“We Are the Best” – When Does an Advertising Claim Become Risky?

Advertising claims such as “the best”, “the cheapest” or “the fastest” can be highly effective in attracting consumers’ attention, but their use may also entail significant legal risks. In its notice published on 24 July 2026, the Hungarian Competition Authority (Gazdasági Versenyhivatal, “GVH”) drew businesses’ attention to the proper use of market leadership claims and also published a new Gondolja Végig Higgadtan! / Think It Through Carefully! information booklet on the topic.

Market leadership claims are among the higher-risk types of advertising claims, as they suggest that the business demonstrably holds an outstanding position on the relevant market compared with its competitors.

Importantly, a market leadership claim is not limited to situations where a business generally presents itself as the market leader. Claims such as the “most popular service”, the “guaranteed lowest price”, the “largest stock” or the “widest selection” may also fall within this category where they communicate superior performance compared with competitors in a particular respect.

Not every eye-catching advertising slogan, however, requires substantiation. The GVH distinguishes between:

1. subjective claims expressing an opinion or impression, such as “fantastic experience” or “great choice”; and
2. objectively measurable and verifiable claims.

A separate category is obvious advertising exaggeration (puffery), which consumers would generally not understand as a literal statement of fact. One example is the slogan “Red Bull gives you wings”, which is plainly not understood literally. However, where a claim refers to a measurable characteristic or market performance, the business must be able to substantiate it with objective evidence. The distinction always depends on the context and on the overall textual and visual presentation of the advertisement.

In its new information booklet, the GVH highlights three fundamental requirements. First, a market leadership claim must be clear: it should be apparent, for example, which product or service, market or geographical area the claim concerns. Second, the claim must remain up to date, meaning that it must be true not only at the launch of the campaign but throughout the entire period during which the communication is used. Finally, the claim must be substantiated: the business must already possess appropriate supporting evidence before publication, such as market research, independent measurements, sales data or revenue figures.

Additional risks may arise where a market leadership claim is used on a market with only a limited number of participants. In such cases, the claim may also be interpreted as a comparison with competitors, meaning that the specific requirements applicable to comparative advertising must also be considered. Among other things, the comparison must relate to goods or services meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose, and must objectively compare material, relevant, representative and verifiable features.

When assessing an advertisement from a legal perspective, the decisive factor is not the message the business intended to convey, or how the business itself interprets that message, but how the average consumer is likely to understand it.

An improperly used market leadership claim may mislead consumers and thus amount to an unfair commercial practice. In addition to a fine imposed by the GVH, this may also create significant reputational risks for the business and the brand concerned.

Against this background, the key message for businesses is that they should assess before, rather than after, using a market leadership claim whether the claim requires substantiation and, if so, ensure that adequate supporting evidence is already available before the advertisement is published.