.svg)
Despite its recent release, Sinners has already generated significant buzz with overwhelmingly positive early reviews and a box office performance likely to break records as the best performing R-rated April release ever. The movie has also helped movie theaters maintain their strong momentum created by the success of A Minecraft Movie.
When Captain America: Brave New World was released on February 14th 2025, the movie drove a 37.0% increase in movie theater visits relative to the YTD (January 6th to April 20th 2025) weekly average. But visits quickly fell following the release week, and movie theater traffic was down 31.1% compared to the YTD average two weeks later.
Meanwhile, A Minecraft Movie led to a 88.6% spike in visits relative to the YTD average on the week of its release, likely thanks to the significant advertising and promotional activities in anticipation of the opening. But traffic was already beginning to fall when Sinners opened on April 18th – and the supernatural thriller helped slow the visit drop: Visits were 13.1% lower over the week of April 7th – April 13th compared to the week of March 31st to April 6th, but only dropped 7.2% week-over-week during the week of the Sinners release, when movie theater traffic stayed 52.1% above YTD weekly visit levels.
Quick-Service Restaurant (QSR) brands operate in a fast-paced industry of shifting consumer preferences, and palate-pleasing promotions are one of the ways QSRs drive traffic in the face of evolving demand for value and innovation. Using the latest location intelligence, we analyzed RBI, Yum! Brands, and other top QSRs, to explore their Q1 2025 performance and several promotions that had a significant foot traffic impact.
QSRs faced challenges in the early months of 2025, leading to a Q1 YoY foot traffic decline of 1.6% for the category as a whole. Analyzing the companies' domestic portfolios reveals that traffic to Yum! Restaurants increased 2.9% YoY, bolstered by Taco Bell’s strong performance, while RBI’s traffic fell 3.4% YoY. Wingstop experienced the greatest foot traffic growth of the QSRs analyzed (+4.3%) while Wendy’s saw the sharpest traffic declines (-4.6%).
Zooming in on weekly visits (since March 2025) highlights the foot traffic impact of several QSR promotions – which often cause fanfare during their initial launch.
KFC’s new bucket meal seems to have provided a YoY visit lift for the Yum! chain during the week of March 17th, while visits to Popeyes, an RBI chain, have remained elevated since the week of March 31st, likely due to the launch of the restaurant’s April Fools no-joke pickle menu. But it was Wingstop that stole the visit-spike show with a 22.9% YoY boost during the week of March 24th, 2025 – as eager customers flocked to the chain to redeem T-Mobile’s one-day-only $0.01 chicken tender reward.
And zooming in on daily visit fluctuations to Wingstop during Q1 2025 shows that the T-Mobile tender deal didn’t provide the only one-day visit boost. On Super Bowl Sunday (February 9th, 2025), Wingstop’s traffic was 56.8% above the daily average for Q1 2025, as wings were once again a party favorite.
Taco Bell’s Q1 2025 YoY foot traffic growth stood out among the analyzed QSRs, and diving into visitor frequency data shows that the chain has been attracting an increasing number of repeat visitors.
Between October 2024 and March 2025, the number of frequent visitors to Taco Bell – those who visited at least twice during the month – rose consistently YoY, even as the number of casual visitors decreased or rose only slightly. But in January 2025, Taco Bell saw a significant 11.7% YoY surge in frequent visitors – many of whom may have been attracted to the chain’s revamp of the Luxe Cravings Box to kick off the year.
Despite overall challenges in the QSR segment, strategic promotions contributed to significant foot traffic gains for several brands. Wingstop and Taco Bell were two of the biggest visit winners in Q1, highlighting the impact of both one-day deals and extended offers.
For more data-driven dining insights, visit Placer.ai.
Health and wellness remain significant drivers for grocery shoppers, and today we’re looking at two health-centric grocers – Sprouts Farmers Market and Natural Grocers. The two chains, which recently topped the “Best Natural Food Stores” list, are thriving, and both are planning further expansions in 2025.
We dug into the visit and demographic data to get a sense for how the chains are performing and what might be driving their success.
Sprouts Farmers Market has been a grocery store to watch in recent years. The Arizona-based chain added some 33 new locations over the past year, leading to a major surge in overall visits to the chain. In Q1 2025, visits to the grocer were 11.9% higher than they were in Q1 2024, with the average number of visits to each Sprouts location also increasing 4.2% YoY. In contrast, visits to the wider grocery space rose just 0.8% YoY.
Colorado-based Natural Grocers has also been thriving, with Q1 2025 visits up 5.9% YoY. And though Natural Grocers’ expansion has been slower than Sprouts', it too is gradually growing its store count – and its consistent over-performance shows that its offerings are meeting robust demand.
Diving into audience segmentation data offers insight into some of the factors contributing to the two chains’ success.
Both Sprouts and Natural Grocers attract relatively affluent visitor bases: In Q1 2025, visitors to Sprouts came from areas with a median household income (HHI) of $96.8K, considerably above the category average of $81.8K. Natural Grocers, meanwhile, drew visitors with a median HHI of $84.0K – lower than that of Sprouts, but still higher than the wider segment.
And each of the chains drew higher-than-average shares of both young professionals and a variety of affluent family segments – though Sprouts was more popular among wealthy families, while Natural Grocers attracted more upper-middle-class suburban families.
In a grocery market defined by trading down and intensified competition from low-cost outlets such as dollar stores and superstores, specialty chains like Sprouts and Natural Grocers may benefit from their ability to attract health-focused, higher-income shoppers and busy professionals.
Beyond demographics, each chain occupies a distinct geographic niche. In Q1 2025, 49.3% of visitors to Sprouts came from the “Suburban Periphery” – defined by the Esri: Tapestry Segmentation dataset as commuter-oriented suburbs with access to major cities and their amenities. Natural Grocers, meanwhile, drew just 39.9% from these areas, just slightly above the sector-wide average.
Meanwhile, Natural Grocers drew a much larger share of shoppers from “Metro Cities” – defined as smaller metropolitan or satellite city areas – than either Sprouts or the wider grocery space.
This variance suggests that the two health-centric grocers play complementary roles within the food shopping space, allowing both to maximize relevance among their respective customer bases.
Both Sprouts and Natural Grocers are experiencing visit growth and success – in part by catering to busy professionals and different groups of affluent consumers. As the two chains continue to expand, will they be able to sustain their appeal to distinct customer segments?
Visit Placer.ai for the latest data-driven grocery and retail insights.
Following a second bankruptcy filing, JOANN recently announced a complete shutdown of its fleet. Using location analytics, we uncovered the foot traffic trends behind JOANN’s unraveling and pinpointed retailers that stand to gain from its exit from the arts and crafts space.
JOANN found success during the pandemic, as many consumers stuck at home took on new crafting hobbies. During the second half of 2020, visits to JOANN were consistently above the January 2019 baseline.
But in recent years, the retailer has struggled to sustain its momentum. Since February 2021, visits have remained below pre-pandemic levels – with even the chain’s annual holiday season visit boosts remaining below those seen in Q4 2019. Overall in 2024, visits to JOANN were down 4.4% compared to 2019.
And since announcing that it would be conducting liquidation sales in late February 2025, visits to JOANN have soared as consumers take advantage of final deals on crafting supplies.
Several factors have contributed to JOANN’s decline, including competition from e-commerce and superstores. Analysis of cross-visitation trends for visitors to JOANN reveals that between 2019 and 2024, the share of the retailer’s visitors that also visited Walmart increased from 90.2% to 92.4%, while the share of visitors to Target rose from 80.8% to 83.2%. This indicates that JOANN has faced growing pressure from big-box chains encroaching on JOANN’s market share in the crafting space.
The largest players in the arts and crafts space – Hobby Lobby and Michaels – also appear to have grown their market share at the expense of JOANN, and stand to gain even more from the retailer’s departure.
Both Hobby Lobby and Michaels have emerged as increasingly popular destinations for JOANN shoppers over the past several years: In 2024 49.9% of JOANN visitors frequented a Michaels, while 49.1% visited a Hobby Lobby – up from less than 45% for both chains in 2019.
And analysis of the median household incomes (HHIs) of the three specialty retailers’ 2024 captured trade areas reveals that JOANN attracted more affluent visitors than Hobby Lobby but lower-HHI visitors than Michaels. This suggests that in the absence of JOANN, the chain’s wealthier shoppers may gravitate towards Michaels while its lower-income shoppers may more naturally turn to Hobby Lobby.
Location analytics illuminate the challenges JOANN faced in a competitive market. The increasing overlap in visitation with major retailers like Walmart and Target underscores the intense pressure from superstores. Simultaneously, the growing shared customer base with specialty competitors Michaels and Hobby Lobby suggests a migration of JOANN's audiences.
For more insights anchored in location analytics, visit Placer.ai/anchor.
Visitation data at manufacturing facilities can shed light on consumer demand and industrial output trends. We dove into the traffic data at a composite of manufacturing facilities across the United States to find out how the potential tariffs are impacting manufacturing output.
We recently explored how potential tariffs are shaping consumer behavior and retail visitation trends, but location analytics data also offers valuable insights into industrial manufacturing demand by analyzing employee visitation patterns at production facilities. By tracking foot traffic, analysts can assess workforce activity levels, which often correlate closely with production volumes. For instance, increased visits by employees may signal ramped-up output to meet rising demand, while declining visitation can indicate reduced shifts or slowed operations. This data-driven approach enables businesses and investors to make more informed decisions by monitoring real-time industrial activity and anticipating future demand.
Below, we present visitation data for a composite of manufacturing facilities across more than 80 companies, covering a diverse set of sectors including aerospace and defense, automakers, auto parts, building materials, containers and packaging, machinery, and specialty chemicals. Our dataset includes metrics for both employees (estimated using dwell time) and visitors, who often represent logistics partners delivering raw materials, transporting work-in-progress goods, or picking up finished products. Historically, our composites have shown a strong correlation with U.S. Census Bureau data on new orders for manufactured goods (measured in billions of dollars), with the relationship even stronger when adjusted for calendar shifts and seasonal slowdowns during the November/December holiday period.
Although the U.S. Census Bureau’s data is not yet out for March 2025, Placer’s aggregated visitation data for manufacturing facilities indicated a pull forward in demand, indicating that companies have accelerated production in anticipation of potential reciprocal tariff implementation. Facing the prospect of rising costs on imported materials and components, many manufacturers ramped up operations to build inventory and secure supply chains ahead of the policy shift. This proactive approach was especially evident in sectors heavily reliant on global sourcing, with visitation data reflecting heightened on-site activity. While this front-loaded demand may offer short-term stability, it also raises concerns about how manufacturers will manage longer-term cost pressures and supply chain challenges if tariffs are enacted.
Year-to-date manufacturing data shows increased activity at facilities in sectors likely to be affected by reciprocal tariffs – such as aerospace and defense, industrial machinery, and packaging and containers – suggesting manufacturers are accelerating production and shipping to get ahead of potential disruptions. Automobile manufacturing, in particular, warrants attention given recent tariff developments. Both Ford and General Motors ramped up production in late March 2025, evidenced by the jumps in visitation to manufacturing facilities in late March and early April. By acting now, these automakers aim to reduce near-term risks while evaluating longer-term adjustments to their sourcing and production strategies.
From a regional perspective, both Idaho and West Virginia saw some of the largest year-over-year increases in manufacturing visitation during March 2025, driven by rising demand in each state’s key industrial sectors. West Virginia experienced heightened activity in the steel sector – including at companies like Nucor – as producers accelerated output and bolstered inventory ahead of potential supply disruptions. Meanwhile, Idaho saw increased visits to basic materials and packaging/container manufacturers, with companies like CRH and Packaging Corporation of America ramping up operations in anticipation of reciprocal tariffs. Idaho also benefited from continued population growth, as noted in our 2024 Migration Trends Whitepaper. Together, these trends highlight how manufacturers in both states are proactively responding to potential pricing volatility and supply chain challenges tied to ongoing trade policy uncertainty.
As tariff-related uncertainty continues to shape business strategies, location analytics offers a powerful lens into how manufacturers are responding in real time. The surge in visitation activity across key sectors and regions in March 2025 underscores a broader trend of companies accelerating production and reinforcing supply chains ahead of potential policy shifts. From automotive to steel and packaging, manufacturers are not only pulling forward demand but also adapting operations to navigate rising input costs and global sourcing challenges. As trade dynamics evolve, continued monitoring of on-site activity through visitation data will be essential for understanding industrial demand, anticipating disruptions, and guiding more strategic decision-making across the supply chain.
When I first started Omni Talk back in 2017, I used to borrow liberally from the great Peter King and his Monday Morning Quarterback Series. In fact, one of the first articles I ever wrote – 10 Things I Think I Think I Love and Don’t Love about Walmart Right Now – was an outright homage to the man.
The double use of “I Think” is unparalleled. It is pure genius. How the man came up with it, I will never know. It is the perfect mix of WTF and stop you in your tracks syntax because this article looks like it is going to be interesting.
All of which is why I am going back to my roots and imitating “The King” once again for my new column called, All The Things I Think I Think About Retail Over The Last Quarter.
I am sure Mr. King never envisioned that his wise words about the gridiron every Monday morning would still inspire a now pushing-50 retail pundit to wax poetically about the state of retail but here I am, 8 years later, doing just that.
So away we go!
Ashley Buchanan, the former Michaels CEO, is the right man for the job at Kohl’s. Buchanan did a wonderful job instilling an omnichannel foundation at Michaels and has a background rooted in innovation and digital from previous stints at Walmart and Sam’s Club. In fact, I said on a recent podcast that Target would have been wise to look at him to succeed Brian Cornell.
But I do not envy Buchanan.
Not. One. Bit.
Turning Kohl’s around is going to be tough. Buchanan inherits 12 consecutive quarters of comparable sales declines, alongside store traffic trends that read like the opening of a John Carpenter movie.
In its most recent quarter, comparable sales at Kohl’s were a negative 6.7%, and Kohl’s also said that it expects 2025 revenue to fall in the range of 5% to 7%. Frightening indeed. Let’s just hope Buchanan doesn’t already feel like Jamie Lee Curtis trapped in a closet trying to fight her way out with coat hangers.
It is no wonder that Buchanan has already instituted page one of every new CEO’s playbook – i.e. laying off 10% of your corporate workforce – because, lord knows, he is going to need the wiggle room (and as many coat hangers as he can get his hands on).
Costco shareholders overwhelmingly (approximately 98% of them) voted down a measure in late January that urged Costco to assess the risk associated with its DEI practices. Costco’s leadership came out strongly against the measure, arguing that its “commitment to an enterprise rooted in respect and inclusion is appropriate and necessary."
Or said another way, Costco held to a position that many others, including Walmart, Target, and Tractor Supply Company, have not.
In my retail experience, the general impact of taking a strong position on something like this publicly is felt near the beginning of such an announcement and then the impact gradually settles over time.
If that were the case, Costco would have felt the impact in February, but Costco’s recently announced results indicate otherwise.
In its most recent quarter, which ended on January 31, 2025, Costco’s U.S. comparable sales increased 8.7% excluding impacts from gas deflation, while in February, its comparable sales held strong at 8.6%, also excluding any impacts from gas.
I’m no mathematician but that is hardly a dip.
Costco is still experiencing year-over-year traffic patterns, particularly into February (more on that later), of which other retailers can only dream; its U.S. membership renewal rate sits right around 93%; and its Kirkland signature brand appears to be a great hedge against inflation in that it, according to Costco CFO Gary Millerchip, “continues to grow at a faster pace than our business as a whole.”
The Costco executive team also did not mention word one of any DEI impact on its financial results within its last earnings call, something of which Costco no doubt would be conscious of given the current legal and political climate.
No, for all intents and purposes, at least initially, Costco appears to be holding strong to its principles and doing just fine.
Under CEO Jack Sinclair, Sprouts has done a masterful job rightsizing its store prototype, bringing differentiation back to its assortment, and playing on the post-pandemic trend of consumers having a willingness to make that extra trip, as long as it is convenient for them (see below).
Sprouts also has a load of dry powder in its keg. For example, Sprouts still does not have a loyalty program (something it plans to launch in Q3 of this year) and only operates in 24 states.
Or, put mildly, that right sized prototype that has been doing so well? The one driving an 11.5% comp in Sprouts’ most recent quarter?
It still has a lot more room to grow.
Macy’s new CEO Tony Spring loves to talk about the results Macy’s is seeing out of its “First 50” locations, i.e. the 50 locations Macy’s has designated to trial new innovations to improve its overall business. Examples of these innovations include things like: enhanced staffing in certain areas of the stores, modernized visual presentations, enhanced merchandising, or aka all the garden variety things anyone who has been around retail longer than three minutes would expect to see within a test of this kind.
In January, Macy’s reported that its First 50 stores delivered a +1.9% sales comp in Q3 2024, outpacing other Macy's stores by 4.1%, and that it planned to expand its First 50 initiative to another 75 stores over the course of 2025.
All sounds great, right?
Not to me it doesn’t.
First off, in its most recent quarter (Q4 2024), the spread between the First 50 stores and the rest of the Macy’s chain appears to have slipped. Executives reported a 1.2% comp in the First 50 stores against a 0.9% comp decline in its Macy’s nameplate stores. In isolation, this performance might look good on paper, but looking at it against the trend line, one could argue that the First 50 stores performed relatively worse in Q4 than the rest of the chain. The chain’s performance picked up, while the First 50’s fell off.
Second, and perhaps more importantly, I have been around retail long enough to know that one should take the results of tests like these with a fine grain of salt. Many factors can impact the performance of 50 stores, particularly when a new CEO has just taken the helm. The least of which is that everyone in the entire Macy’s organization knows the importance of these stores and, therefore, is likely extra committed to making sure they succeed. As the focus wears off, tests like these usually revert back to the mean.
And, the mean, which looks somewhere in the range of just shy of a -0.9% (at best) to a -6.0% comp (at worst) across the last two quarters, won’t keep the Macy’s Day parade balloons afloat come Thanksgiving time.
Fortunately, Bloomingdale’s is not Macy’s and vice versa. I say that because Bloomingdale’s, unlike Macy’s, could be onto something with its small format strategy.
According to Macy’s website, Bloomingdale’s has 33 full-sized U.S. store locations compared to Macy’s 479.
That is quite the delta.
So much so, that one has to wonder if, similar to Sprouts above, small format Bloomie’s stores throughout the country (of which there are three currently in the U.S.) could become a significant growth vehicle for Bloomingdale’s.
I am on record as saying that when there are already 479 larger-sized Macy’s stores, the last thing anyone needs is a smaller Macy’s. That same logic, however, cannot be applied to Bloomingdale’s because only 33 Bloomingdale’s stores actually exist. The majority of the country has no idea what a Bloomingdale’s experience is like, let alone how to compare shopping at a bigger one versus a smaller one. Consumers generally prefer shopping at a store with a greater selection unless, of course, their next best option is no selection at all.
The data from the three smaller format Bloomie’s stores appears to prove this logic out (see below):
Year-over-year visit growth to Boomie’s stores across six of the last nine quarters has outpaced the general department store industry by a wide margin.
Granted, it is still only three stores, but the logic of the strategy is sound, provided Macy’s can operate these smaller Bloomie’s stores profitably (which is still a big unknown – and an issue that also plays into the Macy’s First 50 stores outlined above).
Target, my alma mater, so to speak, has been stuck in neutral since even before the pandemic began.
I don’t know when or why it happened but, at some point, Target became myopic in its strategy, failing to look beyond its vaunted “owned brands” for growth. While others, like Walmart, were evolving with the times, Target stood flat footed and failed to adapt its Expect More, Pay Less brand promise to the needs of its 21st century, digital-first consumer.
Make no mistake: Target’s former beachheads are now all under siege.
Its higher income demographic shoppers are moving to Walmart because of Walmart’s much stronger competitive positioning of Walmart+; fast fashion players like Shein and Temu are stealing share in apparel; the club channel is more formidable than ever; and Wayfair (more on that in a minute) is now the go-to online source for home furnishings. Taken together, it all means less trips into a Target store over the long-term.
A lot less trips.
But that is just the digital impact. Merchandising execution and in-stocks continue to plague the retailer as well, with many people both in and outside of the organization asking if it isn’t time for Target to return to office, similar to Walmart, Amazon and many others before them.
Something is causing the temperature of Target’s porridge to feel just not quite right (see traffic patterns below). Could it be that the goldilocks shine of CEO Brian Cornell’s strategy to wait by the wayside as other retailers started going out of business is starting to wear off?
Cornell, himself, in Target’s most recent earnings call, lauded the $30 billion of additional revenue Target has gained since 2019, but how much of that was pure inflation and inertia given the bankruptcies of Toys R Us, Bed Bath & Beyond, Party City, and many, many more?
A new alarming feature is what appears to be a precipitous decline in February, corroborated by what Target CFO Brian Lee called “soft” topline performance for the month in the aforementioned earnings call.
Target did not mention its recent DEI rollback as a possible rationale for its slow February, citing instead things like “extreme cold” and “flood and fires,” but the prospect of a 40-day boycott in response to the rollback sure as heck won’t make things any easier.
Target has its work cut out for it, to say the least. Its new $15 billion growth plan is potentially a step in the right direction. However, I worry that, when one looks under the covers of that plan, all he or she will find is the same owned brand gobbledygook that Target has espoused ever since Cornell took over.
And that owned brand well, in relation to the competitive issues outlined above, is done and dried up.
Wayfair announced in January 2025 that it was planning to exit Germany. According to Retail Dive, Wayfair said that it “plans to reinvest cost savings from backing out of Germany into expanding its physical retail footprint.”
After many (what some might call, or at least I would) failed attempts at smaller physical store concepts, Wayfair opened a 150,000 square foot mega store just outside of Chicago. From the looks of the data below, this larger store concept, one of which I have also been a big fan of for sometime now, appears to be showing encouraging signs.
Moreover, the home furnishings industry also appears to be on a bit of a rebound. Traffic to home furnishings players appears to be picking up (see below) and Home Depot just posted its first positive comp quarter after eight consecutive quarterly declines.
Wayfair’s CEO Niraj Shah is as shrewd as they come, and he may just be betting on stores right as a big tailwind is ready to hit his back.
Is it a coincidence then that Wayfair just announced the launch of its second large format store in Atlanta?
I think I think not.
New CEO Brian Niccol took the helm in September of last year and wasted no time in establishing his priorities. Put simply, Niccol wanted to reignite the “third place” atmosphere of Starbucks and ensure that all in-store customers get served their orders in under four minutes or less.
Early results look promising.
While Starbucks’ same-store sales did decline by 4% during the last quarter, this figure still beat Wall Street estimates, which, according to CNBC, had predicted a 5.5% drop.
Traffic data also supports Niccol’s moves (see below).
Lord knows, it’s early here, too, and the February traffic decline is definitely something to watch. But, given that Niccol has only been in his role since September, these results at least have the aroma of an early turnaround.
Unless of course, you are a regular Frappaccino drinker – because then you are probably pissed.
For the past six years, Sam’s Club has sat atop my list as the most innovative retailer in America not named Amazon. It is an award well-deserved for a number of reasons.
First, Sam’s Club has been on a winning streak. In its most recent quarter, Sam’s Club delivered a 6.8% sales comp, excluding fuel.
Second, Sam’s Club has seen explosive growth in digital both online and in-store. E-commerce sales were up over 24% in the last quarter, and the use of its scan and go shopping app hit an all-time high during the same period. This last statistic might not sound like much, but the Sam’s Club executives I have interviewed on multiple occasions have all told me that 1 in 3 shoppers regularly use their scan and go app.
1 in 3!
I am going to go out on a limb here but my guess is that Costco’s mobile app usage is nowhere near that high, particularly in-store.
Third, Sam’s Club is also winning with young people. Sam's Club has reported record highs in membership numbers and renewal rates, with particularly strong growth among Gen Z (63% over two years) and millennials (14% over two years).
The combination of a digital-first shopping experience and a growing percentage of younger people shopping in its stores means that Sam’s Club is positioned to create the most one-to-one personalized shopping experience out there.
Retail media anyone?
I say that in jest but the profit-enhancing effects of retail media are real (see Walmart), and Sam’s Club has created a visual menu board to serve up advertisements to one-third of its shoppers right as they are standing at the shelf. Can Costco or anyone else for that matter do that?
Not nearly to the same degree.
Concluding Thoughts
There you have it. All the things I think I think about retail over the last quarter, and in no particular order of importance.
So, I ask you in closing – what do you think of what I think?
1. The hypergrowth of Costco, Dollar Tree, and Dollar General between 2019 and 2025 has fundamentally changed the brick-and-mortar retail landscape.
2. Overall visits to Target and Walmart have remained essentially stable even as traffic to the new retail giants skyrocketed – so the increased competition is not necessarily coming at legacy giants' expense. Instead, each retail giant is filling a different need, and success now requires excelling at specific shopping missions rather than broad market dominance.
3. Cross-shopping has become the new normal, with Walmart and Target maintaining their popularity even as their relative visit shares decline, creating opportunities for complementary rather than purely competitive strategies.
4. Dollar stores are rapidly graduating from "fill-in" destinations to primary shopping locations, signaling a fundamental shift in how Americans approach everyday retail.
5. Walmart still enjoys the highest visit frequency, but the other four chains – and especially Dollar General – are gaining ground in this realm.
6. Geographic and demographic specialization is becoming the key differentiator, as each chain carves out distinct niches rather than competing head-to-head across all markets and customer segments.
Evolving shopper priorities, economic pressures, and new competitors are reshaping how and where Americans buy everyday goods. And as value-focused players gain ground, legacy retail powerhouses are adapting their strategies in a bid to maintain their visit share. In this new consumer reality, shoppers no longer stick to one lane, creating a complex ecosystem where loyalty, geography, and cross-visitation patterns – not just market share – define who is truly winning.
This report explores the latest retail traffic data for Walmart, Target, Costco, Dollar Tree, and Dollar General to decode what consumers want from retail giants in 2025. By analyzing visit patterns, loyalty trends, and cross-shopping shifts, we reveal how fast-growing chains are winning over consumers and uncover the strategies helping legacy players stay competitive in today's value-driven retail landscape.
In 2019, Walmart and Target were the two major behemoths in the brick-and-mortar retail space. And while traffic to these chains remains close to 2019 levels, overall visits to Dollar General, Dollar Tree, and Costco have increased 36.6% to 45.9% in the past six years. Much of the growth was driven by aggressive store expansions, but average visits per location stayed constant (in the case of Dollar Tree) or grew as well (in the case of Dollar General and Costco). This means that these chains are successfully filling new stores with visitors – consumers who in the past may have gone to Walmart or Target for at least some of the items now purchased at wholesale clubs and dollar stores.
This substantial increase in visits to Costco, Dollar General, and Dollar Tree has altered the competitive landscape in which Walmart and Target operate. In 2019, 55.9% of combined visits to the five retailers went to Walmart. Now, Walmart’s relative visit share is less than 50%. Target received the second-highest share of visits to the five retailers in 2019, with 15.9% of combined traffic to the chains. But Between January and July 2025, Dollar General received more visits than Target – even though the discount store had received just 12.1% of combined visits in 2019.
Some of the growth of the new retail giants could be attributed to well-timed expansion. But the success of these chains is also due to the extreme value orientation of U.S. consumers in recent years. Dollar General, Dollar Tree, and Costco each offer a unique value proposition, giving today's increasingly budget-conscious shoppers more options.
Walmart’s strategy of "everyday low prices" and its strongholds in rural and semi-rural areas reflect its emphasis on serving broad, value-focused households – often catering to essential, non-discretionary shopping.
Dollar General serves an even larger share of rural and semi-rural shoppers than Walmart, following its strategy of bringing a curated selection of everyday basics to underserved communities. The retailer's packaging is typically smaller than Walmart's, which allows Dollar General to price each item very affordably – and its geographic concentration in rural and semi-rural areas also highlights its direct competition to Walmart.
By contrast, Target and Costco both compete for consumer attention in suburban and small city settings, where shopper profiles tilt more toward families seeking one-stop-shopping and broader discretionary offerings. But Costco's audience skews slightly more affluent – the retailer attracts consumers who can afford the membership fees and bulk purchasing requirements – and its visit growth may be partially driven by higher income Target shoppers now shopping at Costco.
Dollar Tree, meanwhile, showcases a uniquely balanced real estate strategy. The chain's primary strength lies in suburban and small cities but it maintains a solid footing in both rural and urban areas. The chain also offers a unique value proposition, with a smaller store format and a fixed $1.25 price point on most items. So while the retailer isn't consistently cheaper than Walmart or Dollar General across all products, its convenience and predictability are helping it cement its role as a go-to chain for quick shopping trips or small quantities of discretionary items. And its versatile, three-pronged geographic footprint allows it to compete across diverse markets: Dollar Tree can serve as a convenient, quick-trip alternative to big-box retailers in the suburbs while also providing essential value in both rural and dense urban communities.
As each chain carves out distinct geographic and demographic niches, success increasingly depends on being the best option for particular shopping missions (bulk buying, quick trips, essential needs) rather than trying to be everything to everyone.
Still, despite – or perhaps due to – the increased competition, shoppers are increasingly spreading their visits across multiple retailers: Cross-shopping between major chains rose significantly between 2019 and 2025. And Walmart remains the most popular brick-and-mortar retailer, consistently ranking as the most popular cross-shopping destination for visitors of every other chain, followed by Target.
This creates an interesting paradox when viewed alongside the overall visit share shift. Even as Walmart and Target's total share of visits has declined, their importance as a secondary stop has actually grown. This suggests that the legacy retail giants' dip in market share isn't due to shoppers abandoning them. Instead, consumers are expanding their shopping routines by visiting other growing chains in addition to their regular trips to Walmart and Target, effectively diluting the giants' share of a larger, more fragmented retail landscape.
Cross-visitation to Costco from Walmart, Target, and Dollar Tree also grew between 2019 and 2025, suggesting that Costco is attracting a more varied audience to its stores.
But the most significant jumps in cross-visitation went to Dollar Tree and Dollar General, with cross-visitation to these chains from Target, Walmart, and Costco doubling or tripling over the past six years. This suggests that these brands are rapidly graduating from “fill-in” fare to primary shopping destinations for millions of households.
The dramatic rise in cross-visitation to dollar stores signals an opportunity for all retailers to identify and capitalize on specific shopping missions while building complementary partnerships rather than viewing every chain as direct competition.
Walmart’s status as the go-to destination for essential, non-discretionary spending is clearly reflected in its exceptional loyalty rates – nearly half its visitors return at least three times per month on average -between January to July 2025, a figure virtually unchanged since 2019. This steady high-frequency visitation underscores how necessity-driven shopping anchors customer routines and keeps Walmart atop the retail loyalty ranks.
But the data also reveals that other retail giants – and Dollar General in particular – are steadily gaining ground. Dollar General's increased visit frequency is largely fueled by its strategic emphasis on adding fresh produce and other grocery items, making it a viable everyday stop for more households and positioning it to compete more directly with Walmart.
Target also demonstrates a notable uptick in loyal visitors, with its share of frequent shoppers visiting at least three times a month rising from 20.1% to 23.6% between 2019 and 2025. This growth may suggest that its strategic initiatives – like the popular Drive Up service, same-day delivery options, and an appealing mix of essentials and exclusive brands – are successfully converting some casual shoppers into repeat customers.
Costco stands out for a different reason: while overall visits increased, loyalty rates remained essentially unchanged. This speaks to Costco’s unique position as a membership-based outlet for targeted bulk and premium-value purchases, where the shopping behavior of new visitors tends to follow the same patterns as those of its already-loyal core. As a result, trip frequency – rooted largely in planned stock-ups – remains remarkably consistent even as the warehouse giant grows foot traffic overall.
Dollar Tree currently has the smallest share of repeat visitors but is improving this metric. As it successfully encourages more frequent trips and narrows the loyalty gap with its larger rivals, it's poised to become an increasing source of competition for both Target and Costco.
The increase in repeat visits and cross-shopping across the five retail giants showcases consumers' current appetite for value-oriented mass merchants and discount chains. And although the retail giants landscape may be more fragmented, the data also reveals that the pie itself has grown significantly – so the increased competition does not necessarily need to come at the expense of legacy retail giants.
The retail landscape of 2025 demands a fundamental shift from zero-sum competition to strategic complementarity, where success lies in owning specific shopping missions rather than fighting for total market dominance. Retailers that forego attempting to compete on every front and instead clearly communicate their mission-specific value propositions – whether that's emergency runs, bulk essentials, or family shopping experiences – may come out on top.
1. Market Divergence: While San Francisco's return-to-office trends have stabilized, Los Angeles is increasingly lagging behind national averages with office visits down 46.6% compared to pre-pandemic levels as of June 2025.
2. Commuter Pattern Shifts: Los Angeles faces a persistent decline in out-of-market commuters while San Francisco's share of out-of-market commuters has recovered slightly, indicating deeper structural challenges in LA's office market recovery.
3. Visit vs. Visitor Gap: Unlike other markets where increased visits per worker offset declining visitor numbers, Los Angeles saw both metrics decline year-over-year, suggesting fundamental workforce retention issues.
4. Century City Exception: Century City emerges as LA's strongest office submarket with visits only 28.1% below pre-pandemic levels, driven by its premium amenities and strategic location adjacent to Westfield Century City shopping center.
5. Demographic Advantage: Century City's success may stem from its success in attracting affluent, educated young professionals who value lifestyle integration and are more likely to maintain consistent office attendance in hybrid work arrangements.
While return-to-office trends have stabilized in many markets nationwide, Los Angeles and San Francisco face unique challenges that set them apart from national patterns. This report examines the divergent trajectories of these two major West Coast markets, with particular focus on Los Angeles' ongoing struggles and the emergence of one specific submarket that bucks broader trends.
Through analysis of commuter patterns, demographic shifts, and localized performance data, we explore how factors ranging from out-of-market workforce changes to amenity-driven location advantages are reshaping the competitive landscape for office real estate in Southern California.
Both Los Angeles and San Francisco continue to significantly underperform the national office occupancy average. In June 2025, average nationwide visits to office buildings were 30.5% below January 2019 levels, compared to a 46.6% and 46.4% decline in visits to Los Angeles and San Francisco offices, respectively.
While both cities now show similar RTO rates, they arrived there through different trajectories. San Francisco has consistently lagged behind national return-to-office levels since pandemic restrictions first lifted.
Los Angeles, however, initially mirrored nationwide trends before its office market began diverging and falling behind around mid-2022.
The decline in office visits in Los Angeles and San Francisco can be partly attributed to fewer out-of-market commuters. Both cities saw significant drops in the percentage of employees who live outside the city but commute to work between H1 2019 and H1 2023.
However, here too, the two cities diverged in recent years: San Francisco's share of out-of-market commuters relative to local employees rebounded between 2023 and 2024, while Los Angeles' continued to decline – another indication that LA's RTO is decelerating as San Francisco stabilizes.
Like in other markets, Los Angeles saw a larger drop in office visits than in office visitors when comparing current trends to pre-pandemic levels. This is consistent with the shift to hybrid work arrangements, where many of the workers who returned to the office are coming in less frequently than before the pandemic, leading to a larger drop in visits compared to the drop in visitors.
But looking at the trajectory of RTO more recently shows that in most markets – including San Francisco – office visits are up year-over-year (YoY) while visitor numbers are down. This suggests that the workers slated to return to the office have already done so, and increasing the numbers of visits per visitor is now the path towards increased office occupancy.
In Los Angeles, visits also outperformed visitors – but both figures were down YoY (the gap in visits was smaller than the gap in visitors). So while the visitors who did head to the office in LA in Q2 2025 clocked in more visits per person compared to Q2 2024, the increase in visits per visitor was not enough to offset the decline in office visitors.
While Los Angeles may be lagging in terms of its overall office recovery, the city does have pockets of strength – most notably Century City. In Q2 2025, the number of inbound commuters visiting the neighborhood was just 24.7% lower than it was in Q2 2019 and higher (+1.0%) than last year's levels.
According to Colliers' Q2 2025 report, Century City accounts for 27% of year-to-date leasing activity in West Los Angeles – more than double any other submarket – and commands the highest asking rental rates. The area benefits from Trophy and Class A office towers that may create a flight-to-quality dynamic where tenants migrate from urban core locations to this Westside submarket.
The submarket's success is likely bolstered by its strategic location adjacent to Westfield Century City shopping center – visit data reveals that 45% of weekday commuters to Century City also visited Westfield Century City during Q2 2025. The convenience of accessing the mall's extensive retail, dining, and entertainment options during lunch breaks or after work may encourage employees to come into the office more frequently.
Perhaps thanks to its strategic locations and amenities-rich office buildings, Century City succeeds in attracting relatively affluent office workers.
Century City's office submarket has a higher median trade area household income (HHI) than either mid-Wilshire or Downtown LA. The neighborhood also attracts significant shares of the "Educated Urbanite" Spatial.ai: PersonaLive segment – defined as "well educated young singles living in dense urban areas working relatively high paying jobs".
This demographic typically has fewer family obligations and greater flexibility in their work arrangements, making them more likely to embrace hybrid schedules that include regular office attendance. Affluent singles also tend to value the lifestyle amenities and networking opportunities that come with working in a premium office environment like Century City: This demographic is often in career-building phases where in-person collaboration and visibility matter more, driving consistent office utilization that helps sustain the submarket's performance even as other LA office areas struggle with lower occupancy rates.
The higher disposable income of this audience also aligns well with the submarket's upscale retail and dining options at nearby Westfield Century City, creating a mutually reinforcing ecosystem where the office environment and surrounding amenities cater to their preferences.
As the broader Los Angeles market grapples with a shrinking commuter base and declining office utilization, the performance gap between premium, amenity-rich locations and traditional office districts is likely to widen. For investors and tenants alike, these trends underscore the growing importance of location quality, demographic targeting, and lifestyle integration in determining long-term office market viability across Southern California.
Century City's success – anchored by its affluent, career-focused workforce and integrated lifestyle amenities – can offer a blueprint for office market resilience in the hybrid work era.
