Search among the top 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
See what factors influence Krispy Krunchy Chicken performance in the United States and how they change over time
See what factors influence Krispy Krunchy Chicken performance in the United States and how they change over time
Available by subscription
Available by subscription
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 Cafés & Restaurants
In Cafés & Restaurants
In Cafés & Restaurants
·Jun – Aug 25
Krispy Krunchy Chicken is in the top 1% of brands
Sample of brands in the same percentile
An analysis of Krispy Krunchy Chicken' competitors in the United States
An analysis of Krispy Krunchy Chicken' competitors in the United States
Top-5 brands that brand's customers also visit
Search among the top brands by number of locations
Cafés & Restaurants
Market Performance reveals brand's share of foot traffic, showing its competitive strength and customer preference in the Cafe & Restaurants industry.
Krispy Krunchy Chicken is a leading brand with a market performance percentile of 99 in the United States. This signifies strong customer preference compared to peers like Huey Magoo's Chicken Tenders, Mr. & Mrs. Crab, Taziki's Mediterranean Cafe, California Pizza Kitchen, Shoney's, and Penn Station East Coast Subs, all positioned at the same high percentile.
Customer satisfaction (CSAT) is crucial as it reflects customer loyalty and impacts brand reputation and revenue within the Cafe & Restaurants sector.
Krispy Krunchy Chicken's overall CSAT is 76%, a slight increase year-over-year. Kansas shows the highest CSAT at 100%, followed by Indiana (89%) and Wisconsin (84%). Pennsylvania's CSAT decreased to 82%. These location-specific insights help tailor strategies to boost satisfaction in different regions.
Average check measures how much customers spend per visit, influencing revenue and profitability within the competitive Cafe & Restaurants market.
The overall average check for Krispy Krunchy Chicken is $17.90, up 13.2% year-over-year. Pennsylvania shows the highest average check ($35.40), while Nevada, Virginia and Texas has the lowest. This data helps identify upselling opportunities and pricing strategies in specific locations.
Outlet count indicates brand reach and market presence, reflecting growth and expansion within the Cafe & Restaurants landscape.
Krispy Krunchy Chicken has 270 outlets in Texas and 262 in California, demonstrating its strongest presence in these states. Louisiana and Georgia have 200 and 195 locations respectively, indicating substantial regional coverage and expansion opportunities.
Identifying competitors through cross-visitation patterns allows for strategic benchmarking and competitive analysis in the Cafe & Restaurants industry.
McDonald's (20.17%) is the top competitor for Krispy Krunchy Chicken in terms of cross-visitation, followed by Taco Bell (8.61%), Burger King (7.98%), Wendy's (7.77%), and Starbucks (5.95%). This indicates that customers of Krispy Krunchy Chicken also frequently visit these establishments.
Analyzing traffic workload by hour reveals peak demand times, enabling optimized staffing and resource allocation in the Cafe & Restaurants setting.
Krispy Krunchy Chicken experiences peak traffic between 10 AM and 6 PM, with the highest workload around 1 PM (47.99%). Traffic is lowest in the early morning hours (0-4 AM), guiding operational adjustments for efficiency.
Understanding consumer segments by gender and generation enables targeted marketing, tailored offerings, and improved customer engagement in Cafe & Restaurants.
Women are overrepresented (79) among Krispy Krunchy Chicken consumers, while men are significantly overrepresented (119). Gen X is overrepresented (119) , while Gen Y (90) and Gen Z (94) are slightly underrepresented, indicating different generational preferences.