.svg)
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?
McDonald's and Chipotle, two of the most significant players in the quick-service and fast-casual dining sectors, are maintaining a promising trajectory despite the current economic uncertainty. With the first quarter of 2025 concluded, we examined their recent visit patterns and explored some of the strategies these two dining giants are employing to drive visits.
Although the visit gap to McDonald’s widened slightly – from -1.7% year-over-year (YoY) in Q4 2024 to -2.6% in Q1 2025 – traffic to the chain still remains close to last year's levels, suggesting that its value proposition continues to resonate strongly with its customer base even during times of economic uncertainty.
Meanwhile, Chipotle continues to see YoY visit growth, with YoY foot traffic to the chain rising by 4.5% in Q1 2025.
Some of the company’s strength may be attributed to its strategic fleet expansions, particularly in smaller markets. Moving forward, Chipotle has set its sights on opening roughly 350 new locations throughout 2025, with a focus on drive-through – another major growth driver for the chain.
A Minecraft Movie debuted on April 3rd, 2025, and McDonald’s, perhaps recalling the success of its Adult Happy Meal promotion, participated in the movie rollout by offering a Minecraft Movie special. The meal, which includes Minecraft-themed collectibles, is available for a limited time, creating a sense of urgency for diners – something that McDonald’s has used in the past to great success.
The impact of the special was already evident in the first week following the release. Visits to McDonald’s on Tuesday, April 1st – when the special launched – were 12.2% higher than the year-to-date (YTD) average Tuesday visit count for 2025. And the launch provides a continued boost to the chain, with visits on the following two Tuesdays elevated by 9.5% and 7.4%, respectively, relative to the YTD Tuesday visit average.
Chipotle, too, has leveraged limited-time offers and specials to great success, with chicken-focused promotions like 2024’s Chicken al Pastor and, more recently, the introduction of a Honey Chicken special driving visits to the chain.
Visits to Chipotle jumped by 6.3% above the YTD weekly visit average during the week of March 10th, 2025, when the special launched, and remained elevated through the rest of the month. While visit numbers had been trending slightly upward towards the end of February, the launch of the Honey Chicken special seems to have driven a sustained visit surge. Burrito Day provided another visit boost to the chain, with Thursday visits on April 3rd – the day of the launch – elevated by 13.0% relative to the YTD Thursday visit average.
McDonald’s and Chipotle are maintaining their position in a challenging market, driving visits through carefully considered expansion, specials, and promotions.
Will these visits continue to hold pace as Q2 gets underway?
Visit Placer.ai for the latest data-driven dining insights.
Los Angeles is famous for its film and music industry, but the city also boasts several world-class museums that educate and entertain local visitors and tourists alike. We dove into the data for several of LA’s top museums in order to examine the visitation patterns and demographics of museum goers in the City of Angels.
Analyzing monthly visits to the top LA museums over the past 12 months reveals that although most receive a visit boost in the spring and summer, each institution has a unique seasonal visit pattern.
The California Science Center and La Brea Tar Pits and Museum received the largest July visit surges, likely due to heavy traffic from young families on vacation. Meanwhile, The Petersen Automotive Museum received the largest December visit spike, perhaps due to a boost from private holiday events. And The Museum of Contemporary Art appears to have maintained a steady flow of visitors – experiencing a relatively muted summer uptick, but relatively robust visits in the fall.
Diving further into the data reveals that LA museums are particularly popular with hyper-local visitors and with out-of-towners: Every museum analyzed received large shares of visitors from less than 30 and/or from more than 250 miles away, with fewer visitors coming from 30-250 miles.
The California Science Center received the greatest share of visitors residing less than 30 miles (60.7%) from the museum, perhaps due to its popularity with educational groups and its location in bustling Exposition Park.
Griffith Observatory, with views of the Hollywood sign and Los Angeles's urban landscape, was highly popular with out-of-town visitors – 48.7% of guests resided at least 250 miles away. And as a unique active fossil excavation site, La Brea Tar Pits and Museum was also favored by out-of-town visitors (42.9% of guests came from 250+ miles away).
The relatively high shares of out-of-town visitors at most LA museums analyzed highlights the role that tourists play in supporting LA’s cultural institutions. And diving into the median HHI in the museums’ captured market reveals that these out-of-towners may represent a particularly desirable audience.
In general, the museums analyzed tend to attract a relatively wealthy audience. In 2024, the median household income (HHI) in all the analyzed museums’ captured market trade areas was higher than the median HHI nationwide ($79.6K/year) – perhaps due to California’s relatively high median HHI of $99.3K/year. Most museums also drove traffic from regions with a higher median HHI than the state benchmark – likely due to the relative affluence of the Los Angeles area. The Getty and The Museum of Contemporary Art’s captured trade areas had the highest median HHIs, at $107.2K/year and $103.7K/year, respectively.
But when analyzing only out-of-town visitors (who traveled 250 miles or more), the median HHIs of the captured trade areas increased – indicating that out-of-town museum guests were more affluent than local ones. This suggests that tickets to special exhibitions could be set at higher price points during peak seasons when more out-of-town guests are anticipated.
Though there are similarities between the behavior and demographics of visitors to LA’s museums, they each experience somewhat distinct seasonal visit patterns and attract diverse audiences. With the busiest museum season ramping up, cultural institutions stand to gain from understanding the changing characteristics of their guests.
For more insights, visit Placer.ai.
Marketers, retailers, and category managers spend a lot of time trying to analyze the retail preferences of Gen Z shoppers. Meanwhile, Gen X and Baby Boomers are seldom considered, even though almost 40% of American adults are aged 55 or older. We analyzed the latest data to better understand these frequently overlooked consumer segments.
Although the overwhelming majority of older Americans spend several hours a day online and over half of American seniors own a smartphone, the data indicates many consumers aged 55+ are still more comfortable shopping in-store.
Comparing the age distribution among adult visitors to Walmart’s website with the age distribution in Walmart’s offline trade area shows that older consumers (aged 55+) are overrepresented in the retailer’s offline trade area relative to its online visitor base.
Offline shopping offers a range of benefits, from personalized service to the ability to physically examine products and the convenience of walking out with the purchased items. Retailers looking to increase their penetration with older audience segments might consider investing in brick-and-mortar stores that give older consumers the shopping experience that best fits their needs.
For retailers looking to reach Gen X and Baby Boomers, merely building brick-and-mortar channels may not be enough – brands should also ensure that the in-store experience is optimized for older audiences. And the first step may be ensuring that staffing and opening hours are adapted to the shopping habits of older Americans.
Analyzing the hourly visit distribution at L.L. Bean and Ocean State Job Lot – two chains particularly popular with a variety of older audiences – suggests that Gen X and Baby Boomer shoppers may prefer visiting stores earlier in the day: Visits between the hours of 9 AM and 2 PM accounted for a much larger share of visits to both chains when compared to visitation behavior for the wider category. So retailers seeking to attract Gen X and Baby Boomers may consider earlier opening hours and robust staffing during the late morning and early afternoon.
At the same time, while many older consumers do exhibit some commonalities – such as a preference for offline shopping or for earlier-in-the-day store visits – it is important to remember that older shoppers are not a monolith. Like other age-based market segments, the label of “older consumer” lumps together a variety of customer types from various socioeconomic backgrounds representing a wide array of values and interests. Retailers looking to cater to this demographic should also consider the particular characteristics of their target audience beyond the general attributes common to many older consumers.
The chart below shows the share of various “Boomer” segments (from the Spatial.ai: PersonaLive dataset) in the trade areas of seven apparel retailers popular with older consumers. All these segments – Sunset Boomers, Suburban Boomers, and Budget Boomers – consist of consumers aged 65-74, but their living arrangements and household income levels vary. And as the chart shows, each Boomer segment exhibits unique brand affinities.
Sunset Boomers – the most affluent segment – were significantly overrepresented in the captured markets Talbots, Anthropologie, Vineyard Vines, and Chico’s. Suburban Boomers – middle-class older consumers – were also slightly overrepresented in Talbots, Vineyard Vines, and Chico’s captured market, but were underrepresented for Anthropologie and significantly overrepresented at Boscov’s. And Budget Boomers – older consumers with household incomes of $35K to $50K – were overrepresented in Bealls and Cato’s captured market even though these retailers did not seem particularly popular with the other two Boomer segments.
To effectively target older consumers, retailers should assess how their products and services align with the unique tastes and spending abilities of each Boomer and Gen X sub-segment.
Older consumers make up a significant share of U.S. shoppers, even though this demographic is not always top of mind for marketers and retailers. By embracing the continued importance of physical stores and adapting to the specific shopping behaviors of Baby Boomers and Gen X consumers, retailers can cultivate stronger engagement with these segments. Ultimately, though, success with this audience will hinge on recognizing the heterogeneity of older shoppers and tailoring strategies accordingly.
For more data-driven retail insights, visit placer.ai/anchor.
After leap year comparison induced year-over-year (YoY) declines in February 2025, foot traffic to the Placer 100 Index for Retail & Dining stabilized in March 2025 to just -0.3% below 2024 levels – an impressive performance considering the severe weather that impacted large parts of the country.
State-level analysis of March 2025 visits to the Placer 100 Index reveals that massive storms indeed contributed significantly to regional foot traffic declines. States that bore the brunt of inclement weather in March 2025 – particularly in the Southeastern and Central United States – appeared to experience the steepest YoY visit gaps.
Despite the extreme climate conditions, some chains managed to plow ahead, enjoying visit growth in March 2025. Once again, Chili’s Grill & Bar held on to the top spot in the Placer 100 Index for YoY visits (22.6%) and visits per location (23.4%) growth, likely due to continued success in the areas of value and virality. Meanwhile, three fitness chains made the top 10 in YoY visits – Crunch Fitness (22.5%), LA Fitness (10.0%), and Planet Fitness (9.7%), at least in part due to continuing expansions of their respective footprints.
Expansion is perhaps only one driving factor behind the success of Crunch Fitness, Planet Fitness, and LA Fitness in March 2025. The beginning of the year is generally busy for fitness chains as many consumers adopt new years’ resolutions to get in shape, even if many abandon their pursuit down the line. But the data suggests that Crunch Fitness, Planet Fitness, and LA Fitness experienced visit growth in March in part due to a sustained increase in visitor frequency.
All three chains saw an increase in the share of visitors visiting 8 or more times in March 2025 compared to 2024, indicating that the chains are driving more traffic from fitness-invested visitors. And these fitness buffs, who attend the gym quite often, are perhaps less likely to give up on their fitness goals during the year, which bodes well for the fitness chains’ chances to sustain members and elevated traffic in the months ahead.
The Placer 100 Index for March 2025 demonstrates the effect of harsh winter conditions on retail and dining visits. Still, the strong performance of several chains highlights the consumer trends and brand strategies that can drive growth.
For more insights anchored in location analytics, 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.
