This is simply a reflection of the "structure of production": for any given consumer product, there is a vast graph of exchanges and transformations that lead to it. Most of the inventory and money is not passing between consumers and consumer companies. It is in the structure of production.
Consider: manufacturing is not instantaneous. Primary resource production is not instantaneous. Transportation is not instantaneous. Tertiary services are not instantaneous. Per Little's Law, average items in a system = average throughput * average item latency. The consumer market is the throughput. The structure of production represents a multiple of the consumer market.
The reason we overweight consumer brands is because they are consumer brands. Within each industry and niche, everyone knows who the leading firms are. But outside the niche, nobody knows that a) the firms exist or b) that the niche exists.
But all of us are in the consumer market, so we all know about consumer brands (they literally make it their business to ensure this is so).
Every journalist can write about a consumer brand. Every reader can read about the consumer brand. So on sheer volume, consumer brands are vastly overrepresented in the media relative to their total share of the economy.
So even a relatively small lead in consumer-facing firms will seem much larger than it actually is. B2B is a massive segment in the US software market. But it's the invisible dark matter of our industry: it constitutes almost all of the mass in the software universe, but few folks realise it's there unless it's pointed out.