How Treatonomics reshapes consumer behaviour

In its annual trend report, Kantar identifies Treatonomics as a defining pattern in contemporary consumer behaviour. The term describes the growing importance of small, everyday rewards as people navigate prolonged economic uncertainty and the erosion of traditional life milestones.

What makes the observation stand out is its tone. In a report largely concerned with AI, systems and optimisation, Treatonomics is one of the few trends that does not start from technology or media, but from lived experience. It does not describe a new capability, but a shift in how people cope.

At its core, Treatonomics is not about spending more. It is about spending differently. Less oriented towards aspiration, more towards immediate emotional balance. Small purchases, minor upgrades, momentary indulgences that do not signal progress, but provide relief.

The lipstick effect, explained

The logic behind this behaviour is not entirely new. In economic theory, it is often linked to what is known as the lipstick effect. When financial pressure rises, consumers tend to cut back on large discretionary purchases, but continue to buy small luxuries. A lipstick survives when a handbag does not.

Traditionally, this was seen as a marginal phenomenon. A psychological footnote in times of crisis. A way for consumers to preserve a sense of normalcy when larger forms of consumption become unavailable.

Crucially, it was never about vanity. It was about retaining the ability to choose something pleasurable when options narrow.

From exception to pattern

What Kantar observes with Treatonomics is that this logic has moved from the margins to the centre. The lipstick effect is no longer a situational response to acute downturns. It has become embedded in everyday behaviour.

That is why the phrase “the lipstick effect on steroids” matters. Not because the treats are bigger, but because they are more frequent. People rely on these moments more consistently.

The future no longer organises the present in the way it once did. Classic milestones have lost their coordinating power. In their absence, people create smaller, self-authored moments that make days feel manageable. Treats function less as rewards and more as stabilisers.

From here, the question shifts. Not whether Treatonomics exists, but what it changes for brands operating in a landscape where relief has become more valuable than aspiration.

What this changes for brands

In a treat-driven economy, competition shifts. Brands compete less on identity and more on role. Less on promise and more on presence. Not on what they stand for, but on when they are allowed to matter.

This challenges traditional brand logic. Grand narratives lose traction when decisions happen in brief, personal moments. Friction becomes more damaging than a lack of differentiation. A minor obstacle can be enough to push a brand out of the moment it might have served.

Strategically, this shifts emphasis from storytelling to situational relevance. Not every interaction needs to build meaning. Some moments simply require that a brand does not get in the way.

The line brands cannot cross

Treatonomics is fragile. The mechanism collapses when small rewards feel engineered rather than self-authorised. When brands push treats instead of making space for them, relief turns into resistance.

The line between enabling and exploiting is thin, but clearly felt. People grant themselves treats. They do not like being guided there. Brands that ignore this undermine the very behaviour they seek to benefit from.

A correction, not a trend

Treatonomics is not a hype that calls for activation. It is a correction in how people structure daily life when the future no longer provides clear direction. A shift that reveals how strategically important the everyday has become.

What brands choose to do with that insight remains open. But the idea that small moments now carry more weight than big promises is hard to ignore. And perhaps that is where marketing needs to refocus: not on where people want to go, but on how they are getting through today.