February 17, 2026
ColleenMichaels/Depositphotos.com
Will the Gulf Between Walmart and Target Deepen in 2026?
In a deep dive into Placer.ai data provided to the company’s The Anchor, content manager Lila Margalit outlined an emerging gulf in terms of the current fortunes enjoyed by mega-retailers Walmart and Target.
More specifically, Margalit looked at foot traffic, comparable sales, and broad divergences in outcomes pertaining to both Target and Walmart over the past year. Some of the more notable data points included:
- Walmart saw foot traffic in Q4 2025 improve by 2.3% YoY, while Target saw a nearly matching decline of 2%. Further, foot traffic for Target fell in every single month in the second half of last year, except for October.
- Walmart is winning on comp sales growth: Walmart experienced a 4.5% U.S. comp sales growth over the 13-week period closing on Oct. 31, 2025. Further, the blue-and-yellow brand saw a massive 28% YoY comparable sales growth in e-commerce.
- Target saw a glimmer of growth against an overall decline, by contrast: Meanwhile, the red-and-white branded retailer saw a drop of 2.7% in terms of overall comp sales, with a decline of 3.8% in physical comparable sales YoY being slightly mitigated by a silver lining — online comp sales improved by 2.4%.
Recent traffic figures have been encouraging for Walmart, showing particular strength as 2026 began.
Conversely, Target is showing signs of struggling against a trending tide, as the below table outlines.
Weekends Particularly Dangerous for Target as Discretionary Shopping Dips
Speaking to a “core disconnect” for Target — which, as Margalit underscored, is heavily investing in a turnaround effort based on improved merchandise curation and the overall in-store experience — the analysis widened scope, highlighting that weekend traffic data was particularly telling.
“While Walmart posted relatively consistent visit trends across weekdays and weekends in 2025, reinforcing the resilience of its essentials-driven model, Target experienced a much steeper YoY decline on weekends,” Margalit wrote.
“Because weekends likely capture more browsing-oriented, discretionary trips at Target, the disproportionate weakness during these periods may highlight where the retailer is most exposed,” she added.
Walmart saw full-year visits improve by 0.8% on weekdays for full-year 2025, and weekend traffic dipped by 0.6%. Target, on the other hand, saw weekdays visits tumble by 1.3% — and weekend visits crumble by a significant 6.1%.
Rumblings From Wall Street Show Signs of a Lack of Faith in Target Coming From the Investor Set
And now, with both retailers poised to deliver performance reports (Walmart issues its Q4 2026 earnings of Feb. 19, with Target releasing its annual report a few weeks later), it appears Wall Street is already issuing something of a verdict on its faith in Target’s future performance.
Per Forbes contributor Greg Petro, it appears that many Wall Street analysts may have “thrown in the towel” on Target. Despite a still-strong dividend rate and a well-aimed turnaround plan under new CEO Michael Fiddelke, investors remained spooked: Just three of 22 analysts by Tipranks rate the stock a “buy,” and nearly half have put forth a “sell” rating — well down from the half (of 33 total) investors who rated Target a buy, and the other half a hold, a year ago.
Several major gaffes — from the 10-4 policy to lacking service standards, poor merchandising and service standards, and haphazard private label assortment — have contributed to a growing unease over Target’s 2026.
“I used to love walking into Target and roaming the aisles for interesting finds. Back then, my local Target store was filled with neatly stocked shelves and inventory that was easy to navigate,” TheStreet’s Maurie Backman wrote earlier this month.
“These days, shopping at Target is more of a chore than anything else. In fact, the only reason I’ll set foot in Target now is to buy clothing for my kids or pick up an item I know I can’t find elsewhere. The days of browsing Target’s inventory for fun are long gone. And this isn’t just my experience. A lot of people who used to adore Target are now, in a word, haters,” she concluded.
BrainTrust
Carol Spieckerman
President, Spieckerman Retail
Gail Rodwell-Simon
Strategic Retail Advisor, SPARX Advisory Group
Frank Margolis
Executive Director, Growth Marketing & Business Development, Toshiba Global Commerce Solutions
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Will the gulf in terms of traffic and comparable sales growth between Walmart and Target deepen in 2026? Why or why not, in your opinion?
What can Walmart do to further steal market share from Target? Conversely, is there anything beyond Fiddelke’s revised turnaround strategy that Target can do to rebound?
Poll
Loading …
Over the past few years, there has been a very clear pattern: Walmart has gained market share; Target has lost it. This started in grocery and essentials but has since spread to discretionary categories. Will this divergence stop in 2026? No. Walmart has too many favorable drivers in its favor, such as online expansion and picking up higher-income shoppers. And Target has not yet done enough to stop defections: there is still too much friction in store, assortments are not strong enough in own brand, and the grocery offer isn’t powerful enough to drive foot traffic in its own right. To be fair, management are working on turning things around, but this will not likely deliver in 2026.
One simple answer: yes. Target has yet to give shoppers any compelling reason to come back to their once-great stores. Walmart rightfully seized on several missteps by Target, and will continue to grow share in the near-term.
What can Walmart do to further steal market share from Target?
Correction: WM isn’t stealing anything; Target is giving it away. But if nothing else, this article reenforces what should be universally acknowledged, but is (too) often glossed over: Walmart is far, far bigger than Target.
Consumers who share ideological differences with Jeff Bezos will shun Amazon, and where will they go? The only clear successor has been Walmart. Walmart makes tracking multiple orders a breeze and has a massive catalog. I don’t see anything changing in 2026.
My podcast series, “Comparing Walmart and Target Makes Zero Sense (But I’m Doing It Anyway)” addresses the ever-widening gulf between the two retailers. There simply is no comparison at this point.
Newly minted CEO Michael Fiddelke’s early moves have Target reinforcing merchandising, marketing, and design expertise. Otherwise known as their old playbook trifecta.
Walmart is living in the space age – promoting executives steeped in AI, digital platforms, advertising, and marketplace operations. Don’t get me wrong, Target has to restore the core before lurching at the new, but Walmart’s already boarded the rocket ship.
I think it’s quite possible that the gap in traffic and comparable sales growth between Walmart and Target could deepen in 2026 if Target does not more aggressively address some of its core execution challenges. Walmart’s strength continues to lie in everyday availability, broad assortment, and tight inventory discipline — all of which drive consistent traffic across price points and mission sets. Target, on the other hand, has struggled in areas that traditionally defined its competitive edge: in-stock levels on basics, clarity and value in promotions, and consistency in grocery (especially fresh). In an environment where consumers remain value-conscious and convenience-oriented, these fundamentals matter — and where one retailer excels, and the other lags, divergence in performance is entirely plausible.
If Walmart wants to further steal share from Target, the keys are straightforward: relentless in-stock execution, integrated omnichannel convenience, and compelling value messaging. Walmart’s investments in fulfillment — from micro-fulfillment to expanded BOPIS and Same-Day Delivery — paired with its deep everyday low prices, create a compelling proposition for cost-sensitive shoppers. Strengthening these capabilities even further will continue to attract both lower- and middle-income cohorts who are balancing budget, choice, and speed in their shopping trips.
For Target to rebound meaningfully, however, it needs to recommit to its own strengths and fundamentals. That means ensuring excellent in-stock performance, particularly for basics and essentials, and staffing stores in ways that support service and execution. It also means leaning into what made Target a differentiated destination for many years: proprietary brands and products within Home and Apparel that offer exclusive style and value, and a more rigorous focus on Grocery—especially Fresh—where Target has underperformed relative to competitors that have invested heavily in perishable quality and assortment depth. Fiddelke’s turnaround strategy is a start, but without disciplined execution in these foundational areas, it’s difficult to close the performance gap with Walmart over time.
In short, the gulf in 2026 won’t be determined by flashier strategy alone — it will be about retail basics done well, combined with a clear sense of what makes each retailer unique. Target’s opportunity lies in strengthening its core, not simply adopting incremental change, while Walmart’s advantage continues to rest on operational excellence and broad accessibility.
Target’s struggle is a classic case of being stuck in the middle. It lacks the absolute scale/automation of Walmart to win on price, yet it is losing its differentiation advantage as Walmart’s Bettergoods line successfully mimics Target’s premium private-label aesthetic. For Target to rebound, it must abandon the Walmart-lite inventory model and pivot toward a sustainable Curation-as-a-Service model requiring heavy investments in exclusive, high-margin collaborations that cannot be algorithmically replicated or automated by Walmart’s logistics machine. Moving forward, Target’s survival depends on being a destination for discovery, as a cultural destination, to capture the human demand, while Walmart cements its status as the retail operating system and utility for the agentic era. Walmart wins on pure scale and the technological arms race. Target wins only by shrinking its mission.
I am rooting for Target but I don’t think there will be much of a change in 2026. Target won’t be able to out-Walmart Walmart so they have to create a differentiated experience based on curated product. That said, they have to get the basics right – in-stock, service, competitive pricing on essentials. Their turnaround will take time and they must tread carefully, especially in such a volatile economic and geo-political environment having dramatic effects on supply chain, pricing and consumer behavior.
The gap may widen in 2026. Walmart is anchored in essentials like grocery, protecting traffic in a cautious economy while fueling digital growth. Its expanding ecommerce and Walmart Plus ecosystem enable smarter personalization through tailored offers, replenishment reminders, and AI driven recommendations that increase basket size and loyalty.
Target remains more exposed to discretionary weekend browsing trips, which often decline first when spending tightens. However, leadership appears focused on steady course correction. If Target sharpens private label differentiation, improves in store execution, and invests in data driven personalization, it can rebuild frequency and restore the sense of discovery that once defined the brand.
If you’ve been reading RetailWire over the last SEVERAL years, the good bet is Walmart and the bad one is Target.
I can go back more than “several” when both retailers were my customers. Walmart would order multiple times a week, and 30 days later, the remittance for each order would be deposited into our bank account. Meanwhile, Target shorted every invoice for various reasons… the most common one was Target’s claim that we were selling to Walmart at a lower price than Target. That suggested the management mindset was to take advantage of vendors rather than sell products. Apparently, they are still not focused on customers today.
The question is “what are they focused on?”
It wasn’t that long ago — during my years at Target — that the competitive landscape was cleanly stratified by household income. Walmart owned the lower‑income shopper, Target owned the higher‑income guest, and the real fight was in the middle. Target’s biggest advantage back then was the store experience: clean, curated, stylish, and aspirational. That advantage is diminished. Store execution began slipping years before Walmart+ scaled, and once that “Target trip” magic eroded, the brand lost the one moat Walmart couldn’t replicate.
COVID briefly flipped the script. Target’s curbside was faster and more reliable, and they won big. Walmart caught up — and then kept going. Walmart+ was built to counter Amazon, but its secondary effect was far more disruptive: it created a digital veil for affluent shoppers who once avoided Walmart stores but appreciate Walmart’s pricing, reliability, and especially its grocery strength without the in‑store friction. Let’s not forget that grocery is Walmart’s biggest strength, and for decades, has been a bit of an Achilles heel for Target. Walmart+ has turned budget shopping into a productivity hack for affluent shoppers.
Meanwhile, Target struggled with in‑stocks, value perception, and a Shipt integration that never became the operational backbone Spark is for Walmart. And yes, the national boycotts mattered. It wasn’t the only driver of Target’s decline, but it absolutely accelerated the erosion of trust among the exact households Target depends on.
Walmart isn’t slowing down. By year‑end, almost 2/3 of stores will be serviced by automated fulfillment centers, cutting handling costs and widening the operational gulf. Michael Fiddelke’s “back-to-basics” plan—including the $5 billion investment in store experience and the “merchandising authority” reset—is the right prescription. But the market moves fast. Unless Target flawlessly executes this pivot and closes the grocery gap, the gulf between these two giants will likely widen through 2026.
In recent years, Walmart stepped on the gas and Target slammed on the brakes. Changes in strategy, store operations and employee morale have affected the formerly joyous customer experience. It’s an unfortunate regression, as Target was the top retailer on our list during our trips to the States. I sincerely hope Target finds their way soon.
More Discussions
Would an Amazon Shift of Prime Day to June Be a Good Move?
Would it be a wise move for Amazon to move Prime Day ahead of its current…Should Amazon Be Banning AI Shopping Agents From its Platform?
Amazon is clamping down on access to its platform from competing AI agents.Does Macy’s Own Celebrations?
Macy’s has made a name for itself in terms of high-profile celebrations. Will that drive cross-over…
Over the past few years, there has been a very clear pattern: Walmart has gained market share; Target has lost it. This started in grocery and essentials but has since spread to discretionary categories. Will this divergence stop in 2026? No. Walmart has too many favorable drivers in its favor, such as online expansion and picking up higher-income shoppers. And Target has not yet done enough to stop defections: there is still too much friction in store, assortments are not strong enough in own brand, and the grocery offer isn’t powerful enough to drive foot traffic in its own right. To be fair, management are working on turning things around, but this will not likely deliver in 2026.
One simple answer: yes. Target has yet to give shoppers any compelling reason to come back to their once-great stores. Walmart rightfully seized on several missteps by Target, and will continue to grow share in the near-term.
Correction: WM isn’t stealing anything; Target is giving it away. But if nothing else, this article reenforces what should be universally acknowledged, but is (too) often glossed over: Walmart is far, far bigger than Target.
Consumers who share ideological differences with Jeff Bezos will shun Amazon, and where will they go? The only clear successor has been Walmart. Walmart makes tracking multiple orders a breeze and has a massive catalog. I don’t see anything changing in 2026.
My podcast series, “Comparing Walmart and Target Makes Zero Sense (But I’m Doing It Anyway)” addresses the ever-widening gulf between the two retailers. There simply is no comparison at this point.
Newly minted CEO Michael Fiddelke’s early moves have Target reinforcing merchandising, marketing, and design expertise. Otherwise known as their old playbook trifecta.
Walmart is living in the space age – promoting executives steeped in AI, digital platforms, advertising, and marketplace operations. Don’t get me wrong, Target has to restore the core before lurching at the new, but Walmart’s already boarded the rocket ship.
I think it’s quite possible that the gap in traffic and comparable sales growth between Walmart and Target could deepen in 2026 if Target does not more aggressively address some of its core execution challenges. Walmart’s strength continues to lie in everyday availability, broad assortment, and tight inventory discipline — all of which drive consistent traffic across price points and mission sets. Target, on the other hand, has struggled in areas that traditionally defined its competitive edge: in-stock levels on basics, clarity and value in promotions, and consistency in grocery (especially fresh). In an environment where consumers remain value-conscious and convenience-oriented, these fundamentals matter — and where one retailer excels, and the other lags, divergence in performance is entirely plausible.
If Walmart wants to further steal share from Target, the keys are straightforward: relentless in-stock execution, integrated omnichannel convenience, and compelling value messaging. Walmart’s investments in fulfillment — from micro-fulfillment to expanded BOPIS and Same-Day Delivery — paired with its deep everyday low prices, create a compelling proposition for cost-sensitive shoppers. Strengthening these capabilities even further will continue to attract both lower- and middle-income cohorts who are balancing budget, choice, and speed in their shopping trips.
For Target to rebound meaningfully, however, it needs to recommit to its own strengths and fundamentals. That means ensuring excellent in-stock performance, particularly for basics and essentials, and staffing stores in ways that support service and execution. It also means leaning into what made Target a differentiated destination for many years: proprietary brands and products within Home and Apparel that offer exclusive style and value, and a more rigorous focus on Grocery—especially Fresh—where Target has underperformed relative to competitors that have invested heavily in perishable quality and assortment depth. Fiddelke’s turnaround strategy is a start, but without disciplined execution in these foundational areas, it’s difficult to close the performance gap with Walmart over time.
In short, the gulf in 2026 won’t be determined by flashier strategy alone — it will be about retail basics done well, combined with a clear sense of what makes each retailer unique. Target’s opportunity lies in strengthening its core, not simply adopting incremental change, while Walmart’s advantage continues to rest on operational excellence and broad accessibility.
Target’s struggle is a classic case of being stuck in the middle. It lacks the absolute scale/automation of Walmart to win on price, yet it is losing its differentiation advantage as Walmart’s Bettergoods line successfully mimics Target’s premium private-label aesthetic. For Target to rebound, it must abandon the Walmart-lite inventory model and pivot toward a sustainable Curation-as-a-Service model requiring heavy investments in exclusive, high-margin collaborations that cannot be algorithmically replicated or automated by Walmart’s logistics machine. Moving forward, Target’s survival depends on being a destination for discovery, as a cultural destination, to capture the human demand, while Walmart cements its status as the retail operating system and utility for the agentic era. Walmart wins on pure scale and the technological arms race. Target wins only by shrinking its mission.
I am rooting for Target but I don’t think there will be much of a change in 2026. Target won’t be able to out-Walmart Walmart so they have to create a differentiated experience based on curated product. That said, they have to get the basics right – in-stock, service, competitive pricing on essentials. Their turnaround will take time and they must tread carefully, especially in such a volatile economic and geo-political environment having dramatic effects on supply chain, pricing and consumer behavior.
The gap may widen in 2026. Walmart is anchored in essentials like grocery, protecting traffic in a cautious economy while fueling digital growth. Its expanding ecommerce and Walmart Plus ecosystem enable smarter personalization through tailored offers, replenishment reminders, and AI driven recommendations that increase basket size and loyalty.
Target remains more exposed to discretionary weekend browsing trips, which often decline first when spending tightens. However, leadership appears focused on steady course correction. If Target sharpens private label differentiation, improves in store execution, and invests in data driven personalization, it can rebuild frequency and restore the sense of discovery that once defined the brand.
If you’ve been reading RetailWire over the last SEVERAL years, the good bet is Walmart and the bad one is Target.
I can go back more than “several” when both retailers were my customers. Walmart would order multiple times a week, and 30 days later, the remittance for each order would be deposited into our bank account. Meanwhile, Target shorted every invoice for various reasons… the most common one was Target’s claim that we were selling to Walmart at a lower price than Target. That suggested the management mindset was to take advantage of vendors rather than sell products. Apparently, they are still not focused on customers today.
The question is “what are they focused on?”
It wasn’t that long ago — during my years at Target — that the competitive landscape was cleanly stratified by household income. Walmart owned the lower‑income shopper, Target owned the higher‑income guest, and the real fight was in the middle. Target’s biggest advantage back then was the store experience: clean, curated, stylish, and aspirational. That advantage is diminished. Store execution began slipping years before Walmart+ scaled, and once that “Target trip” magic eroded, the brand lost the one moat Walmart couldn’t replicate.
COVID briefly flipped the script. Target’s curbside was faster and more reliable, and they won big. Walmart caught up — and then kept going. Walmart+ was built to counter Amazon, but its secondary effect was far more disruptive: it created a digital veil for affluent shoppers who once avoided Walmart stores but appreciate Walmart’s pricing, reliability, and especially its grocery strength without the in‑store friction. Let’s not forget that grocery is Walmart’s biggest strength, and for decades, has been a bit of an Achilles heel for Target. Walmart+ has turned budget shopping into a productivity hack for affluent shoppers.
Meanwhile, Target struggled with in‑stocks, value perception, and a Shipt integration that never became the operational backbone Spark is for Walmart. And yes, the national boycotts mattered. It wasn’t the only driver of Target’s decline, but it absolutely accelerated the erosion of trust among the exact households Target depends on.
Walmart isn’t slowing down. By year‑end, almost 2/3 of stores will be serviced by automated fulfillment centers, cutting handling costs and widening the operational gulf. Michael Fiddelke’s “back-to-basics” plan—including the $5 billion investment in store experience and the “merchandising authority” reset—is the right prescription. But the market moves fast. Unless Target flawlessly executes this pivot and closes the grocery gap, the gulf between these two giants will likely widen through 2026.
In recent years, Walmart stepped on the gas and Target slammed on the brakes. Changes in strategy, store operations and employee morale have affected the formerly joyous customer experience. It’s an unfortunate regression, as Target was the top retailer on our list during our trips to the States. I sincerely hope Target finds their way soon.