to solve for?” she asks. “Is it gut health related? Are you trying to push growth rates? Are you trying to reduce treatment rates?”
Without a clearly defined target, it becomes difficult to determine whether an additive is delivering value.
“You have to identify what that is in order to make sure that what you’re evaluating actually fits the job that you’re trying to hire it to do,” Dennis says.
2. How is the Additive Supposed to Work?
Once a problem has been identified, the next question is understanding the additive’s mode of action.
“When a supplier is coming to you with an additive to try to implement, you need to ask for clarity on how it works,” Dennis says.
That information helps producers, nutritionists and veterinarians determine where the product fits within the broader feeding program and whether it addresses the desired outcome.
For example, some additives are intended to support gut integrity, while others target immune function, nutrient digestion or microbial populations. Even effective products may produce disappointing results if they are used in situations where their biological mechanism does not match the challenge being addressed.
Dennis notes that understanding how an additive works also helps determine when it should be used and whether nutrition or management changes should be prioritized first. In fact, she cautions producers to ensure the nutritional foundation of the animal is correct before looking for additives to compensate for shortcomings elsewhere in the program.
3. Has it Been Proven Under Real-World Conditions?
“I will always, always ask for data, data, data,” Dennis says.
Not all research is created equal, but you should seek evidence that demonstrates the additive can consistently deliver results. Dennis recommends asking whether the product has been evaluated in university trials, large-scale commercial field studies or internal company research.
Peer-reviewed research remains an important benchmark because it provides independent evaluation of the results. However, field trials conducted under commercial conditions can also offer valuable insight into how products perform outside of highly controlled research settings.
“It doesn’t mean that one set of data is better than the others,” Dennis explains. “But I would lean toward having more control or having more animals as being a way to quickly evaluate what those results look like.”
Ultimately, you should look beyond testimonials and seek evidence that demonstrates a measurable benefit in situations similar to their own operation.
4. If It Works, Does It Pay Off?
Even if an additive addresses a specific problem and has supporting data, the final question is whether the economics make sense.
The answer depends on the problem being addressed. In some cases, reducing treatment rates, mortality or labor requirements can generate a clear financial return. In others, the value may come from improving long-term performance or protecting animal health.
Dennis emphasizes the goal is not necessarily achieving a dramatic return on investment. Some additives may justify their cost simply by preventing losses or helping maintain performance during challenging periods.
“The ROI could be that you’re just breaking even because it really depends on the problem that you’re trying to solve,” she says.
However, the product must still create biologically meaningful results.
“The bottom line is it has to solve the problem that you’re hiring for and it has to be biologically relevant to why you’re trying to solve it,” Dennis says.
A Checklist That Starts With Questions
As feed additive options continue to expand, avoid costly mistakes by approaching new products with a healthy degree of curiosity.
Rather than asking whether an additive is popular or heavily marketed, ask four simple questions: What problem am I solving? How does the product work? What evidence supports it? And does it generate a meaningful return?
Those answers provide a much stronger foundation for decision-making than any marketing brochure ever could.
