News
US Retail Media Spend Hits $69.33 Billion in 2026. Physical Stores Get Just 3.3% of It.
US retail media spending will hit $69.33 billion in 2026, but physical stores, where more than 80% of retail sales happen, get only 3.3% of it. Shoppers discover brands in-store at higher rates and convert faster there too. The allocation gap is real, though the loudest voice flagging it sells the fix.
Key Takeaways
- US retail media ad spending is projected to reach $69.33 billion in 2026, yet physical stores, where more than 80% of retail sales occur, receive just 3.3% of that spend.
- 48% of shoppers discover new brands in physical stores versus 41% on e-commerce sites, and in-store discovery converts faster: 31.5% purchase immediately in-store versus 19.1% on retail sites.
- 40% of shoppers who discover a product online still visit a physical store before buying, evidence that online and in-store are one shopper journey, not two competing channels.
- Existing retail media budgets split across trade (36%) and shopper marketing (26%) line items that are planned and measured separately, making it hard to compare true ROI across channels.
- The data comes from a Retail Dive article sponsored by Fluent, Inc., a company that sells in-store media measurement, so treat the allocation gap as real but the vendor's prescribed fix with appropriate skepticism.
If your brand is scaling from DTC into wholesale or retail shelf space, this is worth ten minutes of your attention: a new report puts a hard number on how lopsided retail media budgets have become relative to where shoppers actually buy. It is also a useful gut check on your own marketing channel mix, since the same digital-first bias the report describes shows up in most brands' paid spend.
Here is what happened, why it matters even though the source has a dog in the fight, and what to actually do about it.
What happened
As reported by Retail Dive, in content sponsored by Fluent, Inc., US retail media ad spending is expected to reach $69.33 billion in 2026. Despite that scale, physical stores, where more than 80% of retail sales still happen, receive only 3.3% of that budget. The report's core claim is that most "omnichannel" strategy is really multi-digital strategy: online and in-store are treated as competing channels when the shopper data says they are the same journey running at the same time.
The behavioral numbers back that framing. 48% of shoppers discover new brands in physical stores versus 41% on e-commerce, and in-store discovery converts faster: 31.5% of shoppers who discover a product in-store buy it immediately, versus 19.1% on retail sites. Meanwhile 40% of shoppers who discover a product online still visit a physical store before purchasing. Existing retail media spend is also fragmented internally, split across trade (36%) and shopper marketing (26%) budgets that are planned and measured on different systems entirely.
| Retail media allocation gap, July 2026 | Figure |
|---|---|
| US retail media ad spend, 2026 forecast | $69.33 billion |
| Share of that spend reaching physical stores | 3.3% |
| Share of retail sales happening in physical stores | 80%+ |
| Brand discovery: in-store vs e-commerce | 48% vs 41% |
| Immediate purchase after discovery: in-store vs online | 31.5% vs 19.1% |
| Online discoverers who still visit a store first | 40% |
| Retail media budget split: trade vs shopper marketing | 36% vs 26%, measured separately |
Source: Retail Dive, sponsored content by Fluent, Inc., July 2026.
Returns are quietly eating your margin. See by how much.
Get our Real Cost of Returns calculator: plug in your numbers, see the true hit per return.
Check your inbox. We'll send the Real Cost of Returns calculator shortly.
The allocation gap is real, but read the byline
Before acting on any of this, know who is telling you the story. This article ran as sponsored content for Fluent, Inc., a company that sells in-store media measurement. A vendor pointing out that in-store media is under-measured and under-funded, then offering to sell you in-store measurement, is not a coincidence, it is the business model. That does not make the 3.3%-versus-80% stat wrong. Independent retail media forecasts from firms like eMarketer have flagged similar digital-heavy allocation patterns for years. It does mean the "close the gap" prescription deserves the same scrutiny you would apply to any vendor pitch: ask for incrementality evidence, not just a compelling headline stat.
Why the silo is the real problem, not the percentage
The more useful number in the report is not 3.3%, it is the trade-versus-shopper-marketing split: 36% and 26% of budget sitting in two pools that are planned and measured separately. That silo is the actual operational failure. If you cannot compare a dollar spent through trade programs against a dollar spent on paid social using the same yardstick, you are not allocating budget, you are guessing. This is the same discipline problem we cover in MER, ROAS, and CAC as a single efficiency stack: pick one lens, apply it everywhere, and stop letting channel-specific metrics hide relative performance from each other.
Audit before you add a line item
If you are working with an agency or a retail media specialist on this, know what you are paying for before you add an in-store spend line. Our breakdown of what a media agency retainer actually costs is a useful gut check before you fund a new "in-store media" initiative on the strength of one vendor's stat sheet. The audit itself is cheap: pull your own sell-through and discovery data by channel, wherever it exists, and see whether your category actually mirrors the 48%/41% and 31.5%/19.1% splits in the source, or whether your business is genuinely digital-first. Brands selling categories with high impulse or high tactile-evaluation purchases (beauty, food, apparel) are more likely to see real in-store discovery and conversion; brands selling considered or subscription products may not. Either way, do not extend budget on a category average when you have your own data available. The same discipline applies to efficiency benchmarking generally, our TACoS benchmarks by category are a comparable example of using your own numbers against a category baseline rather than an industry-wide claim.
The operator takeaway
Treat this the way you would treat any vendor-sponsored stat: the diagnosis is probably right, the cure is being sold to you. $69 billion is pouring into retail media and only 3.3% of it touches the 80%-plus of sales still happening in stores, and that gap is worth a real look if you are scaling into wholesale, CVS, Target, Ulta, or similar shelf space. But the fix is not "spend more on in-store media" by default, it is auditing where your category's discovery and purchase intent actually concentrate, killing the trade-versus-shopper-marketing measurement silo, and holding every channel to one MER or ROAS view. If you want help running that audit against your own numbers rather than an industry average, our team can walk through it on a call.
Frequently Asked Questions
what is the in-store retail media allocation gap?
It is the mismatch between where retail sales actually happen and where retail media dollars go. More than 80% of retail sales still happen in physical stores, but physical stores receive only 3.3% of the $69.33 billion in US retail media spend projected for 2026. Nearly all of that budget flows to digital and e-commerce placements. The gap matters because it means most retail media planning is really multi-digital planning that happens to call itself omnichannel.
how much retail media spend actually goes to physical stores?
Just 3.3% of the $69.33 billion in projected 2026 US retail media ad spending touches physical stores, according to the Retail Dive report. The rest concentrates in digital channels: retailer websites, apps, and connected commerce media that is easier to buy programmatically and easier to attribute with existing ad tech. That ease-of-measurement bias, not a deliberate strategic call, is the more plausible explanation for why the split looks the way it does.
why do shoppers discover and buy differently in-store versus online?
The source data shows 48% of shoppers discover new brands in physical stores versus 41% on e-commerce sites, and the in-store discoverers convert faster: 31.5% purchase immediately in-store compared with 19.1% on retail sites. On top of that, 40% of shoppers who discover a product online still visit a physical store before they buy. Read together, those numbers argue that online and in-store are not separate funnels, they are one shopper journey with two entry points and a lot of crossover in between.
is this retail media data trustworthy given who published it?
The underlying stats, the 3.3% in-store media share and the 80%+ in-store sales share, are directionally consistent with what independent retail media forecasters like eMarketer have reported for years, so treat the allocation gap itself as real. But the article is sponsored content from Fluent, Inc., a company that sells in-store media measurement and naturally benefits from brands concluding they need more in-store spend and more in-store measurement. Take the diagnosis at face value and pressure-test the prescribed cure against your own incrementality data before buying anything.
should a dtc brand selling into cvs, target or ulta increase in-store media spend?
Only if your category's discovery and conversion data actually supports it, and that is a research question before it is a budget question. A DTC brand scaling into wholesale or retail shelf space should first check where its own customers discover and buy, since the 48%/41% and 31.5%/19.1% splits in the source are averages across all retail, not your category specifically. If your own data shows meaningful in-store discovery and conversion, the audit is worth doing. If it does not, do not fund an in-store media line just because a vendor's report says the average brand should.
why are trade and shopper marketing budgets measured separately?
Trade marketing (about 36% of the mix in the source data) and shopper marketing (about 26%) grew out of different retailer relationships and different planning calendars, so most brands still run them as separate line items with separate approval chains and separate success metrics. That separation makes it structurally hard to compare a dollar of trade spend against a dollar of digital retail media spend on the same yardstick. The fix is not a bigger in-store budget, it is putting every channel, trade, shopper marketing, and digital retail media, on one shared measurement lens so ROAS and MER are actually comparable.
what should a dtc cfo actually do with this data?
Four things, in order. First, audit your retail media mix against where your own category's discovery and conversion actually happen, do not assume it mirrors the all-retail average. Second, if trade and shopper marketing budgets are measured on different yardsticks, force them onto one lens before you compare ROAS across them. Third, stay skeptical of the source: Fluent sells the fix, so pressure-test any in-store media pitch against real incrementality, not just the 3.3% headline stat. Fourth, whatever you conclude, allocate media to the moment of highest purchase intent, the source pegs immediate in-store purchase at 31.5% versus 19.1% online, and measure it consistently across every channel you touch.