We’re Spending Billions on This Work-From-Home Indulgence

Click. Scroll. Add to cart. Now toggle back to that Zoom meeting.

On our remote days, it turns out, we shop while we work. Researchers say it’s driving billions in online sales. There we all are, browsing everything from toothpaste to concert tickets while nodding along on a video call , keying in credit-card info in between dashing off emails to the boss.

Shopping away our entire workday is obviously a bad move. But indulging in a little isn’t going to tank productivity. We pause and procrastinate at the office, too, in ways that are acceptable there. At home, we gather around clothing reviews like we’re hanging out at the office water cooler, and tick errands off our list via Target.com.

With no one looking over our shoulders, we can puncture the monotony of another vanilla workday with the dopamine high of finding the perfect pair of shoes. Even if we might sometimes regret it.

“I wouldn’t have bought this stupid thing if it weren’t for All Hands,” Megan Morreale , a content marketer in New Jersey, thought to herself after purchasing an influencer’s branded candle during a companywide meeting. Bored or between calls, the 32-year-old scrolls Instagram, TikTok and YouTube. Days later, subpar art supplies or a viral dress that really doesn’t suit her land on her doorstep. Oh well.

“It’s a little bit of fun during the day,” she says, without the fear you’ll look like a slacker . At the office, she would never. “All the guilt is completely gone when you work from home.”

A $375 billion boost

Our collective retail therapy adds up. New research from Stanford University, Northwestern University and the Mastercard Economics Institute, the payments company’s research arm, finds the pandemic prompted a rise in online shopping that’s persisted. Last year, for example, we spent $375 billion more than we would have otherwise, the report estimates.

The brunt of that bump is being driven by people working hybrid or fully remote schedules, says Nick Bloom , a Stanford economist and co-author. County-level data shows that in areas where work-from-home jobs are prevalent, online shopping is up, while it’s back to pre pandemic levels in places where more folks work in-person.

Along with walking the dog and getting a jump on dinner, workday shopping is a way to make efficient use of our time, Bloom says, and take advantage of the fact that we have more control over it at home.

“People just can’t work continuously without taking a break,” he says.

Get away without leaving your desk

At home, there’s freedom and time, but also often inertia.

“There’s no coffee break, there’s no somebody’s birthday,” says Ace Bhattacharjya , chief executive of a company that helps folks access their medical records.

Instead, there’s perusing a limited-edition sneaker drop, or collectible figurines on eBay, Bhattacharjya says, recalling some of his recent scrolling. Everything in stores looks the same these days, he finds, but online he can jump down a rabbit hole into random micro communities and inspiration. Turning his attention from the work on his computer monitor to e-commerce on his iPad Pro gives him a jolt of creativity and energy.

Besides, the lines between work and everything else have grown hazy. Bhattacharjya’s hours bleed into the weekends. That can feel like permission to wedge some personal stuff into the workweek.

Ooh, a sale!

Weekly online spending peaks from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Fridays , as the workweek slows to its languorous end, data from Adobe shows. More than a quarter of women surveyed last year by shopping portal Rakuten said they typically shop online during work hours. For Gen Z, the share was 41%.

Jenny Hirschey , who runs an Instagram jewellery shop from St. Paul, Minn., was surprised to find about 80% of her sales are made during the workday.

“I get comments all the time like, ‘I’m running to a meeting but this heart charm is mine! Sold! I’ll pay you in 30 minutes,’” she says.

Big retailers have noticed the trend, too, says Liza Amlani , a retail consultant and adviser based in Toronto who’s worked with companies like Under Armour and Lands’ End.

Some of her clients are timing things like product drops and marketing emails around noon or 3 p.m.

“We know that you’re on your computer,” captive and craving a pick-me-up, she says.

Retailers have also ramped up their investments in online tech, and are flooding their websites with more product, she adds. Algorithm-powered recommendations are getting so powerful it can feel like they know your subconscious desires before you do. Oh, and did you forget about that item you halfheartedly popped in your cart? Here’s 20% off.

“You’re getting so much more of that reminder and that call to buy,” says Nancy Wong , a consumer psychologist at University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The seduction of online shopping

Bricks-and-mortar browsing comes with unknowns and annoyances: traffic en route, long lines at the store, finding out what you want isn’t in stock.

In contrast, Wong says, clicking the buy button online brings a satisfying certainty, and a double hit of pleasure. There’s the immediate high of plucking the item from the virtual shelf—then, the anticipation of its arrival. Sure, that gadget might be a flop once it gets here. But it’s on its way.

“It’s so seductive,” says Michelle Drapkin , a therapist in New Jersey who works a hybrid schedule.

When she worked for a big healthcare company years back, she’d never dream of pulling up Amazon on her office computer.

On her work-from-home days now, she’ll sometimes flop on her bed with a laptop and check purchases off her to-do list. It’s relaxing, she says. “I can do something different than work that’s still productive.”

Some purchases, like groceries, keep her household running. Others, like a new dress for a Kentucky Derby party, feel like a treat.

By the time the purchase arrives, though, she’s usually forgotten what’s inside the box.

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.