Search among the top café & restaurant brands by number of locations
Join us for a demo where we'll discuss how Realytics can support your business growth and adaptability in changing market conditions
Managing Partner, Global Business Development
Search among the top 10,053 café & restaurant brands by number of locations
Search among the top café & restaurant brands by number of locations
In Cafe & Restaurants
·May – Jul 25
Tealive is in the top 1% of brands
Sample of brands in the same percentile
See what factors influence Tealive performance in the Malaysia and how they change over time
See what factors influence Tealive performance in the Malaysia and how they change over time
Available by subscription
Available by subscription
An analysis of Tealive' competitors in the Malaysia
An analysis of Tealive' competitors in the Malaysia
Top-5 brands that brand's customers also visit
Discover your traffic workload during different times of the day
Join us for a demo where we'll discuss how Realytics can support your business growth and adaptability in changing market conditions
Managing Partner, Global Business Development
In Cafe & Restaurants
In Cafe & Restaurants
Search among the top 10,053 café & restaurant brands by number of locations
Cafe & Restaurants
Market performance shows a brand's share of foot traffic, revealing competitive strength and customer preference in the Cafe & Restaurants industry.
Tealive holds the 99th percentile, marking a leading position in Malaysia's Cafe & Restaurants sector. This high percentile indicates strong competitive performance. Peers in the same range include: 农耕记湖南菜 Nong Geng Ji @ Pavilion, Madam Kwan's, Soru Station, Penang Chendul, DÔME, Donkai - The Exchange TRX.
Customer satisfaction reflects customer loyalty, impacting brand perception and repeat purchases, crucial for Cafe & Restaurants brand like Tealive.
Tealive's overall customer satisfaction is at 52%, a 7pp increase year-over-year. State-wise, Kedah leads at 80%, followed by Perak (73%), Penang (72%), Sabah (63%), and Pahang (55%), indicating varying satisfaction levels across regions, with significant growth in Perak and Penang.
Average check reveals customer spending habits, vital for pricing strategies and revenue optimization in the highly competitive Cafe & Restaurants market.
Tealive's overall average check is 18.8 MYR, a 5% decrease year-over-year. Pahang has the highest average check at 41.3 MYR. Negeri Sembilan, Penang, Kuala Lumpur, and Sarawak follow with 22.3 MYR, 21.2 MYR, 21 MYR and 20 MYR respectively.
Outlet count indicates brand reach and market penetration, reflecting accessibility and expansion efforts in the Cafe & Restaurants sector.
Tealive has the most outlets in Selangor (235), followed by Kuala Lumpur (85), Johor (80), Sabah (53), Perak (52), Penang (51), Kedah (41), Negeri Sembilan (38), Pahang (35), and Sarawak (34). This distribution highlights key regions for Tealive's presence in Malaysia.
Identifying competitors reveals market dynamics and customer preferences, enabling Tealive to refine its competitive strategies and offerings.
Tealive's top competitors based on cross-visitation are KFC (9.55%), ZUS Coffee (9.06%), McDonald's (8.93%), Pizza Hut (3.72%), and Secret Recipe (2.98%). These brands share a customer base with Tealive, highlighting potential areas for competitive focus.
Traffic workload by hours informs staffing and marketing strategies, optimizing resource allocation based on peak demand periods for Cafe & Restaurants.
Tealive experiences peak traffic between 10 AM and 9 PM, with the highest workload recorded between 4 PM and 6 PM. Night hours exhibit significantly lower traffic. This data informs staffing and promotional efforts to maximize efficiency.
Consumer segments highlights the strategic importance of understanding consumer segments to inform targeted marketing and positioning strategies.
Tealive's customer base shows high affinity among women (index 103) and men (index 98). Generation Y (index 105) and Generation Z (index 104) are overrepresented, while Generation X (index 96) has a slightly lower affinity. This suggests targeted marketing should focus on Gen Y and Z.