.svg)
.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
The coffee space has become increasingly competitive in recent years. And while traffic to the segment is up, the growth of small and medium sized chains may be coming at the expense of Starbucks. Visits to the reigning coffee giant were down slightly (0.1%) YoY in Q2 2025 while average visits per location declined 4.2% in the same period.
Still, these trends mark an improvement compared to last quarter, when YoY visits and average visits per venue were down 0.9% and 5.4%, respectively – suggesting that the company's "Back to Starbucks" strategy and recent menu innovations are beginning to drive a turnaround.
Meanwhile, Dunkin' – the second-largest coffee chain in the country – is seeing modest growth, with overall visits and average visits per venue up 1.7% and 0.3% YoY, respectively, in Q2 2025. Like Starbucks, Dunkin' showed improvement in Q2 2025 compared to Q1 2025 – perhaps an early sign of strengthening consumer confidence.
But while broader market forces may have helped, Dunkin's Q2 2025 turnaround may also be attributed to the chain's promotional efforts – including a new ad campaign to promote the chain's $6 Meal Deals. As value continues to drive consumer decision-making, Dunkin's emphasis on affordable bundles positions it well to maintain its visit share despite the growing competition in the space.
Dutch Bros, one of the fastest growing coffee brands in recent years, maintained its momentum in Q2 2025, as coffee chains betting on small-format, largely drive-thru locations – including 7Brew, PJ's Coffee, Biggby, and Foxtail – continue to resonate with consumers.
Overall visits to the Oregon-based chain grew 13.8% YoY alongside a 0.8% increase in average visits per venue – indicating that the chain's ongoing expansion is not cannibalizing traffic from existing venues. This bodes well for the brand as it continues its aggressive expansion – 2,029 stores by 2029.
As we look to the second half of 2025, the coffee sector will be characterized by the distinct strategies of its key players. Dutch Bros' aggressive expansion will continue to challenge the incumbents on a local level, while Dunkin's focus on value will likely remain a key advantage with budget-conscious consumers. The ultimate test will be for Starbucks, as the industry leader's ability to translate its strategic innovations into sustained visit growth will determine its capacity to defend its market share.
For more data-driven dining insights, visit placer.ai/anchor.
Shake Shack traffic increased an impressive 13.7% year-over-year (YoY) in Q2 2025 while average visits per venue held relatively steady at -1.7% – indicating that the chain's aggressive expansion strategy is capturing new market share without cannibalizing existing locations.
Meanwhile, although Q2 2025 visits to Wingstop were up 3.6%, the chain's average visits per venue declined 6.3% – which may suggest that discretionary dining brands serving lower-income consumers may be experiencing pressure from tightening household budgets.
Analyzing trade area demographic data reveals that Wingstop's captured market has a median household income of $69.5K – significantly lower than Shake Shack's $97.0K. Wingstop's trade area also includes a much higher proportion of households with children.
Wingstop attracts families with tighter budgets who must stretch their dining dollars further, which likely contributed to the decline in average visits per venue during this period of economic uncertainty. Meanwhile, Shake Shack's appeals to higher-income consumers with more discretionary spending power could explain the chain's impressive visit strength despite the ongoing headwinds.
Looking at the change in visit frequency compared to 2024 also suggests that Wingstop is feeling the impact of its visitors' tighter budgets.
Wingstop still maintains a significant advantage in customer loyalty, with 16.8% to 18.1% repeat monthly visitors in H1 2025 compared to Shake Shack's 10.5% to 11.4%. But comparing these numbers to 2024 reveals that Wingstop's share of repeat visitors has declined slightly since 2024, while Shake Shack has posted modest monthly gains throughout H1 2025.
This shift suggests that budget-conscious families may be reducing their regular Wingstop visits to save money, while Shake Shack's strategic expansion is bringing locations closer to customers which could be driving increased repeat visitation.
Despite facing economic headwinds, Wingstop's continued positive visit growth and superior customer loyalty metrics demonstrate the brand's strong fundamentals and deep connection with its core family demographic.
As economic conditions stabilize, Wingstop's established customer base and proven appeal to budget-conscious families positions the chain for a strong rebound, particularly given that families with children represent a large and resilient market segment that will likely return to regular dining patterns when household budgets recover.
Visit Placer.ai/anchor for the latest data-driven dining insights.
Eyewear chain Warby Parker continues to be a disruptor. The glasses chain got its start online and made the pivot to brick-and-mortar in 2013. And while many retailers who made that move have since shifted to other retail formats, Warby Parker is pressing on – the brand has plans to open 45 new locations in 2025 alone and is partnering with Target to open store-in-stores in H2 2025.
The chain's ongoing expansion drove year-over-year (YoY) visit increases for all months of 2025 so far. Average visits per location showed more variance – average visits per venue declined 2.7% YoY in Q2 2025 – perhaps reflecting the brand's deliberate focus on market penetration and its use of stores as strategic omnichannel touchpoints rather than purely traffic-dependent locations.
Like Warby Parker, footwear brand Allbirds began online before pivoting to physical retail. But Allbirds is now going in a different direction and shrinking rather than expanding its footprint. In March 2024, the company made the strategic decision to shutter about one-third of its store fleet – and the result has been impressive. While overall visits declined YoY by -12.5% in Q2 2025, visits per location surged, increasing by 18.2% in the same period.
Monthly visits followed a similar pattern, with overall visits generally lower than they were in 2024 while visits per location were largely positive – and looking at visits since the beginning of 2025 shows that the YoY overall visit gap has also been narrowing. Visits in January 2025 were 37.1% lower than they were in January 2024, but by June 2025 that visit gap had narrowed to just 15.1%. Meanwhile, average visits per location were elevated by 13.2% YoY in June 2025. This impressive shift highlights that demand for in-store shopping at Allbirds is strong, and the decision to focus on its highest-performing stores has had the intended effect.
Warby Parker and Allbirds have taken divergent approaches to their brick-and-mortar strategy, and both chains are managing to keep things moving forward.
What will H2 look like for these brands? Visit Placer.ai/anchor for the latest data-driven retail insights.
Movie theater visits were up year-over-year in Q2 2025, but traffic generally remains significantly below 2019 levels – with the exception of Cinemark, where visits are almost on par with pre-pandemic levels. We analyzed the data to understand how movie-going behavior has changed since COVID and why Cinemark is staying ahead of the curve.
Movie theater traffic jumped year-over-year (YoY) in Q2 2025 thanks to the release of several successful blockbusters, including A Minecraft Movie, Sinners, Lilo & Stitch, and Mission Impossible: The Final Reckoning.
Still, baseline movie theater attendance remains significantly lower than it was pre-pandemic. And although YoY trends for AMC, Regal, and Cinemark were relatively consistent, comparing these chains' recent visit trends to pre-pandemic traffic reveals major differences in long-term performance.
Between July 2024 and June 2025, visits to the two largest chains – AMC and Regal – were 33.2% and 40.0% lower, respectively, than they were between July 2018 to June 2019. The visits per location gap was slightly narrower – due to rightsizing efforts that consolidated traffic into fewer movie theaters – but the data still indicates that AMC and Regal theaters are generally emptier than they were in 2018-2019.
But bucking the trend is Cinemark, which saw traffic to its flagship Cinemark brand dip just 2.6% compared to pre-COVID, while average visits per location were relatively stable at -0.8%. Thanks to this impressive recovery, Cinemark has significantly strengthened its position in the wider movie theater landscape.
A deeper look at the data confirms Cinemark's success in attracting moviegoers. Cinemark theaters average more visits both per location and per square foot, indicating that their higher visit numbers stem from fuller theaters rather than larger venues or more locations.
But just because Cinemark's visit numbers are relatively aligned with 2018-2019 traffic levels does not mean that the chain has not been impacted by the shift in post-COVID movie-going behavior.
Comparing monthly visits between July 2018-June 2019 and July 2024-June 2025 reveals increased traffic volatility at all three chains, with higher peaks and deeper valleys compared to average monthly baselines. This volatility likely stems from blockbusters playing a more central role in driving movie visits. Fewer consumers now go to movies casually – instead, they save their limited movie budgets for major releases.
The data also shows that all three chains have seen a relative drop in visits to matinee screenings (before 5 PM) along with a relative increase in late-night visits (9 PM to 1 AM) – which could also be consistent with a more intentional and less casual movie-going pattern.
And Cinemark hasn't been immune to these changes. The chain has also experienced similar monthly visit volatility, fewer matinee visits, and more late-night visits – matching the patterns seen at AMC and Regal.
So what is driving Cinemark's success? Some of the answer may lie in its strategic focus on less affluent family audiences. Compared to AMC and Regal, Cinemark attracts visitors from areas with lower median household incomes and higher concentrations of families – a positioning the chain seems to be deliberately cultivating.
Cinemark has built an ecosystem designed for budget-conscious families: their Movie Club membership includes monthly rollover ticket credits and concession discounts, while their Summer Movie Clubhouse offers discounted family packages. Select locations also feature Camp Cinemark auditoriums – screening rooms specifically designed to be child-friendly.
This strategy creates a virtuous cycle. While Cinemark's lower-income audience has tighter entertainment budgets, they're also less likely to have premium home theater setups that compete with the theatrical experience.
When these families do decide to splurge on entertainment, Cinemark's value-oriented approach and family-friendly amenities make it the logical choice – turning occasional visits into a more loyal customer base that sustains traffic even during industry-wide downturns.
While most movie theater chains continue to struggle with significantly lower attendance compared to pre-pandemic levels, the strong YoY performance suggests that the movie theater recovery story is still being written. Cinemark's success demonstrates that chains willing to adapt their strategies to serve underserved audiences can not only survive but thrive in the transformed post-pandemic entertainment landscape.
For more data-driven consumer insights, visit placer.ai/anchor.
Major retailers held promotional events around Amazon's Prime Day sales event. How did the promotional events impact retail foot traffic? And what does the data reveal about the state of consumers going into the second half of 2025?
Comparing daily visits to major retailers during their July campaigns against same-day YTD averages (e.g., Sunday July 6th traffic versus average Sunday visits in 2025) reveals that sales primarily boosted weekday traffic. Visits increased Monday through Friday during the promotional periods, but every retailer that extended its campaign to Saturday – typically the busiest in-store shopping day – experienced traffic declines compared to YTD Saturday averages.
Individual retailer analysis shows Best Buy achieved the strongest response, with visits increasing 13.2% to 21.9% between July 7th and 11th compared to same-day YTD averages, and the final day (Sunday July 13th) posting a 7.2% increase. Conversely, Dollar General saw the weakest performance – only three of seven promotional days generated visit increases, all remaining in low single digits.
This pattern suggests consumers leveraged sales for big-ticket purchases at discounts but didn't use the opportunity to stock up on lower-priced items.
Comparing average daily visits during 2024 and 2025 July campaigns shows generally lower in-store traffic this year. Timing likely played a role – except for Best Buy, all analyzed retailers ran their 2024 campaigns before Amazon Prime Day, while this year all five overlapped with Amazon's event. This means that, unlike in 2024, Target, Walmart, Kohl's, and Dollar General directly competed with Amazon Prime Day in 2025, potentially driving the in-store traffic decline.
This calendar shift makes Walmart's performance particularly noteworthy. Average daily visits during "Walmart Deals" increased 8.9% compared to last year – despite facing direct Amazon competition for the first time.
Walmart's strength may stem from its recent "Who Knew?" advertising campaign, which may have kept the retailer top-of-mind for many customers during this period of intense retail competition.
The YoY visit growth during July campaigns represents another milestone in the company's turnaround and brand refresh, demonstrating the legacy retailer's continued relevance in today's competitive retail landscape.
The data reveals that consumers approached July 2025 promotional events with strategic intent, focusing on high-value purchases during convenient weekday shopping windows rather than impulse buying across all categories.
Walmart's standout performance amid increased competition suggests that strong brand messaging and strategic positioning can overcome market headwinds, providing optimism for retailers heading into the second half of 2025.
For more data-driven retail insights, visit placer.ai/anchor.
.avif)
As consumer sentiment hovers near historic lows and the cost of goods remains elevated, value has become a defining theme across the dining industry. Yet within the sector's diverse restaurant categories – and for individual brands – the question is no longer whether consumers are seeking value, but what value actually means. A closer look at chains across the industry suggests that, amid ongoing economic pressure, perceptions of value are evolving. For some consumers, value may be tied to affordability and promotions; for others, it may come from quality, convenience, or experience. The result is a market with multiple paths to winning consumer traffic.
After an uneven but largely resilient 2025, dining traffic in 2026 tipped into a sustained decline.
Monthly visits to the overall dining industry have trailed year-ago levels throughout 2026, with February standing as the lone exception. That month saw a 3.7% year-over-year (YoY) increase in visits, driven in part by comparisons to the period of initial tariff announcements in early 2025. But broader trends remained challenged, and May's 2.5% YoY decline marked the steepest monthly drop of the past twelve months as rising gas prices and weakening consumer sentiment appear to have added pressure to an industry already navigating a difficult environment.
These headwinds, though, have not landed evenly. Across the dining sector, some segments have faced more intense pressure than others, with much of the divide coming down to how consumers are perceiving value against experience.
Over the past several years, inflation and rising menu prices have gradually weakened a cost-based value proposition that has long been central to the QSR segment. More recently, elevated gas prices have added another deterrent, making a trip through the drive-thru a less compelling choice for some consumers.
Strong performance at grocery stores and superstores suggests that competition for share-of-stomach is increasingly extending beyond traditional restaurant rivals. With expanding selections of ready-to-eat and pre-prepared meals, these channels are offering consumers a combination of value, convenience, and quality that can increasingly match limited-service dining options. At the same time, ongoing pressure on household budgets appears to be driving more consumers toward lower-cost meals made at home, creating additional headwinds for the QSR segment.
Yet for many consumers, there is still a time and place for dining out, and in the face of mounting economic pressure, several dining formats have found foot traffic success. Fine dining has posted traffic growth in nearly every month of 2026, with March standing as the lone exception. That decline was likely influenced by a calendar shift, as March 2026 contained one fewer Saturday than March 2025 – a meaningful headwind for full-service restaurants given the outsized role weekends play in driving visits. The segment's sustained growth points to the resilience of higher-income consumers and the enduring appeal of premium, occasion-driven dining experiences.
Fast casual and casual dining have also proven relatively resilient. The fast casual category saw positive YoY foot traffic in every month of 2026 so far, while casual dining's performance has rebounded since the March calendar shift that likely weighed on YoY traffic. A second calendar shift in May 2026 led to an extra Saturday in the month, which likely helped the segment's overall trend. These trends suggest that both fast casual and casual dining occupy an increasingly attractive middle ground where value is defined as a combination of affordability and experience. At the same time, years of menu price hikes at QSR chains have altered the cost equation in fast casual and casual dining's favor, narrowing the price gap between fast food and more elevated dining formats. As that gap has narrowed, consumers may be placing greater emphasis on experience and quality when deciding where to dine.
The balance between price and elevated experience has made fast casual a favorite for value in the dining industry in 2026. A closer look at two of the segment's largest players, CAVA, a relatively young concept, and Chipotle, a legacy chain navigating operational challenges, shows how brands can deliver on that value proposition in different ways and win in today’s dining landscape.
Chipotle's traffic trends in 2026 have improved compared to 2025, with the brand offering a clear example of how fast casual brands can create value by pairing menu innovation with loyalty perks.
Chipotle outpaced the broader fast casual category in YoY visits nearly every week of 2026 so far. And the graph below shows that the chain's strongest traffic gains tended to coincide with major menu launches and loyalty initiatives – a key component of its ongoing "Recipe for Growth" strategy.
The return of fan-favorite Chicken al Pastor in the week of February 9, 2026 helped drive a 16.6% YoY increase in visits. Two months later, the launch of "Rewards on Repeat" – a refreshed loyalty program offering freebies upon sign-up – generated the period's largest weekly traffic gain, with visits rising 18.2% YoY. And the introduction of Honey Chicken on April 28 provided another boost, as the chain continued to rotate limited-time protein offerings and give customers reasons to return.
These performance peaks suggest that Chipotle has been particularly effective at pairing menu novelty with loyalty perks to reinforce a value proposition anchored by quality and experience.
Year-over-Year Change in Weekly Visits, Chipotle vs. Fast Casual, Jan.–Jun. 2026
Dashed lines mark key Chipotle promotional launch dates. Week-of dates shown; launches may have occurred mid-week.
If Chipotle illustrates the power of menu innovation and loyalty-driven engagement, CAVA highlights a different approach to creating value – one rooted in variety, customization, and a consistently differentiated dining experience.
CAVA's overall visits climbed well above 20% YoY in every month of 2026, a pace largely driven by aggressive unit expansion. Meanwhile, same-store visits, which measure traffic at locations open for at least twelve months, sustained positive YoY growth – evidence of genuine demand at existing restaurants alongside a rapidly growing footprint.
While Chipotle leans on limited-time offers, CAVA's growth rests on a consistent, customizable experience. A deep roster of proteins paired with a wide range of bases, dips, and toppings, gives the chain built-in variety that helps keep the concept feeling fresh. In addition, CAVA's Mediterranean-inspired menu offers flavors and combinations that are less easily replicated at home, helping the brand maintain a differentiated experiential value proposition and drive growth.
O Though Chipotle and CAVA are at different points in their evolution and have taken different paths to growth, both highlight the enduring appeal of fast casual's balance of value and quality. In a dining environment where consumers are increasingly weighing cost against experience, the segment's ability to deliver on both has helped make it one of the industry's strongest-performing formats.
Fast casual isn't the only dining segment benefiting from consumers' evolving perception of value. In 2026, several casual dining chains have found success by pairing accessible price points with the elevated experience of a sit-down meal.
Brands such as BJ's Restaurant & Brewhouse, Chili's Grill & Bar, Bonefish Grill, Cicis, and The Cheesecake Factory all posted positive YoY visit growth in multiple months this year, demonstrating that even in a challenging economic environment, diners are motivated when they feel they are getting more in return. These results are particularly notable given the impact of calendar shifts, which weighed on March 2026 comparisons – and provided a tailwind to May performance.
Unlike many fast casual chains, these brands have not relied heavily on a steady stream of limited-time offers to drive traffic. While menu innovation remains part of the playbook, promotions often serve as ticket builders or engagement tools rather than primary traffic catalysts. Instead, these successful casual dining chains have focused on creating everyday value that diners can depend on, narrowing the price gap between limited-service restaurants and full-service dining.
The result is a value equation that encompasses table service, a more relaxed dining environment, and a place to socialize or celebrate an occasion. In an environment where consumers are increasingly weighing cost against overall experience, that combination appears to be helping several casual dining chains maintain positive traffic momentum.
Although dining traffic has softened in 2026, the industry's performance suggests that consumers have not stopped spending on restaurants altogether. Instead, they have become more selective about where they dine and what they expect in return.
Across segments, the strongest performers have found different ways to deliver value. For some brands, that means menu innovation, loyalty engagement, and differentiated experiences. For others, it means dependable affordability paired with the service and atmosphere of a sit-down meal. As economic pressures continue to shape consumer behavior, the data suggests that value is no longer defined by price alone, but by the balance of cost, convenience, quality, and experience.
During the pandemic and its aftermath, Americans were on the move. Millions left expensive coastal markets for lower-cost destinations across the Sun Belt, while boomtowns such as Bozeman, Boise, and Austin struggled to keep pace with the influx of new residents.
That wave of relocation has since cooled, as return-to-office mandates, higher mortgage rates, and a shrinking affordability gap between coastal cities and many COVID-era hotspots have dampened the incentive to move. But even in a slower market, domestic migration remains one of the most powerful forces shaping local economies, housing markets, and consumer demand.
This report leverages AI-powered location analytics to examine the relocation patterns reshaping the United States in 2026 – where Americans are moving, the demographic and economic forces driving those decisions, and how retailers, investors, developers, and policymakers can respond to the opportunities and challenges created by these shifts.
Which major metros are attracting the most new residents? Which pandemic-era standouts have seen growth stall or reverse? And what factors best predict a large metro area's domestic migration growth potential in 2026?
The latest statewide migration data shows that the slower relocation pace observed in 2024 persisted into 2025. No state recorded net inflows or outflows exceeding 0.7% of its starting population. And while several smaller states continued to attract new residents at meaningful rates, none of the nation's six most populous states saw net in-migration exceed 0.2%.
Among those smaller states, South Carolina and Delaware led the nation with net in-migration equal to 0.7% of their populations, followed by Idaho (0.6%), Maine (0.5%), Tennessee (0.4%), and North Carolina (0.3%). For most of these states, migration accelerated relative to 2024, though Delaware's inflow rate moderated slightly and North Carolina held steady.
Despite their differences, these states tend to offer a similar mix of lifestyle amenities, relatively low congestion, and opportunities for growth. Many also benefit from business-friendly climates, favorable tax policies, or housing costs that remain attractive relative to the higher-cost markets from which they draw new residents.
At the other end of the spectrum was Vermont, which saw the nation’s largest net outflow as share of population in 2025, losing 0.4% of its population to domestic relocation. The decline deepens a reversal that first emerged in 2024, when the state swung to a net loss of 0.2%, after attracting inflows of 0.8% and 0.5% in 2022 and 2023, respectively.
Vermont's reversal likely reflects a combination of factors, including return-to-office mandates and the waning appeal of remote work. Housing undersupply in the state may have also contributed, illustrating how important infrastructure investments are to sustaining migration gains over time.
Among the nation's six most populous states, Florida was the only one to see accelerating net in-migration in 2025, attracting new residents equal to 0.2% of its starting population, up from 0.1% the year before. Texas, by contrast, slowed from 0.1% net in-migration in 2024 to essentially flat in 2025, highlighting the cooling of what was once one of the country's strongest pandemic-era migration magnets.
Meanwhile, the legacy "exodus" states continue to lose residents, but at a slower pace than in previous years. Illinois and California have seen their migration deficits steadily narrow, with further improvement in 2025. Between 2022 and 2025, Illinois moved from -0.8% → -0.2% → -0.2% → -0.1%, while California moved from -0.9% → -0.4% → -0.3% → -0.2%. And though New York has held steady at -0.2% over the past two years, this marks a significant moderation from 2022, when the state experienced net outmigration equal to 1.1% of its population.
Statewide trends reveal important shifts, but a closer look at the nation's ten largest metropolitan areas suggests that broader interstate averages increasingly mask diverging local realities. Several metros are attracting residents through interstate domestic migration even when their states as a whole are experiencing little or no net migration growth.
Phoenix (+0.3%), for example, stood out as the nation's top-performing large metro in 2025, despite Arizona's absence from the list of leading migration destinations – with the majority of its inflow coming from out of state.
Dallas (+0.2%) ranked second, continuing its rebound from -0.1% in 2023 even as Texas' statewide migration gains cooled. Like Phoenix, Dallas drew a majority of its new residents from outside the state, underscoring its growing appeal as a national migration destination. Houston, meanwhile, moved in the opposite direction, falling from 0.1% net in-migration in 2023 to -0.1% in 2025. While it is too early to call this a sustained reversal, the divergence between the two metros may reflect Dallas's growing pull as a corporate magnet alongside rising housing costs and weather-related challenges in Houston.
Metro-level data also suggests that the pandemic-era "big-city exodus" narrative is continuing to fade. Los Angeles improved from -0.8% in 2023 to -0.3% in 2025, while New York held steady at -0.3% after improving in 2024. Even Miami (-0.6%), which ranked last among major metros despite Florida's continued statewide gains, saw its outflows moderate from 2023 levels. And while Illinois continued to post net outmigration, Chicago (0.0%) reached migration neutrality in 2025 after recording losses in both 2023 and 2024.
Despite Miami's struggles – and Florida’s relatively modest 0.2% inflow – a look beyond the top 10 large metros reveals that the Sunshine State is home to six of the nation's eight fastest-growing large metros nationwide.
Those top-performing metros, defined as CBSAs with 500K+ residents that added at least 0.8% of their population through net domestic migration over the past year, share a similar profile: lower housing costs, retiree appeal, suburban density, and an easy drive to a larger economic hub.
Much of the growth of these Florida metro areas, however, is being fueled from within Florida itself. While major out-of-state metros such as New York (6.1%) and Chicago (2.0%) remained important sources of new residents, nearly half of the net migration into Florida's top destination metros came from elsewhere in the state. In 2025, Miami (22.5%), Orlando (13.0%), Tampa (5.8%), and Naples (4.2%) together accounted for 45.5% of the net positive migration feeding these fast-growing markets.
The migration flows feeding the nation’s fastest-growing large metros suggest that affordability remains a powerful driver of domestic relocation.
In 2025, seven of the eight top destination metros analyzed above had lower typical home values than their largest feeder markets. Lakeland–Winter Haven, FL, for example, had a typical home value of $313.4K in December 2024, compared with $404.9K in Orlando and $380.2K in Tampa – its two largest sources of net migration. Even North Port–Bradenton–Sarasota, FL – the most expensive Florida metro in this group – drew its largest share of net migration from the New York metro area, where home values are substantially higher.
The lone exception was Charleston–North Charleston, SC, whose largest source of net migration was Baltimore – a market with lower typical home values than the destination. Even in Charleston, however, affordability appears to have played a role. New York, a significantly more expensive market, ranked a close second in 2025, accounting for 6.5% of net positive migration into Charleston, just behind Baltimore’s 6.8%.
While housing costs are only one factor influencing migration decisions, the data suggests that households continue to gravitate toward markets where homeownership is comparatively more attainable than in the places they leave behind.
Typical Home Values* in Top Feeder Markets to Destination Hubs, 2025
*Typical home value based on Zillow Research’s Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI) for Dec. 2024, immediately preceding the analyzed migration period (Jan.–Dec. 2025).
But as important as affordability is in explaining today’s domestic migration patterns, age appears to be an even stronger determinant of where people choose to relocate.
Among mid-sized and large metros (250K+ residents) experiencing significant population shifts – defined as gaining or losing at least 1.0% of their starting population through domestic migration over the past two years – households are increasingly moving toward older, more established communities.
The data reveals a clear negative relationship between migration performance and age differential – a metric calculated by subtracting the median age of the destination market from the weighted median age of its feeder markets. Negative values indicate movement toward older communities, while positive values indicate movement toward younger ones. In other words, the metros attracting the strongest migration inflows tend to be older than the markets sending them residents.
The data also shows a clear positive relationship between migration performance and retiree concentration. Metros with larger shares of residents aged 65 and older generally saw stronger migration gains over the past two years, while younger metros tended to attract fewer newcomers. This suggests that retiree-driven relocation has become an increasingly important driver of migration. At the same time, the influx of younger residents points to the broader appeal of these communities, which offer a mix of affordability, amenities, and lifestyle advantages.
Net Migration as Share of Starting Population, 2024–2025*
*Analysis includes metro areas with 250K+ residents and domestic migration gains or losses of at least 1.0% during the study period. Weighted Age Differential compares the destination market’s median age with the weighted median age of origin markets, with positive values indicating migration toward younger markets and negative values indicating migration toward older markets. Age data: Census ACS 2020–2024.
The pandemic-era urban exodus is giving way to a more nuanced migration landscape. Large urban markets are stabilizing, while growth is increasingly concentrated in smaller states, secondary metros, and intra-state corridors. Affordability remains a powerful pull, but retirees, lifestyle considerations, and local market dynamics are also playing an increasingly important role in where Americans choose to live.
To capitalize on these shifts in 2026, civic leaders, commercial real estate (CRE) investors, retailers, and developers should:
Across segments, retail and dining expansions converge on a common set of priorities, including identifying markets with strong demand, ensuring alignment with target audiences, and leveraging local consumer behavior to drive synergy. Using AI-powered location intelligence, we analyzed five expanding brands and segments to uncover the core principles driving successful site selection.
Nationwide visits to coffee chains are up in 2026, with established brands and newcomers alike seeing their traffic increase as consumer headwinds lead some to shift their discretionary spend towards more affordable indulgences. But past visit growth does not necessarily indicate future opportunity – it may instead signal market saturation. Relying solely on overall visit trends to guide expansion could lead chains into highly competitive markets where existing supply already meets demand.
For example, analyzing traffic trends in 10 major metro areas where coffee visits increased year-over-year (YoY) in Q1 2026 reveals significant gaps between overall traffic trends and per-location demand. In some CBSAs, overall traffic growth significantly outpaced per-location traffic trends – suggesting that supply is already meeting (or exceeding) demand and limiting room for new coffee locations despite overall category growth. But in other metro areas, where overall visit growth appears smaller, per-location traffic is actually booming – indicating that the underlying demand is resilient enough to support additional coffee concepts.
These patterns highlight the importance of looking beyond topline growth to identify where true whitespace still exists.
Effective site selection matches both regional and local demographics to a brand’s target customer, supporting performance and reinforcing positioning. But even in well-aligned metros, results depend on site-level precision – locations where the trade area visitor profile most closely reflects the brand’s core audience are best positioned to drive incremental upside.
An analysis of Alo locations in the DC area suggests that the company is adopting this strategy. Within the already high-income metro area of Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, individual Alo Yoga stores are placed in centers that draw even more affluent visitors – maximizing the revenue potential of each location.
In fact, Alo's newest stores in the metro area – One Loudoun and Bethesda Row – drive traffic from households with higher median incomes than even the established area locations. This signals a clear focus on premium retail corridors and affluent consumer segments, which reinforces the brand’s positioning while capturing higher-spending customers at the site level.
Beyond driving traffic potential and demographic alignment, site selection should also ensure that a brand’s identity and operating model are well matched to the visitation patterns of prospective locations. Barnes & Noble offers a clear example. The company’s ongoing resurgence has relied in part on repositioning itself as a local cultural and social hub, with a stronger emphasis on local curation and community-driven events.
And analyzing Barnes & Noble’s 2026 openings shows a clear tilt toward centers with a higher share of local traffic than the chain average – supporting its shift away from a purely transactional retail model toward a more community-centric experience built around local curation, events, and repeat visitation. By prioritizing locally driven centers, the company’s site selection strategy not only captures relevant traffic but also reinforces its broader repositioning as a neighborhood-oriented brand.
Effective site selection recognizes that proximity to competitors can function as a demand driver, amplifying traffic rather than diluting it.
In practice, this often takes the form of clustering – deliberately locating near similar or complementary concepts to capture shared demand. Shake Shack provides a clear example. Analyzing the chain's store fleet shows that many locations sit near other QSR and fast-casual concepts, creating opportunities to capture dining-based traffic. At the same time, strong cross-visitation patterns indicate that these co-located brands share a common customer base, positioning the brand closer to consumers who are already likely to visit. And, at least for Shake Shack, this strategy appears to be working – traffic to the chain increased 19.9% YoY in Q1 2026.
Incorporating trade area analysis into site selection can also help determine whether a new location will generate new traffic or risk cannibalizing existing demand. Aldi, a rapidly expanding grocery chain, offers a relevant example.
The company opened a fourth Las Vegas store on S Decatur Blvd in October 2025, positioned between existing locations on W Craig Rd and S Rainbow Blvd, approximately eight miles from each. And analyzing the core trade area of each of the four Las Vegas locations indicated limited visitor cannibalization over the last six months, despite the stores’ close proximity. Only 6.2% and 7.6% of the S Decatur Blvd store’s trade area overlapped with the W Craig Rd and S Rainbow Blvd stores’ trade areas, respectively.
These findings show that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to store spacing – it varies by brand, category, and market. Analyzing a company’s existing store network alongside competitor density and overall demand can help determine how closely locations can be placed without hurting performance. In many cases – especially in high-frequency categories like grocery – markets can support stores that are closer together than expected.
