.svg)
%26firstwatch.avif)
First Watch, Denny's, IHOP, and Applebee's improved their visitation metrics in Q2 2025 relative to Q1 2025.
First Watch increased its total visits by 13.7% year-over-year, fueled both by its ongoing expansion and by a notable 4.1% increase in average visits per location, signaling significant room for continued growth.
In contrast to First Watch's expansion, Denny's has been closing stores. Its smaller footprint led to a 4.9% dip in overall visits, but its remaining restaurants became significantly busier, with average visits per location up 5.1% year-over-year – suggesting that loyal customers are consolidating at its remaining stores
Meanwhile, Dine brands IHOP and Applebee's also improved their visitation trends. IHOP narrowed its overall visits and average visits per location declines while Applebee's turned its traffic dips into gains in Q2, with overall visits up 2.7% YoY and average visits per venue up 5.5% – perhaps thanks to Dine's marketing efforts around the brand.
Overall, the strong Q2 performance of these four chains highlights the resilience of the value-driven casual dining sector – and may indicate that consumers may be 'trading down' from more expensive restaurants while still seeking a sit-down experience.
While First Watch caters to a wealthier clientele (with median HHI of $88.7K compared to the nationwide baseline of $79.6K), it's the chains’ serving of lower-income areas – Applebee's, Denny's, and IHOP – that attract a higher share of frequent monthly visitors. This suggests that loyalty is not dictated by disposable income; instead, brands that offer reliability and affordability can become a go-to option for their customers, driving high visit frequency even in times of macroeconomic uncertainty.
The strong Q2 performance of these chains highlights the casual dining sector's resilience and reveals two distinct paths to success in today's economy. While First Watch thrives on aggressive expansion into higher-income areas, brands like Denny's and Applebee's prove that cultivating deep loyalty among a value-conscious base through affordability and optimization is an equally powerful and sustainable strategy.
For more data-driven dining insights, visit placer.ai/anchor.
.avif)
CAVA started the year off strong with double-digit traffic increases between January and April 2025, but growth slowed down slightly towards the end of H1. Still, the chain capped off the quarter with a 8.7% YoY overall boost in visits in Q2 2025 while visits per location held essentially steady at -1.0% – suggesting that CAVA's expansion is not cannibalizing traffic from its existing venues.
Sweetgreen experienced similar traffic patterns, with overall visits up 8.6% YoY in Q2 2025 and a visit gap of 3.1% – a somewhat larger dip than CAVA's visits per location decline, though still a manageable figure for a brand in a heavy expansion phase.
While CAVA and sweetgreen share a lot of similarities, analyzing the YoY change in Q2 2025 visits by DMA highlights their different expansion philosophies. CAVA's strategy seems focused on market depth, where entry into new markets is part of a broader strategy of establishing and strengthening regional clusters. In contrast, sweetgreen's approach seems to prioritize nationwide breadth – a strategy underscored by its plans to enter three distinct geographically separate markets in 2025.
The map reflects the impact of these distinct strategies: In Q2 2025, CAVA's YoY visit growth is mostly concentrated in distinct geographic clusters, while sweetgreen's gains are more geographically dispersed across the country's major metropolitan areas.
The Q2 2025 visit growth of CAVA and sweetgreen demonstrates that multiple viable paths exist for scaling a premium fast-casual brand. While both approaches are currently driving significant overall growth, the crucial test ahead will be which strategy can better maintain store-level profitability and brand loyalty as they continue to scale.
For more data-driven dining insights, visit placer.ai/anchor
Quick-service restaurants (QSRs) have had to work hard to stay competitive in 2025, contending with inflationary pressures, cautious consumer spending, and a wave of value-focused dining alternatives.
So with the year now more than halfway through, we analyzed location analytics for leading QSR players Yum! Brands, RBI, and Wendy’s to see which chains defied expectations in Q2 2025 – and how they managed to remain ahead of the curve.
Rising costs and growing competition have eroded fast food’s once-formidable value advantage. Convenience and grocery stores now offer more substantial dining options, giving budget-conscious consumers more reasons to look beyond traditional QSRs. Meanwhile, fast-casual brands and even some full-service restaurants (like Chili’s) have introduced more elevated dining experiences at price points close to fast-food levels.
Despite these challenges, Yum! Brands and RBI have remained resilient. Yum! Brands posted modest year-over-year (YoY) traffic growth in Q2 2025 – while RBI, whose domestic footprint contracted somewhat, saw a narrowing YoY visit gap. But both chains maintained average visits per location near last year’s levels, underscoring their ability to navigate a persistently tough environment.
What’s behind RBI’s narrowing visit gap?
Popeyes emerged as a bright spot in Q2 2025, with overall foot traffic rising by 0.6% despite a reduced domestic store count – and average visits per location climbing 2.2%. This marks a notable improvement from Q1, when traffic was down 3.2%. The chicken chain’s blend of innovation and value – from new chicken wing flavors in late 2024 and early 2025 to limited-time offers (LTOs) like the $6 Big Box – appears to be winning over diners.
Burger King, RBI’s most-visited chain, also contributed to the company’s improved traffic. The brand narrowed its YoY visit gap from 3.4% in Q1 to 2.1% in Q2, thanks in part to expanded value deals and timely tie-ins such as a How to Train Your Dragon-themed meal. Meanwhile, average visits per location at Burger King nearly matched 2024 levels, with the gap shrinking from 2.0% in Q1 to 0.2% in Q2.
Yum! Brands’ primary growth engine has been Taco Bell – by far the company’s largest U.S. banner. By frequently introducing new menu items while keeping an eye on affordability – through offerings like the expanded Luxe Cravings Box – Taco Bell has sustained its reputation as a top-value treat. And building on a strong Q1, the Mexican QSR giant saw overall foot traffic climb by 2.6% YoY in Q2, with average visits per location growing by 1.5% YoY.
Elsewhere in Yum!’s portfolio, KFC and Pizza Hut posted YoY visit gaps in Q2. Still, the two brands’ average-visit-per-location gaps remained modest, indicating that consumer demand remains healthy at existing stores despite some closures.
Wendy’s is another QSR relying on value deals and menu expansions to weather the sector’s choppy waters. After two years of steady YoY same-store sales growth in the U.S., Wendy’s recorded a 2.8% comp sales decline in Q1 2025, mirrored by a 3.4% dip in average visits per location.
But Wendy’s isn’t sitting still. In March, it updated its Frostys menu, followed in April by a crowd-pleasing Cajun Crunch Spicy Chicken Sandwich. Alongside its existing value menu, Wendy’s is also leveraging special promotions this summer – from free Frostys on July 20th (National Ice Cream Day) and free fries every “Fryday” to an upcoming “Meal of Misfortune” tied to the latest season of Netflix’s Wednesday. And though visits in Q2 2025 still trailed 2024 levels, Wendy’s consistently narrowing visit gap points to a potentially brighter outlook as the year progresses.
To succeed in 2025, QSRs must excel at both menu innovation and value – no easy feat – giving today’s savvy and budget-conscious consumers a compelling reason to spend. And though 2025 promises more headwinds, chains that effectively strike this balance may be well-positioned to thrive.
Follow Placer.ai/anchor for more data-driven dining insights.
Kohl’s emergence as a hot new meme stock wasn’t on anyone’s bingo card for 2025. The retailer has grappled with declining sales and ongoing leadership challenges, driving a steep drop in its share price over the past several years. But beyond the internet buzz, is there any real reason for optimism about Kohl’s outlook?
Despite recent setbacks, Kohl’s surprised investors in Q1 2025 with a smaller-than-expected 3.9% year-over-year (YoY) drop in comparable sales – fueling speculation that a turnaround might be in the works. The company’s foot traffic gap also narrowed to just 2.7% YoY in Q1, a notable improvement from the 6.0% gap in Q4 2024. In Q2 2025, too, Kohl’s visit-per-location gap remained relatively modest at 3.1%. But monthly YoY data showed substantial volatility, with June experiencing a sharp decline while March through May visits per location held close to last year’s levels.
All in all, Kohl’s clearly has a long way to go to reclaim its former glory – and it’s too soon to tell whether a comeback is indeed in the cards. But with the right strategy, the data does point to some underlying strength that may help the company regain its footing – meme stock or not.
For more data-driven retail analyses, follow Placer.ai/anchor.
Pharmacies have weathered a challenging landscape in recent years, marked by shrinking drug margins, rising costs, and heightened competition from online retailers. Major industry leaders have had to rethink their strategies in response.
So with CVS Health set to report earnings later this month, we dove into the data to see how visits to the company’s eponymous pharmacy chain fared in Q2 2025. How have CVS’s rightsizing and optimization efforts impacted visitation? And what can location analytics reveal about some of the strategies that may drive further growth for the chain?
We dove into the data to find out.
CVS Pharmacy began 2025 on a high note. Despite hundreds of recent store closures, the chain posted steady year-over-year (YoY) visit growth throughout the first half of 2025, with only February seeing a slight dip due to the leap-year comparison.
In the first quarter of the year, CVS Health’s Pharmacy and Consumer Wellness segment reported an 11.1% jump in revenue – driven in part by a 6.7% rise in same-store prescription volume. This growth was reflected in the chain’s solid Q1 visit numbers – a momentum sustained into Q2 2025, when overall foot traffic rose 2.2% YoY and average visits per location saw an even more impressive 5.0% increase.
CVS's strong visit numbers appear to underscore the success of its rightsizing efforts, which have largely focused on optimizing the pharmacy and healthcare side of the business. In addition to closing hundreds of stores, CVS plans to open several smaller-format, pharmacy-first locations – as well as featuring limited over-the-counter offerings. The drugstore leader is also set to absorb prescription files from 625 closing Rite Aid locations, in addition to acquiring 64 of its physical stores.
CVS's pharmacy-focused strategy comes amid softening demand for its front store business – including items like cosmetics, candy, greeting cards, and other over-the-counter products – which saw a 2.4% revenue decline in Q1 2025. Yet location analytics show that these non-medical offerings remain an important traffic driver for CVS – especially during key retail milestones.
In the first half of 2025, for example, Valentine’s Day (February 14th) was CVS's busiest day of the year to date, registering a 39.2% surge in visits compared to the chain’s year-to-date (YTD) daily average and a 26.3% boost compared to an average Friday. Other holidays, including Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, sparked smaller but still significant upticks, as shoppers stopped by for gifts and cards.
CVS’s 2025 visit numbers suggest the chain is adeptly navigating pharmacy’s choppy waters – staying nimble and capitalizing on opportunities as they arise. Will the pharmacy leader continue to thrive in the months ahead?
Follow Placer.ai/anchor to find out.
.avif)
In my last column for The Anchor, I debuted a new quarterly series, entitled “All The Things I Think I Think About Retail Over The Last Quarter.”
Well, another quarter has come and gone, so that means it is time to dust off the shelves and scorecard past predictions as well as to signal what is most top of mind at present.
So, first, the scorecard. Loyal readers of my first column will remember these predictions:
It has only been three months since I put a stake in the ground on all of them, but on the “Nailed It/Too Early To Tell/Dead Wrong” scale, I am feeling pretty darn good about most of the above.
It is way too early to tell on Macy’s, Bloomie’s, and Wayfair. Same goes for Sam’s Club and Sprouts. And, as much as I would like to take a victory lap on these last two especially, the proof will be in the pudding much more down the road. Though I still am feeling like all six will break my way soon.
Finally, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention Kohl’s. Kohl’s is such a dumpster fire (meme stock, anyone?) that the very same above prediction is also likely in play for whomever gets chosen as Ashley Buchanan’s ultimate successor.
All of which leads me to…
Over the last quarter, Costco and Target have been a tale of two retailers. One stood strong on DEI, while the other kowtowed to public pressure. Both companies stated their contrasting positions publicly this past January, and the traffic results speak for themselves..
Costco has emerged unscathed, as predicted, while Target now faces concerns that it could become the next Kmart or Sears (and for a whole host of reasons beyond DEI).
The biggest takeaway for me, however?
No matter your personal opinions on DEI, the most important thing retail executives have to ask themselves is, “What matters most to our brand?”
Target and Brian Cornell forgot this one important question. They didn’t do their homework, and thereby took their fingers off the pulse of the Target customer, and clearly the customer has been voting with his or her feet.
It will likely take a regime change with a clear stated purpose to get them back.
I missed on Starbucks, and, frankly, I am kind of pissed about it. I was thrilled when Starbucks’ new CEO Brian Niccol announced his intentions to enliven the in-store Starbucks experience. His promise of “4 Minutes or Less” wait times and his introduction of ceramic mugs had me at Frappuccino.
But then something interesting happened on the way to the coffee roaster.
First, few, if any, baristas have ever offered me a ceramic mug at checkout. Plus, the experience of drinking my coffee in said ceramic mug actually adds more friction to the overall Starbucks’ experience because you still have to go back and wait in line to take your coffee to go.
Second, the wait time promise has also fallen flat. When Niccol first made the announcement, I would go into Starbucks, order at the counter, track the wait time on my phone, and, without fail, get served my coffee in under four minutes. I even proudly shared my improved wait time experiences on social media.
I bought into Brian Niccol’s java-flavored Kool-Aid hook, line, and sinker, but, as much it pains me to admit it, I also forgot one important axiom of retailing – never judge anything out-of-the-gate (which, side note, is also why, in contrast, I have not jumped on the Richard Dickson at Gap Inc. bandwagon yet, too).
Any initial promise for Starbucks in Q1 was quickly overshadowed by Starbucks’ Q2 results. Starbucks same-store sales fell for the fifth straight quarter, with U.S. same-store sales down 2%.
Shame on me. I should have known better.
When running stores, it is easy to get store teams behind anything for a short period of time. I simply made the call too early and now worry the pendulum may be swinging back entirely. Part and parcel, people appear to be spending less time, not more time, in Starbucks since the regime change, which doesn’t bode well.
Any Kool-Aid drinking, whether it be for Niccol, for Dickson, or, as Target CEO Brian Cornell has received during his tenure, should always be reserved until one is sure that results are sustainable.
For more data-driven retail insights, visit placer.ai/anchor
1. Shoppers are taking more, shorter trips to grocery stores. Over the past 12 months, grocery stores have experienced nearly uniform YoY visit growth. And since COVID, the segment has steadily increased both overall visits and average visits per location – even as average dwell times have consistently declined.
2. Grocery stores are holding ground against fierce competition. Despite growing inroads by discount and dollar stores, wholesale clubs, and general mass retailers like Walmart and Target, grocery stores have maintained their share of the overall food-at-home visit pie over the past several years.
3. Grocery visit share is most pronounced on the coasts. In Q1 2025, grocery stores claimed the majority of food-at-home visits on the West Coast, in parts of the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Mountain Regions, and in Florida and Michigan.
4. Fresh-format, value, and ethnic grocery visit shares are growing at the expense of traditional chains. And in Q1 2025, fresh-format and value grocers outperformed the other sub-segments with positive YoY visit and average visit-per-location growth.
5. Hispanic markets are on the rise. Though the broader ethnic grocery sub-segment was essentially flat YoY in Q1 2025, Hispanic-focused stores recorded increases in both visits and visits per location – and have been steadily growing visits since 2021.
6. Smaller formats for the win. In Q1 2025, smaller-format grocery store locations outpaced mid-sized and larger-format ones, underscoring the power of compact spaces to deliver significant foot traffic gains.
Brick-and-mortar grocery stores face an uncertain market in 2025. Rising food-at-home prices (eggs, anyone?), declining consumer confidence, and increased competition from discounters, superstores, and online shopping channels all present the segment with significant headwinds. Yet even in the face of these challenges, the sector has demonstrated remarkable resilience – growing its foot traffic and holding onto visit share.
What strategies have helped the segment navigate today’s tough market? And how can industry stakeholders make the most of the opportunities in the current market? This report draws on the latest location intelligence to uncover the trends shaping grocery retail in early 2025 – highlighting insights to help key players make informed, data-driven decisions on store formats, product offerings, and more.
The grocery segment has experienced nearly uniform positive year-over-year (YoY) growth over the last 12 months. This sustained performance in the face of inflation and other headwinds highlights the underlying strength of the category.
What is driving this growth? Since 2022, the grocery segment has seen consistent overall visit growth that has outpaced increases in visits per location – a sign that chain expansion has played a key role in the category’s success. But the average number of visits to each grocery store has also been on the rise, indicating that the segment continues to expand without cannibalizing existing store traffic.
At the same time, visitor dwell times have been steadily dropping since 2021. This shift appears to reflect a trend towards multiple, shorter trips by inflation-wary consumers eager to avoid large, costly carts or cherry pick deals across various retailers. Many shoppers may also be placing more bulk orders online and supplementing those deliveries with brief in-store stops for additional items as needed.
The bottom line: Shoppers are taking more grocery trips overall each year, but spending less time in-store during each visit. Operators can respond to this trend by optimizing layouts and promoting “grab-and-go” areas for an even more efficient quick-trip experience.
Visit share data also shows that despite fierce competition from discount and dollar stores, wholesalers, and general mass retailers, the grocery segment has steadfastly preserved its share of the overall food-at-home visit pie.
Between Q1 2019 and Q1 2025, wholesale clubs and discount and dollar stores increased their share of total food-at-home visits, gains that have come primarily at the expense of Walmart and Target. Meanwhile, grocery outlets have held firm – despite some fluctuations over the years, their Q1 2019 visit share remained essentially unchanged in Q1 2025.
So even as consumers flock to alternative food purveyors in search of lower prices, grocery stores aren’t losing ground – and on a nationwide level, they remain the biggest player by far in the food-at-home shopping space.
Still, grocery store visit share varies significantly by region. On the West Coast, in parts of the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Mountain regions, and in Florida and Michigan, grocery stores accounted for the majority of food-at-home visits in Q1 2025. Oregon (61.6%) and Washington (59.6%) led the pack, followed by Massachusetts (59.2%), Vermont (58.5%), and California (57.9%). Meanwhile, in West Virginia, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, North Dakota, and Mississippi, less than 30% of food-at-home traffic went to grocery stores, with more shoppers in these regions turning to general mass retailers or discounters.
Grocery store operators in lower-grocery-share regions may choose to focus on price competitiveness and convenient store locations to capture more foot traffic from competitors in the space.
Which types of grocery stores are thriving the most? The grocery segment is diverse, encompassing traditional grocery chains like Kroger, Safeway, and H-E-B; budget-oriented value chains such as Aldi, WinCo Foods, Grocery Outlet Bargain Market, and Market Basket; fresh-format specialty brands like Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, and Sprouts Farmers Market; and numerous ethnic grocers.
Examining shifts in visit share among these various grocery store segments shows that traditional grocery still dominates, commanding over 70.0% of total grocery store foot traffic.
Still, over the past several years, traditional grocers have gradually ceded ground to other segments – especially value chains. Budget grocers saw a temporary surge in visits during the panic-buying days of early 2020 – and have been more gradually gaining visit share since Q1 2023. . Fresh-format banners, which lost ground in 2021 after a Q1 2020 bump, in the wake of COVID, have also been on the upswing and appear poised to capture additional visit share in the coming months and years. And though ethnic grocers still account for a relatively small portion of the overall market, they have slightly increased their visit share, reflecting heightened consumer interest in these specialized offerings.
Recent performance metrics point to a bifurcation in the grocery market similar to that observed in other retail categories. In Q1 2025, fresh-format and value retailers – which appeal, respectively, to the most and least affluent visitor bases – saw the greatest growth in both overall visits and average visits per location.
This trend highlights the power of both value and health-focused quality to motivate consumers in 2025. And grocery players that can meet these needs will be well-positioned for success in the months ahead.
One factor fueling fresh-format’s success may be its role as a convenient, relatively affordable midday lunch destination for the remote work crowd.
In Q1 2025, consumers working from home accounted for 20.2% of fresh-format grocery stores’ captured market – a significantly higher share than any other analyzed grocery segment. These stores also tended to be busier midday than the other segments. Remote workers may be stopping by to grab a quick bite – and some may be choosing to do their grocery shopping during their lunch break when stores are less crowded.
This finding suggests an opportunity for grocery operators across all segments to develop or enhance in-store salad bars and quick-serve sections to tap into the lunch rush. Likewise, CPG companies may benefit from developing more ready-made, nutritious meal options that align with these midday dining habits.
Though the broader ethnic grocery category remained essentially flat in Q1 2025, Hispanic-focused grocers emerged as a sub-segment to watch. Both overall visits and average visits per location to these stores have been on the rise since 2021.
This robust demand presents an opportunity for CPG brands and grocers across segments to expand Hispanic-focused offerings, capturing a slice of this growing market.
Finally, store size matters more than ever in 2025. During the first quarter of the year, smaller format grocery store locations (locations under 30K square feet, across different chains) outpaced larger stores with a 3.2% YoY jump in visits, showing that bigger isn’t always better in the grocery store space.
This pattern aligns with the decrease in dwell times noted above – shoppers may be making shorter trips to smaller, more convenient grocery store locations. These quick errands are ideal for picking up a few items to supplement online orders, shopping multiple deals, or sourcing specialty products unavailable at larger grocery destinations. And to lean into this trend, grocery operators might consider testing neighborhood “micro-store” concepts, focusing on curated selections, and offering convenient parking or pickup to match consumer preferences for targeted purchases and quicker trips.
Location intelligence reveals a growing, dynamic grocery landscape which is holding its ground in the face of increased competition. Shorter trips, busier lifestyles, and changing work routines are reshaping in-store experiences. And grocery players that refine their store formats, target both lunch and on-the-go shoppers, and adapt to shifting demographics can position themselves to thrive in this competitive sector. As the market continues to evolve, continuous attention to these changing patterns will be key to maintaining and expanding market share.
1. Elevated visitor frequency could mean that gym-goers are getting more value out of their memberships and are therefore more likely to stay signed up. Between January and March 2025, all of the gym chains analyzed had a higher share of frequent visitors (those who visited about once a week) than in the equivalent month of 2024.
2. Fitness chains at all price tiers need to be strategic about the value they offer and the amenities that can engage budget-conscious consumers. Between Q1 2022 and Q1 2025, the captured trade area median HHI increased for all fitness subsegments – value-priced, mid-range, and high-end – suggesting that consumers swapped pricier gym memberships for more affordable options.
3. Close attention should be paid to how long visitors spend at fitness chains in order to reduce crowding and bottlenecks. Between Q1 2022 and Q1 2025, the average visit length increased at value-priced, mid-range, and high-end gyms. Floorplan and equipment improvements could be considered, as well as having trainers available to help gym-goers streamline workouts.
4. Gyms can use hourly visit data to better serve their members or use promotions to stabilize facility usage throughout the day. In Q1 2025, high-end chains received a larger share of morning visits while value-priced and mid-range fitness chains received larger shares of evening visits.
Like many industries in recent years, the fitness sector has experienced significant shifts in consumer behavior. From the rise in home workouts during the pandemic to the strain of hyper-inflation, foot traffic trends to gyms and health clubs have been as dynamic as the consumers they serve.
This report leverages location analytics to explore the consumer trends driving visitation in the fitness space and provides actionable insights for industry stakeholders.
The pandemic drove several shifts in the fitness space. Widespread gym closures led consumers to embrace home-based workouts, while demand for all things fitness increased due to an emphasis on overall health and wellness. This subsequently drove a renewed interest in gym-based workouts as restrictions lifted – even as some consumers remained committed to their home workout routines.
In Q1 2023, visits to fitness chains surpassed Q1 2019 levels for the first time since the onset of the pandemic, a sign that consumers had recommitted to out-of-home fitness. And in Q1 2024 and Q1 2025, fitness chains saw further growth, climbing to 12.8% and 15.5% above the Q1 2019 baseline, respectively.
Several factors have likely driven consumers’ return to gyms and health clubs, including the desire for both social connection and professional-grade facilities difficult to replicate at home. The steep increase in cost of living has likely also played a role, since consumers cutting back on discretionary spending can enjoy multiple outings and a range of recreational activities at the gym for one monthly fee.
Zooming in on weekly visits to the fitness space in Q1 2025 reveals the industry’s exceptional strength and resilience in the early part of the year.
The fitness industry experienced YoY visit growth nearly every week of Q1 2025 (and 2.4% YoY visit growth overall) with only minor visit gaps the weeks of January 20th, 2025 and February 17th, 2025 – likely due to extreme weather that prevented many Americans from hitting the gym.
And the fitness industry’s weekly visit growth appeared to strengthen throughout the quarter, defying the typical waning of New Year's resolutions. This could indicate that gym visits haven't plateaued and that consumers are demonstrating greater commitment to their fitness routines compared to last year.
Diving into visitation patterns for leading fitness chains highlights how increased visitor frequency drove foot traffic growth in Q1 2025.
Fitness chains tend to receive the most visits during the first months of the year as consumers recommit to health and wellness in their post-holidays New Year’s resolutions. And not only do more people hit the gym – analyzing the data reveals that gym-goers also typically work out more frequently during this period. Zooming in on 2025 so far suggests that consumers are especially committed to their fitness routines this year: Leading gyms saw an increase in the proportion of frequent visitors (4+ times a month) in Q1 2025 compared to the already significant percentage of frequent visitors in the first quarter of 2024.
Elevated visitor frequency could mean that gym-goers are getting more value out of their memberships than last year, and are therefore more likely to stay signed up throughout the year.
At the same time, the data also reveals that – contrary to what may be expected – a fitness chain’s share of frequent visitors appears to be independent of the cost of membership associated with the club: Life Time, a high-end club, and EōS Fitness, a value-priced gym, had the highest shares of frequent visitors between January 2024 and March 2025. This suggests that factors other than cost, such as location convenience, class offerings, community, or individual motivation, might be more influential in driving frequent gym attendance.
Segmenting the fitness industry by membership price tiers – value-priced, mid-range, and high-end – can reveal further insights on current consumer behavior around out-of-home fitness.
In Q1 2025, the captured market* median household income (HHI) was higher than the nationwide median HHI ($79.6K/year) across all price tiers – suggesting that even value-priced fitness chains are attracting a relatively affluent audience. This could indicate that gym memberships are somewhat of a luxury and that consumers from lower-income households gave up their gym memberships altogether as they tightened their purse strings.
Analyzing the historical data since Q1 2022 also reveals that the captured market median HHI has risen consistently over the past couple of years with the largest median HHI increase observed in the captured trade areas of high-end fitness chains. This suggests that middle-income households – that are more sensitive to the rising cost of living – likely swapped pricier gym memberships for more affordable options in recent years.
These metrics indicate that fitness chains at all price tiers need to think strategically about the value they offer and the amenities that can engage budget-conscious consumers who are carefully weighing every expenditure.
*Captured trade area is obtained by weighting the census block groups (CBGs) from which the chain draws its visitors according to their share of visits to the chain and thus reflects the population that visits the chain in practice.
Fitness clubs of all types need to manage their capacity to ensure health and safety standards and a positive experience for members. And understanding the average amount of time visitors spend at the gym can help fitness chains at every price point keep their finger on the pulse of their facilities.
Between Q1 2022 and Q1 2025, the average visit length increased at value-priced, mid-range, and high-end gyms. Value-priced gyms experienced the largest increase in average visit length – from 72.4 minutes in Q1 2022 to 74.0 minutes in Q1 2025 – perhaps due to their relatively lower-income visitors spending more time enjoying club amenities after cutting back on other forms of recreation. Meanwhile, mid-range and high-end gyms experienced relatively modest increases in average visit length, which were higher to begin with – likely due to their ample class and spa offerings and overall inviting, upscale spaces.
Elevated average visit length could mean that visitors are well-engaged and less likely to cancel their memberships. But as overall gym visits are on the rise, fitness chains may want to pay close attention to how long visitors spend at the facility. Floorplan and equipment improvements could be considered in order to reduce bottlenecks, and having trainers available to instruct on equipment usage and workout technique could help gym-goers streamline workouts.
Along with average visit length, understanding the daypart in which they receive the most visits is another way that fitness chains can improve efficiency and prevent overcrowding. And analysis of the hourly visits to fitness sub-segments revealed that some fitness segments receive more morning visits while others are more popular in the evenings.
In Q1 2025, high-end chains received a larger share of visits between 6 a.m. and 9 a.m. (19.7%) than value-priced and mid-range fitness chains (11.6% and 11.8%, respectively). Meanwhile, value-priced and mid-range fitness chains received larger shares of visits between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. (21.9% and 22.2%) than high-end chains (16.5%).
Gyms can leverage this data to better serve members, for instance by scheduling more classes during peak hours. Value-priced and mid-range gyms, which saw a larger disparity between shares of morning and evening visits in Q1 2025, might also consider incentivizing off-peak usage through discounted morning memberships or early-bird snack bar deals.
The fitness space appears to be in good shape in 2025. Visits have made a full recovery from the pandemic era and still continue to grow, indicating strong consumer demand for out-of-home workouts. And using location intelligence to analyze the behavior and demographics of visitors to gyms at different price points can help identify opportunities for driving even greater success.
1. Idaho and South Carolina have emerged as significant domestic migration magnets over the past four years. Between January 2021 and 2025, both states gained over 3.0% of their populations through domestic migration. Other Mountain and Sun Belt states – including Nevada, Montana, and Florida – also drew significant inflow, while California, New York, and Illinois experienced the greatest outmigration.
2. Interstate migration cooled noticeably in 2024. During the 12-month period ending January 2025, California, New York and Illinois saw their outflows slow dramatically, while domestic migration hotspots like Georgia, Texas, and Florida saw inflows flatten to zero. A similar cooling trend emerged on a CBSA level.
3. Still, some states continued to see notable relocation activity over the past year. In 2024, Idaho, South Carolina, and North Dakota drew the most relocators relative to their populations. And among the nation’s ten largest states, North Carolina led with an inflow of 0.4%.
4. Phoenix remained a rare bright spot among the nation’s ten largest metro areas. The CBSA was the only major analyzed hub to maintain positive net domestic migration through 2024.
Over the past several years, the United States has experienced significant domestic migration shifts, driven by factors like remote work, housing affordability, and regional economic opportunities. As some areas reap the benefits of population inflows, others grapple with outflows tied to higher living costs and evolving workplace dynamics.
This report dives into the location analytics to explore where Americans have moved since 2021 – and how these patterns began to change in 2024.
Since 2021, Americans have flocked toward warmer climates, expansive natural scenery, and more affordable housing options – particularly in the Mountain and Sun Belt states.
Between January 2021 and January 2025, South Carolina led the nation in positive net domestic migration – drawing an influx of newcomers equivalent to 3.6% of its January 2025 population. (This metric is referred to as a state’s “net migrated percent of population.”) Next in line was Idaho with a 3.4% net migrated percent of population, followed by Nevada, (2.8%), Montana (2.8%), Florida (2.1%), South Dakota (2.1%), Wyoming (2.0%), North Carolina (2.0%), and Tennessee (1.9%). Texas saw positive net migration of just 0.9% during the same period. However, the Lone Star State’s large overall population means a substantial number of newcomers in absolute terms.
Meanwhile, California (-2.2%), New York (-2.1%), and Illinois (-1.9%) experienced the greatest outflows relative to their populations. This exodus was driven largely by soaring housing costs and the rise of remote work, which lowered barriers to moving out of high-priced areas.
Between January 2024 and January 2025, many of the same broad patterns persisted, but at a more moderate clip – suggesting a stabilization of domestic migration nationwide. This leveling off could reflect factors such as rising mortgage interest rates, which dampened home buying and selling, as well as the increased push for employees to return to the office.
Still, South Carolina (+0.6%) and Idaho (+0.6%) remained among the top inflow states. The two hotspots were joined – and slightly surpassed – by North Dakota (+0.8%), where even modest waves of newcomers make a big impact due to the state’s lower population base. A wealth of affordable housing and a strong job market have positioned North Dakota as a particularly attractive destination for U.S. relocators in recent years. And Microsoft and Amazon’s establishment of major presences around Fargo has strengthened the region’s economy.
Meanwhile, California (-0.3%), New York (-0.2%), and Illinois (-0.1%) continued to post negative net migration, but at a markedly slower rate than in prior years. And notably, several states that had been struggling with outflow, such as Michigan, Minnesota, Virginia, Ohio, and Oregon, began showing minor positive inflow during the same 12-month window. As home affordability erodes in pandemic-era hot spots like the Mountain states and Sun Belt, these areas may emerge as new destinations for Americans seeking lower costs of living.
Zooming in on the ten most populous U.S. states offers an even clearer picture of how domestic migration patterns have stabilized over the past year. The graph below shows a side-by-side comparison of domestic migration patterns during the 36-month period ending January 2024 and the 12-month period ending January 2025.
California, New York, and Illinois saw population outflows slow dramatically during the 12 months ending January 2025 – while domestic migration magnets such as Georgia, Texas, and Florida saw inflow flatten to zero. Meanwhile, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania flipped from slightly negative to slightly positive net migration – incremental upticks that could signal a possible turnaround.
The only “Big Ten” pandemic-era migration magnet to maintain strong inflow in 2024 was North Carolina – which saw a 0.4% influx in 2024 as a result of interstate moves.
A closer look at the top four states receiving outmigration from California and New York (October 2020 to October 2024) reveals that residents leaving both states tended to settle in nearby areas or in Florida.
Among those leaving New York, 37.4% ended up in neighboring states – 21.1% moved to New Jersey, 9.2% to Pennsylvania, and 7.1% to Connecticut. But an astonishing 28.8% decamped all the way to the Sunshine State, trading the Northeast’s colder climate for Florida sunshine.
Similarly, 20.1% of California leavers chose to stay nearby, moving to Nevada (11.5%) or Arizona (8.6%). Another 19.1% moved to Texas, and 8.0% moved to Florida, making it the fourth-largest destination for Californians.
Zooming in on CBSA-level data – focusing on the nation’s ten largest metropolitan areas, all with over five million people – reveals a similar picture of slowing domestic migration over the last year.
Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. – four cities that experienced notable population outflows between January 2021 and January 2024 – saw those outflows flatten considerably. For these metros, this leveling-off may serve as a promising sign that the waves of departures seen in recent years may have begun to subside. Conversely, Houston and Dallas, which both welcomed positive net migration between January 2021 and January 2024, registered zero-net domestic migration in 2024. Atlanta, for its part, remained flat in both of the analyzed periods.
In Miami, however, outmigration persisted at a substantial rate. Despite Florida’s overall status as a domestic migration magnet, Miami lost 2.6% of its population to domestic net migration between January 2020 and January 2024 – and another 1.0% between January 2024 and January 2025. As one of Florida’s most expensive housing markets, Miami may be losing some residents to other parts of the state or elsewhere in the region. Meanwhile, Philadelphia, which lost 0.3% of its population to net domestic migration between January 2021 and January 2024, continued losing residents at a slightly faster pace in 2024 – another 0.3% just last year.
Of the ten biggest CBSAs nationwide, only Phoenix continued to see a net domestic migration gain through 2024 (+0.2%). This highlights the CBSA’s continued draw as a (relative) relocation hotspot even in 2024’s cooling market.
Who are the domestic relocators heading to Phoenix?
From October 2020 to October 2024, the top five metro areas sending residents to the Phoenix CBSA each registered median household incomes (HHIs) of $73K to $98K – surpassing Phoenix’s own median of $72K. This suggests that many of those moving in are arriving from wealthier, often more expensive metro areas – for whom even Phoenix’s high-priced market may offer more affordable living.
Overall, domestic migration patterns appear to have cooled in 2024, reflecting economic and societal trends that have slowed the rush from pricey coastal hubs to more affordable regions. Yet states like South Carolina, Idaho, and North Dakota – as well as metro areas like Phoenix – continue to attract new arrivals, paving the way for evolving regional demographics in the years to come.
