The common bed bug (Cimex lectularius L.) has recently surged in numbers internationally. A variety of plant-based, or “natural”, products that are stated to kill or repel bed bugs are being marketed directly to consumers, even though the efficacy of many of these products remains poorly known. This study was conducted to determine whether some products advertised as natural are potential tools for management of bed bugs. Five natural-based products were applied as direct sprays to insecticide-susceptible (Harlan) and pyrethroid-resistant (Jersey City) strains of bed bug. Products that were most effective as direct sprays were chosen for residual-spray assays, which were compared with an industry-standard insecticide labeled for control of bed bugs. Both assays were conducted for a 2-wk period. For direct-spray assays, Green Bug^® was the only product to produce 100% mortality within 1 min–1 hr (based on strain). Bed Bug Patrol^® required 1–2 wk (based on strain) to produce 100% mortality, whereas all other products failed to exceed 70% mortality by the end of the 2-wk period. The two natural-based products (Bed Bug Patrol^® and Green Bug^®) selected for residual-spray assays failed to differ from the control. Zenprox^® (0.25%) produced 100% mortality when applied to the insecticide-susceptible (Harlan) strain yet failed to differ from the control when applied to the pyrethroid-resistant (Jersey City) strain. These findings demonstrate that some natural-based products may be ineffective as residual spray applications for bed bug management.