Global Hyaluronic Acid Trade Falls 89% from Peak as February Liquidity Collapses

Global hyaluronic acid trade moved from a major supply release in May 2025 to a severe contraction in February 2026, exposing substantial changes in physical availability, pricing, package structure and transaction liquidity.

Between March 2025 and February 2026, recorded trade reached:

• 9.25 million kg of hyaluronic acid
• 15.11 million reported units
• USD 39.48 million in transaction value
• 8,410 trade records
• Weighted average price of USD 4.2666/kg
• Average value of USD 2.6125 per reported unit

Physical trade weight peaked at 1.64 million kg in May 2025, before falling to only 183,323 kg in February 2026. This represented an 88.8% peak-to-trough contraction.

The decline was even sharper in several other indicators:

• Reported quantity fell 97.1% from its June peak.
• Trade count fell 84.5% from its October high.
• Transaction value fell 80.9% from its July peak.
• Monthly weight-based prices ranged from USD 1.92/kg to USD 8.38/kg.

The market did not follow a single volume cycle. May generated the highest physical weight and the lowest price per kilogram, July produced the greatest transaction value, October recorded the most trades, and December delivered the highest average price per kilogram.

February 2026 then became an extreme low-liquidity month. Weight, quantity, value and transaction count all reached their lowest levels, while the reported value per unit surged because only a very small number of units remained in the trade basket.

For hyaluronic acid buyers, suppliers and distributors, the data shows why annual averages are insufficient. Physical weight, product grade, molecular weight, package format, regulatory requirements and transaction liquidity must be evaluated together.

Key Hyaluronic Acid Market Findings

Physical trade weight declined by 88.8%. Monthly volume fell from 1.64 million kg in May 2025 to 183,323 kg in February 2026.

May was the strongest bulk procurement window. It recorded the highest physical weight and the lowest average price at USD 1.92/kg.

June recorded the greatest reported quantity. Quantity reached 1.93 million units, but physical weight remained well below the May peak, indicating a different packaging or product mix.

July generated the highest monthly transaction value. Total value reached USD 5.12 million, supported by strong physical volume and a more favorable price mix.

October recorded the most transactions. A total of 892 trades were completed, indicating broad market participation despite neither weight nor value reaching an annual high.

December produced the highest price per kilogram. The monthly average reached USD 8.38/kg as physical weight declined to 421,896 kg.

February marked a severe liquidity crash. Trade count fell to only 138, reported quantity dropped to 56,624 units and monthly value declined below USD 1 million.

Physical availability and price were strongly inversely related. Higher-weight months generally produced lower average prices, while restricted physical supply supported stronger pricing.

The February price per reported unit was not a broad market benchmark. Its USD 17.24/unit reading resulted primarily from an extreme collapse in reported quantity and a shift toward a small number of selective transactions.

Global Hyaluronic Acid Trade Overview

Hyaluronic acid is used across several high-value downstream markets:

• Injectable aesthetic products
• Dermal fillers
• Ophthalmic preparations
• Medical devices
• Wound-care products
• Pharmaceutical formulations
• Cosmetics and personal care
• Nutraceuticals and dietary supplements
• Functional foods
• Veterinary applications
• Research and biotechnology

The market includes several forms and specifications, including:

• Hyaluronic acid
• Sodium hyaluronate
• Hydrolyzed hyaluronic acid
• Cross-linked hyaluronic acid
• High-molecular-weight material
• Low-molecular-weight material
• Cosmetic-grade material
• Food-grade material
• Pharmaceutical-grade material
• Injectable or medical-device grade material

Prices can vary substantially according to:

• Molecular-weight range
• Purity
• Fermentation process
• Microbial limits
• Endotoxin limits
• Protein and nucleic-acid residue
• Intended application
• Regulatory documentation
• Package size
• Shipment volume
• Origin and destination
• Freight and delivery terms

A kilogram of standard cosmetic-grade sodium hyaluronate cannot be directly compared with pharmaceutical or injectable-grade material.

Changes in product grade and package structure therefore played an important role in the monthly price movements recorded in the trade data.

Overall Hyaluronic Acid Trade Performance

The market averaged approximately:

• 771,198 kg per month
• 1.26 million reported units per month
• USD 3.29 million in monthly transaction value
• 701 transactions per month

February 2026 fell substantially below each of these averages.

Its physical weight was only 24% of the monthly average, while its trade count was less than one-fifth of the normal monthly level.

Monthly Hyaluronic Acid Trade Data

Monthly Weight, Quantity and Transaction Value

Monthly Prices and Trade Activity

March and April: A Stable Opening Followed by Lower Availability

March Established a Balanced Starting Point

March 2025 recorded:

• 760,007 kg of physical weight
• 1.42 million reported units
• USD 3.80 million in transaction value
• 719 trades
• Average price of USD 5.00/kg

Average weight per transaction reached approximately 1,057 kg, while average transaction value was around USD 5,283.

The month presented a relatively balanced combination of volume, price and market participation.

April Weight Declined but Value Remained Stable

Physical weight fell 26.5% in April to 558,498 kg.

Reported quantity declined only 5.0%, while transaction value increased slightly to USD 3.81 million.

The average price rose to USD 6.82/kg, 36.5% above the March level.

This combination indicates that April’s smaller physical flow was offset by stronger realized pricing or a higher-value product mix.

For buyers, April was a less favorable procurement month than March:

• Physical availability weakened.
• Price per kilogram increased.
• Average weight per trade declined.
• Market participation fell to 648 transactions.

For suppliers, however, the month delivered stronger pricing without a corresponding decline in total transaction value.

May: Record Physical Volume and the Lowest Price

May produced the most significant supply event of the reporting period.

Physical trade weight surged 194.3% month on month to 1.64 million kg.

The month represented 17.76% of total annual weight, making it the single largest contributor to the year’s physical flow.

At the same time, the average price per kilogram fell 71.9% to USD 1.92, the lowest level in the dataset.

The combination of maximum volume and minimum pricing makes May the clearest bulk procurement window.

May also recorded:

• 1.58 million reported units
• USD 3.15 million in transaction value
• 795 trades
• Average weight of 2,068 kg per trade
• Average value of USD 3,960 per trade

Average weight per trade was the highest monthly figure.

This indicates that the May surge was driven by larger physical shipments rather than only by an increase in transaction frequency.

Potential commercial explanations include:

• A major inventory release
• Bulk contract execution
• Greater availability of standard grades
• Supplier destocking
• Large-volume customer replenishment
• Concentration of shipments delayed from previous months

Regardless of the underlying driver, the commercial impact was clear: buyers gained access to significantly more physical material at sharply lower average prices.

May’s Value Share Lagged Behind Its Weight Share

Although May represented 17.76% of annual physical weight, it generated only 7.97% of annual transaction value.

This gap shows the extent of price compression.

The market moved almost three times April’s physical weight but generated less monthly revenue.

For buyers, this created negotiating leverage.

For suppliers, it demonstrated the risk of pursuing volume without adequate price discipline.

June to August: Packaging Changes and Uneven Value Performance

June Recorded the Highest Reported Quantity

June physical weight fell 48.0% from May to 855,531 kg.

However, reported quantity increased 22.7% to 1.93 million units, the annual high.

The average weight represented by each reported unit fell to approximately 0.44 kg, compared with 1.04 kg in May.

This indicates a major change in shipment or product structure.

Possible factors include:

• Smaller package sizes
• Greater order fragmentation
• More packaged or formulated products
• Changes in product concentration
• Different customs-reporting units
• A shift toward smaller downstream customers

The average price per kilogram recovered to USD 3.35, but the value per reported unit fell to USD 1.48, the annual low.

For buyers, June offered meaningful availability at a price below the annual weighted average.

However, supplier comparisons required close attention to physical net weight, grade and package structure.

July Generated the Highest Transaction Value

July physical weight increased 41.1% to 1.21 million kg, the second-highest monthly total.

Transaction value surged 78.3% to USD 5.12 million, the annual high.

The month also recorded:

• 815 trades
• Average price of USD 4.24/kg
• Average value of USD 4.56 per reported unit
• Average transaction value of USD 6,280

July combined strong physical volume with a more valuable trade basket.

Unlike May, the month did not sacrifice pricing to achieve higher tonnage.

For suppliers, July represented one of the strongest balanced sales periods:

• Physical availability was high.
• Transaction activity was broad.
• Total revenue reached its maximum.
• Price remained close to the annual weighted average.

For buyers, July offered better product availability than most months, although purchasing costs were substantially higher than during the May supply surge.

August Price and Value Weakened

August weight declined 32.1% to 819,863 kg.

Reported quantity increased to 1.51 million units, but transaction value fell 51.1% to USD 2.50 million, the second-lowest monthly total before February.

The average price dropped to USD 3.05/kg.

August therefore provided another attractive procurement period:

• Physical volume remained above the monthly average.
• Price was 28.5% below the annual weighted average.
• Reported quantity was relatively high.
• Market participation remained active at 686 trades.

For buyers that missed the May low, August presented a secondary opportunity to secure volume at relatively favorable pricing.

September and October: Stable Supply and Active Trading

September Returned to Mid-Range Pricing

September weight declined slightly to 782,229 kg.

Transaction value recovered to USD 3.57 million, while the average price increased to USD 4.56/kg.

The month remained close to the annual averages for physical weight, price and transaction activity.

This made September a relatively balanced market rather than a strong buyer- or seller-controlled period.

October Recorded the Highest Trade Count

October physical weight increased 21.4% to 949,257 kg.

The number of trades rose to 892, the highest monthly figure.

However, transaction value declined to USD 3.04 million and the price per kilogram fell to USD 3.20.

October provided buyers with another favorable combination:

• Physical weight above the annual monthly average
• Highest number of recorded trades
• Broad supplier and buyer participation
• Price below the annual weighted average
• Relatively large average transaction size

The month offered stronger price discovery and more counterparties than the low-liquidity months at the end of the reporting period.

For procurement teams seeking supplier diversification, October was one of the most practical buying windows.

November to January: Lower Weight and Stronger Pricing

November Price Increased as Physical Weight Contracted

November physical weight fell 36.1% to 606,784 kg.

Despite the lower volume, transaction value increased 25.2% to USD 3.80 million.

The average price almost doubled to USD 6.27/kg.

Trade count remained relatively strong at 797.

The combination of lower weight, higher price and broad participation suggests that the price increase was not based on only a handful of isolated transactions.

The month may have contained:

• A higher share of premium grades
• Tighter availability of qualified material
• Smaller physical orders
• Stronger demand from regulated applications
• More pharmaceutical or medical-grade transactions

For buyers, November marked the beginning of a more expensive purchasing environment.

December Recorded the Highest Price per Kilogram

December physical weight declined another 30.5% to 421,896 kg.

The average price rose to USD 8.38/kg, the highest monthly level.

December’s price was:

• 96.3% above the annual weighted average
• More than four times the May low
• 33.6% above the November level

Reported quantity increased to 1.61 million units, but the average weight per unit fell to only 0.26 kg.

This indicates that December’s large reported quantity did not represent an equivalent increase in physical supply.

The market appears to have shifted toward smaller units, different package formats or a more specialized product mix.

For suppliers, December created the strongest pricing conditions.

For buyers, it presented several challenges:

• Limited physical availability
• High average price
• Smaller physical units
• Greater grade and packaging complexity
• Higher risk of comparing unlike products

January Price Remained Elevated

January physical weight recovered modestly to 466,395 kg, but remained well below the annual average.

The average price declined to USD 7.11/kg but remained 66.7% above the annual weighted average.

Transaction value reached USD 3.32 million, while trade count remained relatively stable at 721.

January therefore continued the low-volume, high-price structure established in November and December.

Unlike February, the market still maintained a reasonable level of transaction participation and price discovery.

February 2026: Liquidity and Physical Flow Collapsed

February was the most extreme month in the dataset.

Compared with January:

• Physical weight fell 60.7%
• Reported quantity fell 94.0%
• Transaction value fell 70.6%
• Trade count fell 80.9%
• Price per kilogram fell 25.1%

Monthly results dropped to:

• 183,323 kg
• 56,624 reported units
• USD 976,187 in transaction value
• 138 trades
• USD 5.33/kg

February represented:

• 1.98% of annual physical weight
• 0.37% of annual reported quantity
• 2.47% of annual transaction value
• 1.64% of annual trade count

Why the USD 17.24 per Unit Figure Is Misleading

The value per reported unit rose to USD 17.24, far above every other month.

However, the price per kilogram remained at USD 5.33, within the broader annual range.

The apparent per-unit price spike resulted from the collapse in reported quantity.

Each reported unit represented an average of approximately 3.24 kg, compared with only:

• 0.26 kg in December
• 0.50 kg in January
• 0.44 kg in June

February’s reported units were therefore much heavier on average.

The USD 17.24 figure should not be interpreted as a broad increase in the price of hyaluronic acid. It primarily reflects a major change in package or reporting structure.

Selective Transactions Remained Relatively Valuable

Although total transaction value fell below USD 1 million, average value per trade increased to approximately USD 7,074, the highest monthly figure.

This did not indicate broad market strength.

Only 138 transactions were recorded, meaning activity was concentrated into a small number of selected deals.

The market became narrower rather than stronger.

Potential buyer risks included:

• Fewer available counterparties
• Reduced grade selection
• Less reliable market pricing
• Greater dependence on individual suppliers
• Limited ability to compare quotations
• Higher execution and delivery risk

  

Monthly Physical Weight Ranking

May and July together accounted for 30.8% of total annual physical weight.

The top four months—May, July, October and June—represented slightly more than half of annual supply.

The bottom three months—December, January and February—contributed only 11.6%.

This concentration confirms that buyers relying heavily on late-period spot procurement faced considerably less physical availability.

Reported Quantity and Package Structure

Reported quantity did not move in direct proportion to physical weight.

The relationship between weight and quantity was moderate, while the average physical weight represented by one reported unit varied sharply.

The difference between December and February was more than twelvefold.

Possible factors include:

• Package size
• Bulk versus small-lot shipments
• Powder or solution formats
• Product concentration
• Different molecular-weight grades
• Different reporting conventions
• Consolidation of several packages
• Different end-use sectors

Buyers should compare offers using physical net weight and specification rather than package count alone.

A reliable comparison should include:

• Price per kilogram
• Molecular-weight range
• Purity and assay
• Product grade
• Package size
• Number of packages
• Net weight
• Country of origin
• Incoterm
• Freight
• Payment terms
• Lead time
• Shelf life

Regulatory documentation

Transaction Value: Revenue Was Driven by Both Volume and Grade Mix

Monthly transaction value ranged from:

• USD 5.12 million in July 2025
• USD 976,187 in February 2026

July Generated the Highest Value

July represented:

• 13.04% of annual physical weight
• 12.96% of annual transaction value

The month delivered a balanced combination of strong volume, broad transaction participation and stable pricing.

May Generated Less Value Despite Maximum Volume

May represented 17.76% of physical weight but only 7.97% of transaction value.

Its low average price reduced supplier revenue despite record tonnage.

December Generated High Value from Limited Weight

December represented only 4.56% of annual weight but generated 8.95% of annual value.

The imbalance resulted from the year’s highest price per kilogram.

February Fell Below USD 1 Million

February accounted for only 2.47% of annual transaction value.

The decline confirms that the final-month contraction affected not only physical trade but also the overall commercial scale of the market.

Hyaluronic Acid Price Analysis

The average weight-based price ranged from:

• USD 1.9155/kg in May
• USD 8.3761/kg in December

The December high was approximately 4.4 times the May low.

Buyer-Friendly Price Months

Months below the annual weighted average of USD 4.2666/kg included:

May was the strongest procurement month because it combined the lowest price with the highest physical volume.

October provided the strongest balance of active liquidity, above-average physical volume and below-average pricing.

August and June offered additional staged-purchasing opportunities.

Higher-Price Months

December and January offered the clearest pricing opportunities for suppliers.

February’s price remained above the annual weighted average, but its market was too thin to provide a reliable broad benchmark.

Volume and Price Were Strongly Inversely Related

Physical weight and price per kilogram had a strong negative relationship of approximately -0.76.

This means high-volume periods generally compressed prices, while lower physical availability supported firmer pricing.

May and December illustrate the relationship:

December generated more value than May from only one-quarter of May’s physical weight.

This demonstrates the importance of price and grade management for suppliers.

Trade Liquidity and Average Transaction Size

Trade count ranged from:

• 892 in October 2025
• 138 in February 2026

October Offered the Broadest Market Participation

October’s 892 trades provided buyers with:

• More active counterparties
• Better price discovery
• Broader supplier access
• Greater ability to split orders
• Lower dependence on a single seller

Its price of USD 3.20/kg was also below the annual weighted average.

This made October one of the most practical procurement periods.

May Was Dominated by Large Physical Transactions

Average weight per trade reached 2,068 kg in May, the highest monthly figure.

This confirms that May’s supply event was based on larger cargoes or bulk orders.

December Became More Fragmented

Average weight per trade fell to 545 kg in December, despite 774 recorded transactions.

The market was active but physically constrained.

February Became Highly Selective

February recorded only 138 trades.

Average weight per trade increased to 1,328 kg, while average value per trade rose to USD 7,074.

The small number of remaining transactions was relatively large and valuable, but the overall market lacked breadth.

Four Market Phases

March–May 2025: Supply Expansion and Price Compression

May’s supply surge transformed this period into a buyer-friendly market.

June–August 2025: Balanced Availability and Mixed Pricing

June and August offered relatively low prices, while July generated the year’s highest transaction value.

September–November 2025: Stable Trading and Gradual Tightening

This period recorded the highest three-month trade count.

October offered strong liquidity, while November marked the beginning of higher pricing.

December 2025–February 2026: High Prices and Liquidity Compression

Compared with September–November:

• Physical weight fell 54.2%.
• Reported quantity fell 27.9%.
• Transaction value fell 24.8%.
• Trade count fell 33.1%.
• Weighted price increased 64.1%.

The period combined limited physical availability with substantially higher average pricing.

February then disrupted the high-price structure by recording an extreme liquidity contraction and a lower monthly price.

Main Risks for Hyaluronic Acid Buyers and Suppliers

1. Physical Availability Risk

The 88.8% peak-to-trough decline shows that monthly physical availability can change dramatically.

Buyers relying on spot purchases may struggle to secure the required grade, molecular weight or documentation when physical trade contracts.

Recommended controls include:

• Multiple approved suppliers
• Regional sourcing diversification
• Safety-stock requirements
• Framework supply agreements
• Alternative grade qualification
• Staggered delivery schedules

2. Price and Product-Mix Risk

Monthly price averages may be distorted by changes in:

• Molecular weight
• Purity
• Product grade
• Regulatory status
• Application
• Origin
• Package size
• Shipment volume

A low-priced cosmetic-grade product cannot automatically replace material qualified for pharmaceutical or medical use.

3. Liquidity Risk

February’s fall to 138 trades reduced market breadth and price transparency.

A thin market can lead to:

• Fewer comparable offers
• Wider price differences
• Limited specification choice
• Longer delivery times
• Greater counterparty concentration
• Lower reliability of monthly averages

4. Packaging and Reporting Risk

Reported quantity was not a consistent measure of physical supply.

Contracts should clearly specify:

• Net weight
• Package size
• Number of packages
• Product concentration
• Inner packaging
• Moisture protection
• Storage conditions
• Batch size
• Pallet configuration

5. Quality and Regulatory Risk

Hyaluronic acid used in pharmaceuticals, medical devices and injectable applications is subject to stricter controls than material used in general cosmetics.

Buyers should verify:

• Molecular-weight range
• Assay
• Microbial limits
• Endotoxin limits
• Protein residue
• Nucleic-acid residue
• Heavy metals
• Residual solvents
• Manufacturing standard
• Regulatory documentation
• Certificate of Analysis

6. Inventory and Shelf-Life Risk

Buying heavily during a low-price month may reduce average procurement cost but increase:

• Working-capital requirements
• Storage costs
• Shelf-life exposure
• Quality deterioration risk
• Specification-change risk
• Inventory write-downs

7. Counterparty Risk

A severe market contraction can create financial pressure for smaller suppliers and traders.

Buyers should review:

• Supplier financial stability
• Credit conditions
• Production capacity
• Delivery history
• Quality consistency
• Insurance and payment security

Hyaluronic Acid Procurement Opportunity Calendar

图片：透明质酸全年采购窗口、高价销售期与流动性风险时间轴】

Best Procurement Windows

May: Best Bulk Purchasing Opportunity

May offered:

• Highest physical volume
• Lowest price per kilogram
• Largest average shipment size
• Broad transaction participation

Buyers with adequate storage and qualified suppliers could use similar supply-release periods to secure annual or semiannual requirements.

October: Best Liquidity and Supplier-Choice Window

October combined:

• Above-average physical volume
• Highest trade count
• Below-average pricing
• Broad market participation

This made it suitable for supplier diversification and competitive bidding.

June and August: Secondary Low-Price Windows

Both months offered prices significantly below the annual weighted average.

They may suit staged purchasing strategies that reduce dependence on a single buying period.

February: Not Automatically a Buying Opportunity

February’s market was too thin to treat its price as a broad benchmark.

Buyers required:

• Established suppliers
• Clear grade requirements
• Strong quality verification
• Flexible volume needs
• Reliable delivery commitments

Sales Opportunities for Suppliers

December and January: Strongest Pricing Window

Lower physical availability supported prices of USD 8.38/kg and USD 7.11/kg.

Suppliers can use comparable periods to:

• Protect margins
• Shorten quotation validity
• Prioritize qualified customers
• Allocate limited inventory
• Negotiate stronger payment terms
• Promote premium grades

July: Best Balance of Volume and Revenue

July generated the highest transaction value without requiring the lowest pricing.

Suppliers may reproduce this structure through:

• Premium-grade positioning
• Consistent molecular-weight control
• Strong regulatory documentation
• Customized packaging
• Technical support
• Reliable regional inventory

October: Customer-Acquisition Opportunity

The high-liquidity environment provided the broadest access to active buyers.

Suppliers could use such periods for:

• Trial orders
• New distributor development
• Framework contract negotiations
• Multi-grade offerings
• Customer reactivation

February: Protect Cash Flow and Execution Quality

The collapse in trades and total value required greater commercial discipline.

Suppliers should:

• Reduce speculative inventory
• Review customer credit
• Prioritize confirmed orders
• Accelerate receivables
• Avoid broad discounts without demand response
• Protect quality and delivery standards

Recommended Actions for Procurement Managers

Standardize Supplier Quotations

Every offer should be compared using:

• Price per kilogram
• Molecular-weight range
• Product grade
• Purity
• Package size
• Net weight
• Country of origin
• Incoterm
• Freight
• Lead time
• Payment terms
• Shelf life
• Regulatory documentation

Use a Staged Procurement Structure

A practical purchasing plan can include:

• Contracted base volume
• Safety stock
• Flexible quarterly allocation
• Opportunistic purchases
• Emergency supplier capacity

Qualify Suppliers During Liquid Months

Supplier qualification is easier when more counterparties are active.

Waiting until the market has already contracted reduces buyer leverage and increases execution risk.

Monitor Weight and Price Together

A high reported quantity does not necessarily mean that more physical material is available.

Physical weight and delivered price remain more reliable indicators.

Avoid Single-Month Price Anchors

Extreme months such as May, December and February can distort negotiations.

Rolling averages and grade-specific comparisons provide more reliable benchmarks.

Recommended Actions for Suppliers and Distributors

Separate Volume Strategy from Margin Strategy

May favored tonnage and customer coverage.

December favored pricing and margin protection.

Sales teams should define whether each campaign is intended to:

• Move volume
• Protect margin
• Reduce inventory
• Acquire customers
• Expand distribution
• Promote premium grades

Segment the Market by Application

Cosmetic, food, pharmaceutical, injectable and medical-device customers should receive different product positioning and commercial terms.

Offer Flexible Package Sizes

The variation in weight per reported unit shows demand across several shipment structures.

Potential formats include:

• Bulk commercial packs
• Standard drums
• Smaller cosmetic-grade packs
• Pharmaceutical-compliant packaging
• Customized batch sizes
• Regional repacking

Use Trade Count as a Liquidity Indicator

Falling transaction activity can provide an early warning of a market slowdown.

Trade count should be monitored alongside weight, price and transaction value.

Indicators to Monitor in Future Hyaluronic Acid Trade Cycles

Buyers and suppliers should track:

• Producer operating rates
• Fermentation capacity
• Plant maintenance
• Cosmetic and medical-aesthetic demand
• Pharmaceutical demand
• Food and supplement demand
• Regional inventories
• Customer destocking and restocking
• Molecular-weight mix
• Quality and regulatory requirements
• Freight and warehousing costs
• Currency movements
• Supplier credit conditions
• New production capacity

Several combined signals are particularly useful:

Rising weight and falling prices may indicate a strong procurement window.

Falling weight and rising prices may indicate tighter availability or a premium-grade shift.

Rising quantity without rising weight may indicate smaller packages or product-mix changes.

Rising trades with lower average transaction size may indicate fragmented purchasing.

Falling weight, quantity, value and trades together may indicate broad liquidity contraction.

Conclusion

Global hyaluronic acid trade between March 2025 and February 2026 generated USD 39.48 million across 8,410 trades, covering approximately 9.25 million kg.

The market’s physical high occurred in May, when trade weight reached 1.64 million kg and the average price fell to USD 1.92/kg.

July generated the highest monthly transaction value, October recorded the most trades, and December delivered the highest price per kilogram.

The market then entered a severe contraction.

By February 2026:

• Physical weight had fallen 88.8% from the May peak.
• Reported quantity had fallen 97.1% from the June high.
• Transaction value had fallen 80.9% from its July peak.
• Trade count had fallen 84.5% from the October high.

February’s USD 17.24 value per reported unit was not evidence of a universal price surge. It resulted mainly from an extreme reduction in reported quantity and a shift toward fewer, heavier and more selective transactions.

For buyers, May offered the strongest bulk procurement opportunity. October provided the best combination of liquidity, supplier choice and below-average pricing. June and August offered additional low-price windows.

For suppliers, December and January provided the strongest pricing conditions, while July produced the best balance between physical volume and revenue.

The central lesson is that the global hyaluronic acid market cannot be evaluated using one price or volume indicator.

Procurement and sales decisions must account for physical weight, molecular weight, product grade, package structure, regulatory documentation, transaction liquidity and delivered cost.

By integrating trade data intelligence with real-time supply, inventory, quality and downstream-demand signals, buyers and suppliers can identify stronger negotiation windows, reduce execution risk and respond earlier to changes in the global hyaluronic acid market.