Key takeaways:
- GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic may be reducing overall food consumption, but they are not eliminating indulgence.
- Data cited by Lindt & Sprüngli suggests some GLP-1 users are trading up to premium chocolate rather than abandoning treats altogether.
- Snacks that rely heavily on frequent, impulse purchases could face greater pressure as consumers become more selective about what they choose to indulge in.
For much of the past year, the rise of GLP-1 weight-loss drugs has been discussed in food circles as if it points in only one direction. If people taking Ozempic, Wegovy or Mounjaro are eating less, then surely indulgent categories such as confectionery, biscuits and salty snacks must be heading for a squeeze.
But the picture coming through from chocolate looks more layered than that. What seems to be emerging isn’t the end of indulgence, but a change in its shape. Consumers using these medications may well be cutting back on everyday, impulsive snacking, yet that doesn’t automatically mean they’re turning their backs on treats altogether. What it may mean is that when they do choose to indulge, they want something that earns it.
That distinction suggests the pressure may fall hardest not on indulgence itself, but on products built around frequency, habit and easy reach. The snacks most exposed could be the ones that rely on repeat, low-thought purchases – the grab-and-go bar, the checkout add-on, the familiar sweet treat tossed into the basket without much consideration. If shoppers are becoming more selective, those products have more to lose.
Recent data cited by Swiss chocolatier Lindt & Sprüngli gives that argument some shape. An internal study based on Circana purchasing data found that while around 15% of US households are now using GLP-1 drugs, those same households accounted for roughly 17.5% of chocolate sales in the dataset. That isn’t what a clean collapse in indulgence looks like: if anything, it hints at a market beginning to split.
A smaller treat chosen with intent
Lindt said US premium chocolate sales rose by nearly 17% among GLP-1 users in 2025, compared with about 6.5% growth among non-users. The company’s explanation is straightforward enough: as consumers cut back on heavier foods such as pizza and pasta, they’re still making room for pleasure, only in a more measured way. The treat is still there, but the logic behind it has changed. It’s less about eating casually and more about choosing carefully.
“They are upgrading to premium products. Less is more – small rewards with moment of bliss rather than mindless munching,” said Lindt CEO Adalbert Lechner.
Chocolate, especially at the premium end, is well placed for that change because it already trades on ritual, mood, gifting and personal reward. It’s long had one foot in snacking and the other in self-treating. In a GLP-1 market, that second identity may become more important.
Lechner also said he doesn’t see GLP-1 drugs as a threat to future business. He expects Europe, once regulatory approvals broaden, to show a similar pattern to the US. Oral GLP-1 drugs could widen that effect further, bringing in more men and younger consumers who may be less likely to use injectables and more likely to enter the category through pills that generally deliver less dramatic weight loss.
That reading of the market also chimes with wider snacking behaviour. Mondelez International’s 2024 State of Snacking research has repeatedly shown that people don’t turn to snacks only for hunger. They use them to switch off, to lift a dull moment, to create a small pocket of pleasure in the day. In its latest survey, more than eight in 10 consumers said they snack to treat themselves, while a similar share said snacks give them small moments of joy.
“Indulgent snacking is the perfect expression of ‘little treat culture’ – a convenient and comforting escape from day-to-day routines,” said Melissa Davies, senior manager, Global Insights & Trendspotting at Mondelēz International. “People see snacking as a well-deserved reward and way to unwind after a long day.”
That emotional role doesn’t vanish simply because appetites shrink. What may change is how often consumers indulge; how much they buy each time; and what standard they expect the product to meet.
Less food overall, sharper choices within it
None of this means the broader warning signs for the snack industry have gone away. Research released in December 2025 by Cornell University and published in the Journal of Marketing Research found that households taking GLP-1 medications reduced grocery spending by an average of 5.3% within six months of starting treatment. Among higher-income households, the drop was more than 8%.
“The main pattern is a reduction in overall food purchases,” said Sylvia Hristakeva, an assistant professor and co-author of the Cornell study. “Only a small number of categories show increases, and those are modest relative to the overall decline.”
The declines were especially pronounced in categories associated with cravings and casual consumption. Spending on savoury snacks fell by about 10%, with similarly steep drops in sweets, baked goods and cookies. Spending at fast-food and other limited-service restaurants was also down by about 8%.
That’s where the pressure point for manufacturers starts to come into focus. If overall purchasing is falling, and if the biggest drops are turning up in categories tied to convenience, frequency and impulse, then not all snacks will be equally vulnerable. Some will struggle because they are easy to skip. Others may survive – even thrive – because they feel worth keeping.
Mintel’s research helps explain why. The firm has found that snacking is increasingly wrapped up in emotion rather than pure hunger, with seven in 10 US consumers saying they snack to relax and four in 10 UK consumers saying they snack to treat themselves. Younger shoppers are especially likely to use snacks to relieve boredom or stress. At the same time, Mintel has pointed to a broader shift in value, with quality, ingredients and premium positioning increasingly carrying more weight than sheer frequency or volume.
That opens the door to reinvention. Premiumisation isn’t only for boxed chocolates or luxury truffles. Almost any snack can be pushed in that direction if the proposition is strong enough – better ingredients, sharper flavour profiles, cleaner labels, more refined textures, smarter portioning, packaging that signals occasion rather than habit. The category lines don’t disappear, but the value equation changes.
The products at risk may be the ones bought on autopilot
The real divide may not be healthy versus indulgent, or even chocolate versus everything else. It may be intentional versus automatic.
Brands built around gifting, seasonality, discovery and perceived quality have a degree of insulation because they already ask the consumer to stop, choose and justify. Their products are bought with some thought. By contrast, products that depend heavily on frequent, impulse-driven consumption could come under more strain as baskets get tighter and every purchase has to make a stronger case for itself.
And as GLP-1s push consumers towards fewer eating occasions, food makers across the board may have to work harder to answer a more demanding question: why this and why now?
Lindt’s full-year figures suggest the upside for those that can answer it well. The Kilchberg-based company posted organic sales growth of 12.4% in 2025, taking revenues to CHF 5.92 billion ($7.51 billion), even after raising prices by roughly 19% to help cover soaring cocoa costs.
The contradiction at the heart of this market is becoming harder to ignore. GLP-1s may well reduce how much people snack. They may also raise the bar for the snacks that remain. For the products consumers buy out of habit, that’s a serious threat. For brands able to turn indulgence into something chosen, savoured and worth paying more for, it may be the opening of a new premium chapter.
Study:
Hristakeva S, Liaukonytė J & Feler L. (2025). EXPRESS: The No-Hunger Games: How GLP-1 Medication Adoption is Changing Consumer Food Demand. Journal of Marketing Research,0(ja). https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437251412834
