Covid Slashed Consumer Choices. This Is Why They Aren’t Coming Back.

The furniture retailer Malouf sells beds and bedding in a fraction of the colours it did a few years ago. Newell Brands, the Sharpie maker, has retired 50 types of Yankee Candle. Coca-Cola offers half as many drinks.

Covid slashed consumer choices as companies pared their offerings to ease clogs in the supply chain. The logistical mess is behind them. But many of the choices aren’t coming back.

Retailers and suppliers across industries—from groceries to health, beauty and furniture—have said that it didn’t pay to offer products for everyone, and consumers didn’t care that much when they stopped.

“Today, people would rather lose a portion of consumer demand as opposed to spending extra on too much variety,” said Inna Kuznetsova, chief executive officer of ToolsGroup, a supply-chain planning and optimisation company.

Macy’s president and CEO-elect, Tony Spring, told analysts in November that “the customer today does not want an endless aisle.”

New items made up about 2% of products in stores in 2023 across categories such as beauty, footwear and toys, down from 5% of items in 2019, according to the market-research firm Circana. Shelf Engine, a technology company that automates ordering for grocery retailers, said large grocery stores have reduced fresh-food offerings such as fruit, dairy products and deli meats by 15% to 20%.

Large grocers cutting back on choice is a reversal from pre pandemic days, when they believed they had to carry everything to avoid losing customers to the store across the street, said Stefan Kalb, CEO of Shelf Engine.

Kalb said that grocers are now saving money because they have fewer items to manage and that the slimming of product options is reducing food waste.

Executives at consumer-product companies said the thinning of their product lines has been a relief for those struggling to improve profitability in the midst of higher interest rates and rising costs for raw materials and labor. They said many of the reductions have been in lines that consumers wouldn’t notice, such as items in special packaging and assortments for specific big-box retailers. The cutbacks are also to product lines that drown consumers in options.

“I don’t think any consumer would have noticed we went from 200 to 150” types of Yankee Candle, said Chris Peterson, chief executive of Newell Brands.

Some industry specialists said the new focus on bestselling items has reduced innovation and hurt smaller brands that rely on retailers’ desire to carry something for everyone.

“There has definitely been less innovation since the pandemic,” said Seth Goldman, a founder of the organic-beverage maker Honest Tea, which was bought by Coca-Cola in 2011 and discontinued in 2022.

Coca-Cola over the past few years reduced its brands to 200 from 400, cutting slow-growing as well as declining products, including small regional lines such as Northern Neck Ginger Ale and national brands such as its first diet cola, Tab.

“It was pruning the garden to let the better plants grow,” Coca-Cola Chief Executive James Quincey said in 2022.

Goldman said there was still demand for Honest Tea, even if it wasn’t big enough for Coca-Cola. In September 2022, four months after Coca-Cola’s announcement, he launched Just Ice Tea, a drink that he said is similar to Honest Tea and that is expected to have sales in 2023 of more than $16 million.

Companies began winnowing product lines in the years leading up to the pandemic as a corrective to previous decades when consumer choice ballooned. That was partly because of the internet, where online retailers weren’t constrained by the space limitations of physical stores, giving rise to the term “endless aisle.”

The cuts were turbocharged in 2020 and 2021, when product shortages and a surge in consumer spending led companies to give priority to the most in-demand items. They focused on products that ran fastest on production lines and, because of social distancing in factories, could be made with automated machinery.

Kimberly-Clark cut more than 70% of its toilet paper and facial-tissue products over a single weekend in 2020 as it rushed to satisfy a fourfold increase in demand, said Tamera Fenske, the company’s chief supply chain officer.

Fenske said the company jettisoned slow-selling items as well as many of the special counts and custom sizes it made for individual retailers. Fenske said that, as pandemic restrictions eased, Kimberly-Clark was able to be more thoughtful about the items it brought back. She said the company carries about 30% fewer product lines in North America than it had at the start of 2020.

PVH, which owns Tommy Hilfiger and Calvin Klein, embarked in 2020 on a plan to cut more than a fifth of its offerings to focus on what it calls “hero” products—those that make up an essential part of someone’s wardrobe.

Kimberly-Clark, maker of Scott paper towels, has brought back some, but not all, of the products it stopped offering during the pandemic. PHOTO: KRISTEN NORMAN FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Some companies said the culling of less-popular products opened up space for new lines.

Georgia-Pacific stopped selling 164-sheet rolls of Quilted Northern toilet paper because its larger rolls were better for consumers who valued longer-lasting rolls, said Kim Burns, senior vice president of supply chain for Georgia-Pacific’s consumer products group. Burns said the company has subsequently invested more time and money in new product lines, such as toilet paper with a scented tube that acts as a bathroom air freshener.

For other companies, the supply-chain shock provided a real-life experiment in how trimming product lines could improve productivity without hurting customer satisfaction. “It was quite shocking as we parsed it out to see we were using a lot of our buying power to really not get much of a return on investment,” said Nick Jensen, vice president of product at Malouf.

The Logan, Utah-based furniture company has reduced its lines to about 3,500 product choices, down from almost 11,000 items before the pandemic. Jensen said the company is adding new items more carefully these days.

“If we have 15 different colours and three shades of grey, it’s a paralysing choice,” Jensen said. “It’s kind of forced us to be much more intentional versus throwing a lot of things at the wall and hoping that they stick.”

—Suzanne Kapner contributed to this article.

President Donald Trump’s imposition of tariffs on trading partners have moved analysts to reduce forecasts for U.S. companies. Many stocks look vulnerable to declines, while some seem relatively immune.

Since the start of the year, analysts’ expectations for aggregate first-quarter sales of S&P 500 component companies have dropped about 0.4%, according to FactSet. The hundreds of billions of dollars worth of imports from China, Mexico, and Canada the Trump administration is placing tariffs on, including metals and basic materials for retail and food sellers, will raise costs for U.S. companies. That will force them to lift prices, reducing the number of goods and services they’ll sell to consumers and businesses.

This outlook has pressured first-quarter earnings estimates by 3.8%. Companies will cut back on marketing and perhaps labour, but many have substantial fixed expenses that can’t easily be reduced, such as depreciation and interest to lenders. Profit margins will drop in the face of lower revenue, thus weighing on profit estimates. The estimates dropped mildly in January, and then picked up steam in February, just after the initial tariff announcements.

“We are starting to see the first instances of analysts cutting numbers on tariff impacts,” writes Citi strategist Scott Chronert.

The reductions aren’t concentrated in one sector; they’re widespread, a concrete indication that the downward revisions are partly related to tariffs, which affect many sectors. The percentage of all analyst earnings-estimate revisions in March for S&P 500 companies that have been downward this year has been 60.1%, according to Citi, worse than the historical average of 53.5% for March.

The consumer-discretionary sector has seen just over 62% of March revisions to be lower, almost 10 percentage points worse than the historical average. The aggregate first-quarter earnings expectation for all consumer-discretionary companies in the S&P 500 has dropped 11% since the start of the year.

That could hurt the stocks going forward, even though the Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR exchange-traded fund has already dropped 11% for the year. The declines have been led by Tesla and Amazon.com , which account for trillions of dollars of market value and comprise a large portion of the fund. The average name in the fund is down about 4% this year, so there could easily be more downside.

That’s especially true because another slew of downward earnings revisions look likely. Analysts have barely changed their full-year 2025 sales projections for the consumer-discretionary sector, and have lowered full-year earnings by only 2%, even though they’ve more dramatically reduced first-quarter forecasts. The current expectation calls for a sharp increase in quarterly sales and earnings from the first quarter through the rest of the year, but that’s unrealistic, assuming tariffs remain in place for the rest of the year.

“The relative estimate achievability of the consumer discretionary earnings are below average,” Trivariate Research’s Adam Parker wrote in a report.

That makes these stocks look still too expensive—and vulnerable to declines. The consumer-discretionary ETF trades at 21.2 times expected earnings for this year, but if those expectations tumble as much as they have for the first quarter, then the fund’s current price/earnings multiple looks closer to 25 times. That’s too high, given that it’s where the multiple was before markets began reflecting ongoing risk to earnings from tariffs and any continued economic consequences. So, another drop in earnings estimates would drag these consumer stocks down even further.

Industrials are in a similar position. Many of them make equipment and machines that would become more costly to import. The sector has seen about two thirds of March earnings revisions move downward, about 13 percentage points worse that the historical average. Analysts have lowered first-quarter-earnings estimates by 6%, but only 3% for the full year, suggesting that more tariff-related downward revisions are likely for the rest of the year.

That would weigh on the stocks. The Industrial Select Sector SPDR ETF is about flat for the year but would look more expensive than it is today if earnings estimates drop more. The stocks face a high probability of downside from here.

The stocks to own are the “defensive” ones, those that are unlikely to see much tariff-related earnings impact, namely healthcare. Demand for drugs and insurance is much sturdier versus less essential goods and services when consumers have less money to spend. The Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF has produced a 6% gain this year.

That’s supported by earnings trends that are just fine. First-quarter earnings estimates have even ticked slightly higher this year. These stocks should remain relatively strong as long as analysts continue to forecast stable, albeit mild, sales and earnings growth for the coming few years.

“This leads us to recommend healthcare and disfavour consumer discretionary,” Parker writes.

Covid Slashed Consumer Choices. This Is Why They Aren’t Coming Back.

Retailers and suppliers say it didn’t pay to offer products for everyone, and customers didn’t care that much when they stopped