Is snacking too obsessed with Gen Z?

What generational targeting misses: overview

• Generational targeting can overlook demand among shoppers who share similar eating habits across age groups
• Research from Innova and Circana shows opportunities around protein, flavour discovery and convenient formats that extend beyond younger consumers
• Manufacturers should establish whether age differences justify a new recipe, pack format or marketing approach before adding complexity
• Testing products by eating occasion and household circumstances can reveal broader opportunities and stronger reasons for repeat purchase

A biscuit doesn’t become less appealing because someone turns 40, yet snack marketing can make appetite sound remarkably age-dependent. Gen Z gets adventurous flavours, Millennials get convenience and older shoppers get familiarity, as though curiosity expires and busy lives belong to a particular birth cohort. These labels offer a convenient way to describe consumers, but they’re a questionable starting point for deciding what to make.

Manufacturers have sound commercial reasons to recruit younger buyers, particularly when they’re trying to secure the future of an established brand. However, recruiting the next generation and designing a product exclusively around it are different decisions. A campaign can reach younger shoppers while the product earns its place in considerably more baskets.

Research commissioned by Gousto offers a useful challenge to the assumption that informal eating belongs to the young. In a nationally representative survey of 2,000 UK adults, conducted by Opinium in July, 27% said grazing or eating ‘picky bits’ instead of proper meals happened more often in their household during summer. The figures were remarkably similar across generations, at 28% for Gen Z, 27% for Millennials, 30% for Gen X and 25% for Boomers.

Although the research examined seasonal habits, it exposes a broader commercial risk: manufacturers can mistake a widely shared eating occasion for a generational niche. A business developing crackers, savoury bakes or other foods for informal meals could unnecessarily restrict its ambitions by deciding too early that the customer must be under 30.

The shoppers missing from the youth story

Gousto’s findings also suggest that manufacturers should look more closely at household circumstances. Some 37% of women reported more grazing or ‘picky bits’ meals in their household during summer, compared with 16% of men, producing a much wider difference than the five percentage points separating Gen X and Boomers.

Understanding who organises those meals, who buys the food and how many people share it could give product developers more useful information than another description of Gen Z’s appetite for convenience. Those details influence whether shoppers need individual portions, a sharing format or packaging that keeps the remaining contents fresh.

Older respondents were also particularly likely to change their meal preparation. Some 48% of Boomers reported more cold meals instead of cooked dinners during summer, compared with 23% of Gen Z, while 38% said their household cooked less often, against 23% of Gen Z.

Bakery and snack suppliers have reason to investigate how their products fit into those lower-preparation meals. A savoury bake served alongside salad or crackers used as the basis of a light lunch can give an established format another role without requiring a demographic reinvention.

Wider research supports paying attention to needs shared across ages. Innova Market Insights’ June analysis identifies the afternoon snack as a core occasion for consumers of all ages. It also finds that three in five consumers globally are looking for ways to incorporate more protein into their diets, with its health benefits valued across generations.

The reasons for wanting protein, the preferred portion and the acceptable price may vary, giving manufacturers plenty to investigate. Starting with ‘protein for Gen Z’, however, could obscure demand among older consumers who also want convenient ways to improve their diets.

Brand owners should resist replacing youth stereotypes with equally sweeping assumptions about older buyers. Household size, working patterns, appetite and the occasion itself all deserve examination before someone decides that age dictates a smaller pack, a familiar flavour or a softer texture.

Younger consumers lead without owning the market

Younger shoppers do provide important signals about changing demand. Innova reports that 60% of Gen Z and Millennials snack at least twice a day, while half bought single-serve food and beverage formats weekly or more often over the previous year. Those findings give manufacturers practical reasons to examine frequency, portability and portioning when developing products for these consumers.

The opportunity extends into a substantial wider market. Circana’s 2026 Global Snack Unwrap report finds that 55% of US shoppers eat three or more snacks daily, up nine percentage points since 2021. Its research describes growing demand for snacks that provide nourishment, energy and enjoyment as eating occasions become more varied.

“Consumers expect their snacks to do more, whether that means delivering protein, supporting a health goal, or simply providing a moment of joy,” says Sally Lyons Wyatt, global executive VP and chief advisor at Circana.

Manufacturers need to establish which of those expectations their product can meet convincingly. A snack covering a missed lunch faces different demands from a small evening treat, even when both purchases come from the same shopper.

Bold flavour offers another example of how easily an opportunity can acquire an unnecessary age label. Circana reports that 58% of consumers across Europe, the Middle East and Africa like experimenting with new and exotic snack flavours, while 52% say exposure to foods from different cultures has changed their preferences. That gives suppliers a substantial audience to investigate beyond the familiar story of adventurous young consumers.

Reaching that audience may require different communications. Mondelēz International’s 2026 State of Snacking research, produced with Mintel and Black Swan Data, found that 77% of adult Gen Z hosts in the UK turn to social media for snack and menu inspiration when entertaining. The same research found that actively savouring eating experiences was common across UK generations, ranging from 74% of Gen X to 80% of Gen Z.

A creator’s video might introduce a product to a younger buyer while an instore display attracts an older one. Both can want the same flavour and texture, so producers should establish whether they need a different product or simply a better way of bringing it to people’s attention.

Make the product justify the target

The same consumer can also move between nutritional priorities and indulgence throughout the day, making a fixed generational description an incomplete guide to what they’ll buy.

Speaking ahead of FoodNavigator’s Positive Nutrition broadcast, Next-gen snacking on 29 October, Abby Evans, senior insights manager for Retail & Strategy at Hormel Foods, challenges the idea that healthy snacking fits one narrow definition. “Healthy is personal and it’s contextual to me in that moment,” she says.

Evans describes consumers looking for different combinations of convenience, lasting satisfaction and enjoyment. A nutritious, functional choice on one occasion can give way to a smaller indulgent portion on another, with each purchase answering a different expectation.

A manufacturer needs enough insight to distinguish those occasions before deciding what the product should contain. Describing both purchases as Gen Z snacking does little to establish the right serving size, the nutritional proposition or the price.

Mike DiMarcello, who leads Ingredion’s global category marketing team and also contributes to the broadcast, argues that “the brands that will create the most value are the ones that design around the eating occasion first”.

He describes consumers evaluating the whole experience, including whether a snack fits their lifestyle, satisfies their needs and delivers meaningful nutrition or enjoyment. That requires more detailed development work than selecting a nutrient claim and attaching it to a demographic.

Manufacturers can test their assumptions by showing concepts to relevant consumers across age groups, then examining responses alongside intended occasions, household circumstances and existing buying habits. If people regularly eating lunch away from home respond strongly across several cohorts, that behaviour gives the business a clear audience to develop for.

Where younger shoppers show greater interest, researchers should investigate the reason. Familiarity with an ingredient, exposure to a trend, price expectations and the presentation of the concept can each affect the response, with different implications for formulation and marketing.

Separate recipes and pack formats also bring additional ingredients, production planning and stock to manage. A business proposing several generational variants should be able to show that the differences improve the eating experience or unlock demand sufficiently to justify that work.

Testing should follow the product through consumption and the likelihood of buying it again, because initial enthusiasm can fade when a portion disappoints or the texture fails to match expectations. The target audience’s age won’t rescue a snack that feels poor value.

Generational research is useful when it helps manufacturers find customers and understand their requirements. It becomes expensive shorthand when the label substitutes for that understanding, encouraging businesses to develop around an assumed identity rather than a purchase people have reason to make.

A launch team should be able to explain precisely why its product needs a particular age target. Otherwise, it risks paying for the extra complexity of a niche while walking past customers willing to buy.