Power your entire consumer experience. From pre-purchase tools to increase cart-conversion, rapid physical fulfillment saving you days in transit, to post-delivery services that protect your brand loyalty.
We power over $5 billion in commerce every year, and are ready to scale yours.
Enable your commerce with best-in-class software. Track every item, protect every order, and ensure repeat customers with our complete suite of software tools.
Our software was built in tandem with our fulfillment services to provide greater visibility, control, and data to drive your growth.
Are U.S. E-Commerce Brands Delivering on Consumer Expectations?
At A Glance
This report is the culmination of more than
250+
E-COMMERCE TRANSACTIONS
From the most in-demand U.S. brands across four key product categories:
Apparel & Accessories
Beauty & Personal Care
Nutrition & Supplements
Food & Beverage
Pre-purchase
95% of brands had readily available inventory. A contributing factor to this performance is the deliberate build-up of larger stockpiles in response to ongoing trade policy uncertainty and the accelerating shift to domestic fulfillment.
93% of e-commerce brands do not send abandoned cart reminders even though 84% of consumers report abandoning carts. If even just a small percentage of those abandoned carts were recovered through reminders, a brand could earn thousands in incremental monthly revenue.
Post-purchase Communication
56% of consumers prefer receiving order updates and tracking information via SMS, however, only 12% of brands are meeting this baseline expectation.
6% of brands do not provide real-time order tracking information despite it being ranked as a highly essential post-purchase feature.
Shipping and Delivery
58% of consumers want estimated delivery dates but only 1% of brands provide them. Even when a brand’s product quality and its broader shopping experience is strong, uncertainty around delivery timelines can lead to abandoned carts.
14% of brands failed to fulfill their stated delivery promises, largely missing the mark by 7 days on average. These brands are highly at risk of losing ground to competitors that set realistic, prime-like expectations and consistently deliver against them.
Unboxing
12% of the products arrived damaged. Further investigation shows that the issues originated prior to shipping, either during manufacturing, handling at the fulfillment center, or in the use of inadequate protective materials inside otherwise sturdy boxes.
Only 36% of brands included samples or inserts, even though they are among the top drivers of a memorable unboxing experience.
Reverse Logistics
12% of brands had no returns policy. This lack of clarity introduces friction and hesitation, particularly when the brand is unfamiliar or the purchase value is high.
10% of brands imposed restocking fees costing $5 or up to 25% of the item’s price. These brands risk losing customers to those that treat returns as an extension of their value proposition.
Executive Summary
This report presents the findings of a comprehensive mystery shopping study conducted by Stord that evaluates the end-to-end e-commerce experience of leading U.S. brands across four major industries: Nutrition & Supplements, Apparel & Accessories, Beauty & Personal Care, and Food & Beverage. The study assessed performance across the critical elements of the buying journey to benchmark how effectively brands are keeping pace with rising consumer expectations.
Our mystery shopping results point to a consistent imbalance across industries. Brands have invested heavily in digital storefronts, product storytelling, and customer acquisition, but their operational foundations have not kept pace. Many still fall short in meeting even the most basic customer expectations when it comes to fulfillment and the post-purchase experience. While the severity differs by category, what emerges is a consistent trend: most brands are not meeting the rising baseline of delivery speed, transparency, reliability, and personalization that defines consumer trust today.
Understanding this expectations-experience gap matters for at least two reasons. First, they reveal where brands risk undermining conversion despite significant investment in customer acquisition. Second, they highlight where competitive differentiation is now most likely to emerge. Best-in-class e-commerce brands prove that these challenges can be systematically addressed with the right operational infrastructure. The brands that close these gaps in consumer experience will be the ones to capture disproportionate growth and define the next standard in U.S. e-commerce.
Introduction
E-commerce has shifted beyond being an additional retail convenience for digital savvy customers. It is now the default for a growing share of consumer purchases. In 2024, global online retail reached a staggering $6 trillion,1 with U.S. sales accounting for more than 20% of that total.2 Forecasts show no signs of slowing down with U.S. e-commerce sales alone projected to exceed $1.6 trillion by 2027.3 While recent pandemics, wars, and trade policies may influence the accuracy of these forecasts, each of these disruptions has ultimately led to more adoption of e-commerce shopping. As digital transactions become increasingly embedded in everyday life, the standards consumers apply to delivery speed, reliability, and communication have sharpened.
With same-day and next-day delivery becoming normalized through services like Prime, a new delivery benchmark has emerged. For many shoppers, anything longer is viewed as suboptimal. As a result, e-commerce businesses across all verticals now face heightened pressure to meet accelerated delivery expectations, prompting a renewed focus on fulfillment operations as a core driver of customer satisfaction and long-term loyalty.
Stord is The Consumer Experience Company, powering seamless checkout through delivery and returns for today's leading brands. By combining comprehensive commerce enablement technology with high-volume fulfillment services, Stord provides a platform for brands of all sizes to compete with retail giants.
To better understand how brands are adapting to these elevated consumer expectations and how they can close the gap, Stord conducted a comprehensive mystery shopping study. The evaluation covered the end-to-end consumer experience across multiple brands and industries with a particular focus on the 5 key stages of the customer buying journey: (1) pre-purchase, (2) post-purchase communication, (3) shipping and delivery, (4) unboxing, and (5) reverse logistics.
This report offers a detailed, data-backed look into how brands are performing on critical delivery metrics, where gaps exist, and what steps are most urgent to meet the new standards of fulfillment and delivery.
What Is Mystery Shopping
E-commerce has shifted beyond being an additional retail convenience for digital savvy customers. It is now the default for a growing share of consumer purchases. In 2024, global online retail reached a staggering $6 trillion,1 with U.S. sales accounting for more than 20% of that total.2 Forecasts show no signs of slowing down with U.S. e-commerce sales alone projected to exceed $1.6 trillion by 2027.3 While recent pandemics, wars, and trade policies may influence the accuracy of these forecasts, each of these disruptions has ultimately led to more adoption of e-commerce shopping. As digital transactions become increasingly embedded in everyday life, the standards consumers apply to delivery speed, reliability, and communication have sharpened.
With same-day and next-day delivery becoming normalized through services like Prime, a new delivery benchmark has emerged. For many shoppers, anything longer is viewed as suboptimal. As a result, e-commerce businesses across all verticals now face heightened pressure to meet accelerated delivery expectations, prompting a renewed focus on fulfillment operations as a core driver of customer satisfaction and long-term loyalty.
Stord is The Consumer Experience Company, powering seamless checkout through delivery and returns for today's leading brands. By combining comprehensive commerce enablement technology with high-volume fulfillment services, Stord provides a platform for brands of all sizes to compete with retail giants.
To better understand how brands are adapting to these elevated consumer expectations and how they can close the gap, Stord conducted a comprehensive mystery shopping study. The evaluation covered the end-to-end consumer experience across multiple brands and industries with a particular focus on the 5 key stages of the customer buying journey: (1) pre-purchase, (2) post-purchase communication, (3) shipping and delivery, (4) unboxing, and (5) reverse logistics.
This report offers a detailed, data-backed look into how brands are performing on critical delivery metrics, where gaps exist, and what steps are most urgent to meet the new standards of fulfillment and delivery.
Objectives
Stord recognizes that fulfillment and delivery are core value drivers that directly impact conversion, retention, and unit economics. With this in mind, the primary objective of this mystery shopping study was to evaluate the end-to-end performance of leading industry brands, with a focus on operational performance and customer experience across five key stages of the customer buying journey:
Determine the extent to which brands provide clear and accurate visibility into product availability and assess the presence of cart recovery strategies.
Assess the channel consistency and clarity of order confirmation emails and shipping information provided throughout the delivery process.
Compare shipping costs against delivery speed, while assessing a brand’s reliability in meeting stated delivery expectations.
Evaluate the overall unboxing experience by documenting any damage or handling issues to product and packaging, while also assessing branding, personalization, and included extras.
Review the clarity of stated return promises by reviewing policies for indicators such as free returns, restocking fees, or vague and missing terms.
In addition, industry trends were evaluated alongside each of the elements above to contextualize performance against broader market norms and reveal categorical disparities in speed, reliability, and consumer experience.
Mystery Shopping Methodology
Scope
Sample
Data Collection & Analysis
The mystery shopping exercise was conducted across three operational periods: Q3 2024 and Q1 to Q2 2025. No evaluations were performed during Q4 2024 as this period includes Black Friday Cyber Monday (BFCM) and the broader holiday shopping season. These events significantly elevate order volumes and can introduce atypical service patterns, temporary process adjustments, and resourcing that do not reflect a merchant’s standard operating environment.
Moreover, to ensure a geographically representative assessment, orders for each brand were placed for delivery to three regions across the U.S.: the West Coast, Central, and East Coast, represented by California, Texas, and Georgia, respectively. This geographic distribution allowed for a comparative view of whether brands are equipped to meet their stated delivery promises and deliver on consumer expectations consistently nationwide.
Unpacking the Modern Consumer
Mystery shopping provides a clear view of how brands perform in real-world interactions. However, to assess how effectively e-commerce brands deliver on their stated promises, it is essential to first understand what consumers expect from their online shopping experiences. Stord conducted a dedicated consumer survey to capture these expectations and offer benchmarks against the mystery shopping results.
While the full findings of the survey will be published separately in the upcoming proprietary Stord Consumer Expectations Report, here is a summary of the priorities and preferences shaping consumer behavior today:
Cart abandonment is one of the most persistent issues in online retail. The majority of consumers in the survey report having left items in their cart without completing the purchase, underscoring how common this behavior has become. The leading causes stem mostly from high costs and out-of-stock items. Most retailers have attempted to address this challenge through follow-up communication, often in the form of abandoned cart reminders. Nearly 3 in 4 survey respondents reported having received reminder emails from past online transactions, and almost half found these messages compelling enough to return and complete the purchase. This suggests that reminders can be effective in recovering lost sales, though their impact on conversion depends heavily on the execution.
Order visibility has become a baseline expectation when shopping online. Our survey has found that the vast majority of consumers expect real-time tracking information and prefer to receive relevant, timely updates through email, text message, and in-app notifications. Many expect to receive tracking details within hours of purchase, and broken links or missing updates were cited as a top source of frustration. Real-time order tracking is no longer perceived as a value-added feature but rather as a fundamental requirement for establishing trust during the post-purchase stage.
While faster delivery options such as same-day or next-day delivery have become normalized through services like Prime, our survey found that consumers are generally unwilling to pay significant premiums for speed. Free shipping remains a powerful expectation, with many respondents believing free shipping should be unlocked at relatively low cart value thresholds. Most reported that they are willing to add additional items to their cart simply to qualify for free shipping. This underscores that while speed and convenience remain critical, costs also serve as a deciding factor in shaping purchase decisions. Importantly, the willingness to trade delivery speed for lower costs is not universal. It varies by category and the timeliness of consumption. For products where immediacy matters, speed remains non-negotiable. For others, shoppers are willing to trade a longer delivery window in return for lower or no shipping costs. Brands that can flexibly position themselves across this spectrum and offer both cost-efficient options and reliable expedited delivery are best placed to capture and retain customer loyalty.
Consumers place high value on reliable and predictable delivery. The respondents identified packages arriving later than promised and changes to delivery timelines as critical factors that negatively influence their perception of a brand. These findings underscore the importance of transparent and accurate communication of stated delivery promises. Providing precise delivery dates, rather than vague day ranges or business days, and ensuring they are consistently met not only reduces consumer frustration but also reinforces trust in the brand.
For e-commerce brands, building trust and driving conversions begin online, either through a website, app, or social platform. Digital personalization, such as tailored recommendations, customized offers, or targeted messaging, has become an essential lever for attracting customers and nudging them toward purchase. However, once an order is shipped and delivered, the brand association shifts from the digital interaction to the tangible experience. At this stage, packaging and product integrity become direct reflections of a brand’s reliability. When customers receive damaged packaging, or worse, a damaged product, the negative impression often outweighs even the best digital experience. Respondents identified damaged goods as a leading cause of an overall poor delivery experience with a brand. Many consumers have expressed that they would avoid interacting with a brand again if such issues persist or remain unresolved.
A related dimension of this tangible brand experience is unboxing. While often underestimated, the unboxing moment is an opportunity to deepen consumer connection and loyalty. Respondents highlighted secure product presentation as a top priority, with branded or attractive packaging also playing a significant role in shaping perceptions of quality. Here, physical personalization, whether through customized packaging, name-personalized thank-you notes, or customer-relevant product recommendations included as inserts, can make a brand stand out. Beyond functionality, these small but thoughtful touches reinforce the continuity between digital and physical interactions, signaling that the brand not only knows its customers but values them.
Returns have become a routine part of the consumer journey, with a majority of consumers having returned a product at least once. The survey revealed that among all the factors, consumers have a particularly strong sensitivity to return fees and costs. Brands that employ affordable return policies, such as free returns or nominal fees under $5, were perceived as fairer, resulting in a significantly improved trust in the brand.
Overall, consumers are clear about the standards they expect from brands. However, these expectations represent only the baseline standard and not points of differentiation. Brands that fall short of these expectations risk losing customers and margin to competitors who consistently delight and deliver.
The forthcoming Consumer Expectations Report will explore these themes in greater depth, including demographic and behavioral differences that further showcase how consumer priorities and preferences are shaping e-commerce.
The Current State of E-Commerce
The following key insights examine how e-commerce brands are performing against consumer expectations across the most critical elements of the buying journey. The analysis highlights where brands are meeting the mark, where gaps persist, and how these gaps are shaping consumer behavior and loyalty.
Inventory Availability
Stord’s Mystery Shopping results showed consistently strong inventory performance across e-commerce brands, with 95% of products in stock, only 5% at low stock levels, and no instances of products being out of stock. Considering that product unavailability is the second leading cause of online cart abandonment, this level of availability indicates that brands are proactively safeguarding against one of the most critical drivers of lost sales.
A likely factor behind this performance is the deliberate build-up of inventory. Many brands are holding larger stockpiles in response to ongoing trade policy uncertainty, rising supply chain costs, and lessons learned from past shortages during global disruptions. Recent developments such as the tightening of U.S. customs enforcement and the end of the de minimis exemption have only accelerated this move toward strategic stockpiling and domestic or nearshore fulfillment. By positioning inventory closer to major consumer markets in the U.S., brands reduce regulatory exposure while gaining a competitive advantage in delivery speed, responsiveness, and last-mile cost efficiency. Improved forecasting models, diversified sourcing strategies, and stronger supplier relationships have also played a role in ensuring that products are available when customers are ready to purchase.
However, the benefits of high availability must be carefully balanced against the risks of overstocking. Excess inventory ties up working capital, inflates storage and handling costs, and can lead to markdowns or promotions to clear slower-moving SKUs. For seasonal or trend-driven categories in particular, excess stock can quickly erode margins.
Overall, the combination of strategic stockpiling and smarter supply chain management has enabled brands to meet consumer expectations for product availability. The challenge ahead will be sustaining this advantage for the long term.
Abandoned Cart Reminders
Cart abandonment remains a major challenge in e-commerce, but most brands are failing to address it effectively. Stord’s Mystery Shopping study revealed that 93% of brands do not send abandoned cart reminders. This gap is striking when set against consumer behavior data. Although 84% of consumers report abandoning carts, 42% say a reminder would prompt them to return and complete their purchase.
To illustrate the impact, consider a brand generating 1,000 orders per month with an average order value (AOV) of $50. If 84% of carts are abandoned, those 1,000 completed purchases represent only 16% of total carts created, meaning the brand is losing an estimated 5,250 potential orders every month. Now, if reminders were triggered with empathy and relevance, the captured volume generated from recovered carts could lead to more than 260 purchases which can translate to roughly $13,000 in incremental revenue on that volume alone.
Abandoned Cart Recovery Calculator
Up to 42% of customers say a reminder would prompt them to return and complete their purchase. Calculate your potential earnings.
Brands are effectively allowing nearly half of potential buyers who express willingness to reconsider their purchase to slip away. Instead of addressing this conversion gap, many continue to invest heavily in customer acquisition through paid advertising and promotional incentives, while failing to leverage a relatively low-cost retention tool that directly addresses one of the most frequent points of friction in the online shopping journey.
Abandoned cart reminders represent one of the simplest and most cost-effective ways for e-commerce brands to align with consumer expectations, recover lost sales, and improve profitability. The current lack of adoption signals a clear opportunity for improvement. Well-timed and personalized reminders can serve as a final nudge that restores momentum and reinforces purchase intent.
Post-Purchase Communication
Order Updates
Post-purchase communication is a critical moment in the shopping experience that shapes consumer confidence and brand trust. Data from our Mystery Shopping study showed that while most e-commerce brands reliably provide updates, there were meaningful gaps in how these updates were delivered compared to consumer preferences.
Stord’s Mystery Shopping results revealed that:
This indicates that most brands are meeting baseline expectations but they are not fully aligning with consumer preferences for multi-channel communication.
SMS provides immediacy and convenience that email alone cannot deliver. Expanding into text and in-app channels presents a clear opportunity to differentiate and better meet customer expectations.
Tracking Information
Delivery tracking represents another critical dimension in the post-purchase communication stage. Our Mystery Shopping findings revealed that
94% of brands provide tracking information as part of their standard communication. Since nearly all sampled brands provide tracking, the competitive edge will come from how it is delivered. The degree of differentiation will be measured in terms of speed of availability, real-time accuracy, ease of access (e.g., mobile-friendly links), and proactive updates. For the small share of brands that do not provide real-time tracking, the gap in reliability is glaringly evident.
Overall, e-commerce brands that provide timely, consistent, multi-channel communication and order updates strengthen their post-purchase experience. Brands that fail to meet these expectations, by contrast, risk generating unnecessary “Where is my order?” (WISMO) inquiries. Each of those calls can cost approximately $5 to answer and resolve.4 For a brand processing 5,000 monthly orders, if even just 10% of those customers reach out with a WISMO inquiry, that's $2,500 more in support costs every month. By providing customers with automated notifications, accessible tracking pages, and updates across multiple channels, brands can significantly reduce the need for customers to reach out at all. Not only does this lower support costs, but it also frees up customer service teams to focus on higher-value interactions, such as upsells or loyalty-building engagements.
The Delivery Promise
How brands communicate delivery timelines is a decisive factor in conversion. From the results of Stord’s forthcoming Consumer Experience report, 58% of shoppers want to see an exact delivery date before committing to a purchase, while only 10% find value in vague indicators such as business days or broad day ranges (e.g., “3-5 business days” or “up to 5 days”). Most brands, however, are falling short of these expectations. Our Mystery Shopping study revealed that only 1% of e-commerce brands provide customers with clear estimated delivery dates (EDD).
Instead, 45% use day ranges, often phrased vaguely (e.g., “up to 5 days”). Our study even found that some brands provide 1-week and even 2-week ranges for the delivery window, which leaves customers highly unsure of when their order will actually arrive. The other 14% of brands communicate timelines using business days, which can be confusing since most shoppers do not instinctively account for weekends or holidays. For example, many may interpret “2 business days” as simply “2 days,” leading to missed expectations and frustration. Most concerning of all, however, is that 40% of brands made no delivery promise at all.
2 OUT OF 5 BRANDS DON’T STATE WHEN AN ORDER WILL ARRIVE
The impact is particularly pronounced for time-sensitive purchases such as gifts, seasonal items, or products tied to specific events. Even when product quality and the broader shopping experience are strong, uncertainty around delivery often leads to cart abandonment. In fact, unclear delivery times rank among the top 10 reasons customers abandon their carts. E-commerce brands that fail to meet this standard risk losing both immediate sales and long-term brand equity to competitors who recognize delivery promises as an integral part of the customer experience. In contrast, brands that employ EDD build consumer confidence at the point of purchase and effectively transform delivery from a potential source of anxiety into an opportunity to strengthen brand trust.
The Costs of Fulfillment
Free Shipping vs the Cost Threshold
Stord’s Mystery Shopping findings revealed that only 12% of brands offer free shipping with no minimum purchase requirement, while the majority rely on threshold-based models. The most common breakpoint was $50 (24% of brands), followed by $75 (12%), and then $40 (8%), with other thresholds across the sample ranging from as low as $0 to as high as $150. In contrast, consumer sentiment indicates a tighter band of acceptable thresholds. More than 35% of the surveyed consumers believe free shipping should be offered between $25 and $39, a level lower than where most brands set their incentives today. In fact, only a total of 11% currently meet this expectation.
This gap suggests that while brands are optimizing thresholds to balance cost-to-serve and margin protection, they may be misjudging consumer price sensitivity. The minority of brands that offer unconditional free shipping are effectively using it as a competitive differentiator. While this model introduces higher fulfillment costs, it also reduces friction in the purchase journey and can increase average order frequency which can offset margin pressures over time. Savvy brands can also leverage economies of scale through partnerships with reliable fulfillment providers. They can also try to benchmark from the small subset of players who have sidestepped the threshold challenge altogether using subscription models where “free” shipping is bundled into a broader membership offer as a way to reframe fulfillment costs into a form of customer value. Conversely, those with higher thresholds (approaching $100 or more) may preserve short-term margins but risk cart abandonment particularly when competing against platforms that have conditioned consumers to expect low or zero cart value thresholds to achieve the free shipping incentive.
Shipping Cost vs Delivery Speed
The trade-off between shipping cost and delivery speed remains one of the most critical dynamics shaping purchase behavior in e-commerce.
Our proprietary dataset showed that for brands offering free shipping, the average delivery speed was 5 days. This is a clear indication that free shipping is often subsidized by slower fulfillment. Conversely, brands that promised same-day or next-day delivery charged a median of $11 per order (reaching as high as $65), highlighting the cost premium associated with speed.
Consumer sentiment, however, reveals a consistent unwillingness to pay significantly more for faster delivery. For same-day delivery, 30% of consumers expected it at no extra cost, with only 17% willing to pay a small premium not exceeding $5. A similar pattern emerged for next-day delivery, where 34% expected it free, and 23% of consumers were open to paying extra. The expectation of “fast and free” becomes even more pronounced as delivery timelines extend. Nearly two-thirds of consumers expect 3-5 day delivery at no additional cost, and this rises to 76% once delivery windows reach 5-10 days.
The data points to a fundamental tension. Consumers value speed but are reluctant to pay for it, creating a structural challenge for brands attempting to differentiate on ultra-fast fulfillment. The exponential increase in the share of consumers unwilling to pay as delivery windows lengthen suggests that, beyond a certain point, speed loses its incremental value relative to cost. In other words, free shipping outweighs faster delivery in most purchase decisions.
Consumers are willing to wait slightly longer if it means avoiding additional costs. For brands, this reinforces the importance of segmenting fulfillment strategies. Premium speed delivery remains strategically valuable for time-sensitive purchases or high-value customers, where immediacy enhances the overall experience. At the same time, reliable delivery within a 3-5 day window, ideally free, aligns best with broader consumer expectations. In practice, the most effective approach is not “fast versus free,” but offering customers the flexibility to choose: free and predictable when speed is less critical, and paid premium options when urgency matters.
Delivery Promise vs Actual Performance
Stord’s Mystery Shopping results found a clear misalignment between stated delivery promises and actual performance.
Our findings revealed that only 34% of orders were delivered as promised, with an additional 12% arriving earlier than expected. Together, fewer than half of transactions reflected brands meeting or exceeding their stated delivery commitments. Notably, just 7% of brands both promised and successfully fulfilled same-day or next-day delivery. This is in stark contrast to the prime-like standards in delivery speed expected by the majority of consumers. This is a very clear signal that rapid fulfillment is still more a marketing message than operational reality for a significant share of e-commerce brands.
But what is most concerning is that 40% made no delivery promise at all. This absence of commitment is concerning, as it leaves customers uncertain about when their orders will arrive and deprives brands of a critical lever to build trust. Several factors may explain this gap. Some brands may lack the operational systems and data integration required to generate accurate delivery estimates at checkout. Others may be deliberately avoiding commitments to reduce the risk of service-level failures. In some cases, logistics complexity, such as fragmented fulfillment networks and reliance on third-party carriers, may make it difficult to guarantee timelines with confidence. Interestingly, 9% of these “no-promise” orders did deliver at prime-like speed, suggesting that some brands have the capability to exceed delivery expectations but fail to communicate it effectively.
The decision to not communicate a delivery promise shifts the burden of uncertainty onto the consumer. This is especially problematic given that many competitors are increasingly transparent about shipping timelines, even if those timelines are conservative. Brands that fail to provide clarity risk losing ground to those that set realistic expectations and consistently deliver against them.
At the other end of the spectrum, 14% of brands failed to meet their stated delivery promises, with delays averaging up to 7 days. The most damaging outcomes came from brands that explicitly promised same-day or next-day delivery but missed the mark by days, with some delays even reaching up to a full week. Such failures substantially damage a brand’s overall value proposition.
Consumer sentiment from our survey underscores the importance of reliable fulfillment. The number one cause of a poor delivery experience was a package arriving later than promised, followed closely by sudden changes in the delivery date. Both frustrations point directly to brands’ inability to set realistic delivery expectations and maintain consistency.
Following a poor delivery experience, only 26% of consumers indicated they would overlook a rare issue. A majority tied their continued loyalty to how quickly and effectively the brand resolved the problem, either through the quality of customer support received or the incentives provided to make up for the bad experience.
In summary, the evidence points to a simple but critical conclusion: consumers prioritize reliability over speed alone. Brands that overpromise and underdeliver face heightened risk of reputational damage and churn. Conversely, those that consistently set clear, achievable expectations and deliver against them can build trust, even without competing on ultra-fast shipping.
Product & Packaging Integrity
Across all brands and transactions studied by Stord, the majority of orders arrived in good condition. Overall, 88% of products were received without any issues, while 12% arrived damaged. Packaging outcomes were slightly stronger, with 94% of packages intact and 6% damaged.
Interestingly, packaging integrity did not always align with product conditions. While only 6% of orders arrived with visibly damaged packaging, most of these cases did not result in product damage. Conversely, a portion of the products were found to be damaged despite the packaging arriving intact. This suggests that the issues originated prior to shipping, whether during manufacturing, handling at the fulfillment center, or in the use of inadequate protective materials inside otherwise sturdy boxes. For brands, this highlights the need to not only invest in reliable packaging but also ensure rigorous quality control and protective measures within the fulfillment process.
Although the majority of transactions met expectations, even relatively low levels of damage can overshadow an otherwise positive shopping experience. Damaged packages ranked among the Top 5 issues that contributed to a poor delivery experience. Consumer expectations around product presentation further heighten the stakes. When asked what defines a positive unboxing experience, respondents identified secure product presentation as one of the most important drivers. Customers expect items to arrive well-protected and presented in a manner that conveys care and reliability. Instances of damage, even when isolated, undermine this expectation and diminish confidence in the brand. In fact, 85% of consumers report they would never shop with a brand again after a poor delivery experience. Even when brands deliver on speed, cost, and convenience, a single instance of product or packaging damage can outweigh all other positives, leaving customers not only frustrated but unwilling to trust the brand with future purchases.
Protecting both the outer package and the product inside is not just a matter of presentation, but part of the implicit contract between customer and brand. When an item arrives late, the experience can sometimes be salvaged if the product itself meets expectations. But when it arrives broken or damaged, the failure is absolute. The brand has not only disappointed but created a problem for the customer to solve: what to do next, how to replace it, and whether to trust the brand again. Broken is simply broken, and once that trust is compromised, it is difficult to recover. For brands, this reinforces that packaging is not a cost center to be minimized, but a strategic lever for customer satisfaction, retention, and ultimately, profitability.
Branded & Personalized Unboxing Experiences
Unboxing is one of the most visible and emotionally resonant moments in the e-commerce experience. It is often the first physical interaction a customer has with a brand, making it a key opportunity to reinforce brand identity.
However, Stord’s Mystery Shopping results revealed that only 56% of e-commerce brands are leveraging branded packaging, while only 36% are including samples or inserts to enhance the unboxing moment. While these numbers suggest that many brands recognize the role of packaging in reinforcing brand identity, there remains a significant gap between consumer expectations and current industry practice. We have found that consumers place high value on both branded or attractive packaging and personal touches such as thank-you notes, free samples, or inserts. These elements not only elevate the customer’s perception of value but also create a sense of exclusivity and personalization that can drive repeat engagement and long-term loyalty.
However, branded or attractive packaging and personal touches were ranked as the Top 3 and Top 6, respectively, on what constitutes as an unforgettable unboxing experience.
At the same time, the rise of AI-driven personalization is reshaping what customers expect from the unboxing experience. Leading brands are beginning to use AI to tailor product samples, recommend inserts, and even generate personalized thank-you notes or QR codes that unlock individualized digital content. This shift moves personalization beyond a generic gesture into a data-driven extension of the shopping journey. For example, instead of every customer receiving the same sample, AI can match the insert to purchase history, browsing behavior, or predicted preferences, transforming unboxing into a curated experience unique to each buyer.
As AI adoption and the demand for hyper-personalization accelerate, the gap between brands that embrace branded, personalized unboxing experiences and those that do not will become increasingly visible to consumers. Brands need to view packaging and inserts as strategic investments for the customer experience. Those that integrate branded design with thoughtful AI-powered personalization into their fulfillment process will be better positioned to exceed expectations and differentiate in an increasingly competitive e-commerce environment.
Reverse Logistics
Returns remain a critical pressure point in e-commerce, both logistically and in terms of the consumer experience. Our survey found that 61% of customers have returned a product, signaling how returns are a common occurrence in the online buying journey. Yet many brands fall short. Stord’s Mystery Shopping study revealed that while 62% of brands published a clear return policy, 26% left theirs vague, inconsistent, or buried in fine print. Even more troubling, 12% had no policy at all. For consumers, this lack of clarity creates friction and hesitation particularly when the brand is unfamiliar or the purchase value is high.
In terms of the return process, 57% of brands offered a dedicated online portal that helped streamline the process. In contrast, 36% required customers to email support to initiate a return, and 7% offered no clear method at all. For consumers used to seamless digital interactions, these added efforts heighten frustration and amplify what is already a disappointing and stressful brand experience.
Moreover, refund practices remain heavily weighted against the customer. Our findings revealed that 74% of brands provided a full refund of the item cost but excluded the original shipping fee and required customers to cover return shipping, typically costing $5-10. Only 3% of brands offered free returns with shipping included. Beyond return shipping, 7% of brands deducted a return label fee costing between $5-8 from the refund amount, while 10% imposed restocking fees costing $5 or up to 25% of the item’s price. This approach falls well short of consumer expectations. Our survey results confirmed that the top frustrations with returns are high shipping costs and the need to pay for return labels.
It is understandable, however, why most brands hesitate to absorb the full cost of returns. Generous return policies can drive up reverse logistics expenses, compress margins, and create opportunities for abuse. By contrast, some brands treat returns as an extension of their value proposition rather than purely a cost burden. One standout brand, for example, offered 110% refunds under a money-back guarantee,5 signaling confidence in their product quality and reframing reverse logistics as a loyalty driver rather than a deterrent.
Taken together, the findings suggest that reverse logistics remains one of the weakest links in the e-commerce value chain. While brands have invested heavily in front-end speed and convenience, post-purchase processes are often complex, costly, and opaque for the customer. Given the frequency of returns and the impact of the return experience on brand reliability, reverse logistics represents a critical area for differentiation and long-term customer retention.
Request a Custom Mystery Shopping Report for Your Brand
E-commerce performance is not uniform across sectors. Each industry reflects its own structural dynamics shaped by product characteristics, unique customer expectations, and operational realities. By examining benchmarks and best practices, brands can better understand where they stand against competitors in their categories and identify opportunities to close the gaps in customer expectations.
Nutrition & Supplements
With 84% of sampled brands in the Nutrition & Supplements category not deploying abandoned cart reminders, the industry is overlooking a clear opportunity to drive conversion. In a category where purchases are often routine replenishments, this omission creates a structural weakness. Abandoned carts are not always signals of customer hesitation; more often, they reflect timing misalignments, distractions, or deferred purchases until a consumer’s current supply is depleted. Automated reminders or subscription models can recapture these moments and reinforce habitual buying patterns that can increase customer lifetime value (CLV). Without them, brands leave recurring demand to chance, creating openings for competitors to capture market share.
Free shipping thresholds in the Nutrition & Supplements category range from $40 to $150, with a median of $75. This places the industry at the pricier end compared to other product categories. For first-time buyers, particularly those testing taste or efficacy, these thresholds introduce friction. The effect is compounded by price dynamics: a single tub of protein powder can easily exceed $70, meaning many customers already qualify for free shipping. Yet brands often frame their messaging as meeting a threshold rather than a value delivered. A blanket promise of free shipping on all supplements would shift perception from conditional to inclusive, positioning free shipping as a core benefit rather than an earned perk.
The implications differ for trial products. Bulk sizes and higher price points can deter experimentation when consumers are uncertain about flavor or effectiveness. Offering free shipping on smaller sample packets could reduce this barrier, accelerate trial, and increase conversion to full-size purchases. Subscription models remain an exception by bundling free shipping to encourage retention, but the lack of a coherent strategy across one-time orders suggests many nutritional brands underutilize shipping policies as a lever for both customer acquisition and loyalty.
Fulfillment performance in Nutrition & Supplements remains inconsistent. Only 38% of brands reliably met delivery commitments, 20% delivered early, 7% failed to deliver on time, and 35% made no delivery promise at all. For a category built around predictable consumption cycles (e.g., monthly supplement refills or protein powder reordered after a set number of uses), reliability is a baseline expectation. Customers expect products to arrive in sync with their consumption rhythm. Without clear and dependable delivery commitments, brands risk leaving customers in a trust gap uncertain about whether essential health products will arrive when desired. This disconnect places nutrition and supplements behind categories where delivery is less time-sensitive yet executed more reliably.
Nearly 6 in 10 brands (59%) in the Nutrition & Supplements category did not use branded packaging or personalized inserts. In a market where credibility and differentiation are critical, especially amid the rise of private-label and generic competitors, this is a missed opportunity. A branded, thoughtful unboxing experience can signal quality, reinforce compliance and safety, and deepen brand equity in a category where trust is paramount.
Part of this gap may stem from the size and weight of the packaging itself. Large tubs and heavy pouches make fully branded boxes less practical and more costly to ship. But alternatives exist. Branded inserts, tailored product literature, or even small lifestyle cues within otherwise plain packaging can deliver the same signals of quality at a fraction of the cost. For nutritional brands, the choice is not just binary between expensive, fully branded packaging and generic cardboard. Inserts and lightweight brand touches can be a middle path that reinforces credibility while remaining operationally practical.
Return policies remain restrictive. Twelve percent of Nutrition & Supplements brands offered no return policy, and another 24% left terms unclear. Although 20% offered free returns, most required products to be unopened, which is not surprising given that once a powder or capsule is opened, resale and safety assurance are compromised. Yet this constraint underscores the importance of lowering the trial barrier in other ways. Offering sample packs, variety bundles, or smaller format options allows customers to test flavors and efficacy before committing to multi-pound tubs or multi-month supplies. In a category where trust and repeat purchase are critical, flexible trial formats can serve as a more powerful lever than lenient return policies.
Bottom Line: Trust and Trial Are Missed Value Drivers
Overall, the results point to a category underutilizing two of Nutrition & Supplements’ most critical growth drivers: trust and trial. Consumers approach this category with heightened expectations of reliability, safety, and consistency, yet many brands are failing to reinforce those expectations through predictable delivery, transparent return policies, and trust-building unboxing experiences. At the same time, high shipping thresholds, restrictive returns, and the absence of cart recovery mechanisms discourage first-time buyers from testing out products, which constrain acquisition.
Operational reliability and customer-friendly policies are not peripheral; they are central to winning and retaining consumers in a category defined by habitual replenishment and long-term trust. Closing these gaps presents a meaningful opportunity to strengthen conversion rates and expand customer lifetime value.
Apparel & Accessories
Out of the sampled Apparel & Accessories brands, 89% did not deploy abandoned cart reminders, marking the second weakest performance across industries studied. In a category with high browsing and comparison behavior, cart recovery communications are critical to converting intent into purchase. Relative to other industries, apparel is losing a greater share of high-intent consumers, despite facing fewer structural barriers to trial than consumable goods. The lack of adoption suggests many Apparel & Accessories brands are leaving substantial revenue unrealized.
Free shipping thresholds in this segment ranged from $30 to $85, with a median of $50. Apparel stands out as the most generous category in eliminating thresholds altogether. A potential reason for this divergence lies in packaging economics. Apparel is lightweight and often shipped in low-cost poly mailer bags, making free shipping financially viable. By contrast, heavier or bulkier categories face higher fulfillment and transportation costs that push thresholds upward. This structural difference highlights how category-specific unit economics shape not only shipping policies but also broader strategies for customer acquisition and retention.
Only 42% of apparel brands met their delivery promises. Though this is significantly better than other industries, it is still below what consumers expect in a trend-driven category. 21% of orders from this industry were delayed, and worse, 26% did not provide a delivery promise at all. In fast fashion where purchases are often tied to specific occasions or seasons, delays or missed and unclear delivery promises risk not just dissatisfaction but irrelevance. Brands that fail to consistently meet delivery standards undermine the immediacy that drives fashion consumption.
Eighty-nine percent of apparel brands shipped products without branded packaging or personalized inserts. This is a striking gap given that fashion purchases are often emotionally driven, and unboxing can serve as an extension of brand identity. By neglecting this moment, brands are missing the opportunity to elevate the product from commodity to experience. This is in stark contrast to luxury and premium players that consistently leverage packaging as part of their value proposition.
Returns are apparel’s standout advantage. Apparel brands recognize the inevitability of returns, with 74% providing clear policies, the highest among industries studied. Most require items to be unworn, unwashed, undamaged, and with tags intact. While these conditions may seem restrictive, they are broadly aligned with customer expectations in fashion, where products are tried on but not always kept. Unlike categories such as beauty or food, apparel inherently involves higher trial-and-error due to size, fit, and style preferences, which are factors that cannot always be accurately judged online.
Notably, 28% of brands offered extended return windows of up to 100 or even 365 days. At face value, this seems to invite higher risk by stretching the eligibility period of returns. In practice, however, it is a clever trust-building tactic. Longer return windows allow customers to purchase in advance for future seasons, gifts, or events, while reducing the immediate pressure to decide. It also simultaneously lowers the likelihood of actual returns, as many shoppers will likely forget or lose the motivation to send items back months later. This return policy strategy demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of consumer behavior.
Bottom Line: Reliability and Brand Experience Are Untapped Levers
The apparel and accessories industry has invested heavily in flexible shipping and returns, aligning with the trial-and-error nature of fashion purchases. Yet two critical gaps remain: operational reliability and brand experience. Failure to consistently meet delivery promises and neglect of the unboxing experience undermine both consumer trust and emotional connection. To win in this category, brands must go beyond transactional flexibility and deliver on the speed, reliability, and branded experiences that consumers increasingly view as inseparable from the product itself.
Beauty & Personal Care
None of the Beauty & Personal Care brands sampled deployed abandoned cart reminders. This is a striking gap in a category driven by discretionary purchases, impulse buys, and heavy browsing behavior. Without reminders, brands lose the chance to re-engage consumers at the moment of highest purchase intent, undercutting conversion rates in an industry where decision-making is often emotional and influenced by low switching costs.
Free shipping thresholds ranged between $50 and $75, with a median of $65. While thresholds at this level align with prestige beauty and multi-item baskets, they sit above the average cart size for single-product or trial purchases. In a category where consumers often test new products in small increments, such thresholds can create friction or, conversely, nudge customers toward sampling more items to reach the minimum cart value for free shipping. Whether this serves as a deterrent or a growth lever depends on execution. It is a delicate, data-driven decision that requires close monitoring of conversion rates to ensure thresholds are delivering the intended effect. Brands that calibrate free shipping thresholds to balance trial, discovery, and profitability are better positioned to capture a greater share of first-time buyers.
Delivery reliability in the beauty sector significantly lags behind consumer expectations. Only 28% of brands consistently met delivery promises, 17% experienced delays, and 50% made no commitment at all. For consumers replenishing essential personal care items or purchasing beauty products for time-sensitive occasions, this lack of clarity erodes confidence. In a category where reputation and trust are core to loyalty, the absence of reliable delivery commitments is particularly damaging.
Beauty stands out for its balanced approach to branded packaging, with 51% of brands investing in personalized unboxing experiences. This reflects the category’s deep ties to social media culture, where packaging aesthetics and presentation are frequently shared and reviewed. Unlike other industries, beauty brands understand that the unboxing moment extends the product narrative.
Seven percent of deliveries from Beauty & Personal Care brands arrived with damaged products, which is the highest incidence rate across all industries studied. The fragility of beauty products (e.g., glass containers, pumps, liquid formulations) contributes to this vulnerability, but it also highlights insufficient investment in protective packaging and quality control. What stands out is the divergence between branding and protection. Many beauty brands excel in crafting aesthetically compelling packaging designed to delight consumers and perform well in the “shareability” economy. Yet, this investment in beauty and design is sometimes undermined by insufficient attention to structural durability. The result is that products arrive in packaging that looks premium, but fails to consistently protect the product itself. Closing this gap will be essential for beauty brands to translate their strength in aesthetics into brand reliability.
Return policies in Beauty & Personal Care remain highly fragmented. While 68% of brands provided clear terms, the conditions varied widely from accepting gently used products to only allowing returns on unopened items, with bundled or kit purchases frequently excluded. Return windows were equally diverse, ranging from 14 to 365 days, though 72% of brands concentrated around 30 days. Unlike apparel, which has gravitated toward broadly consistent standards, beauty brands appear less influenced by competitors’ norms and more driven by their own product portfolios and risk management priorities. Return policies in this industry tend to reflect the brand’s positioning and strategic intent.
Bottom Line: Beauty Brands Win on Experience, Lose on Reliability
Beauty & Personal Care brands have effectively invested in packaging and presentation, aligning with the industry’s reliance on emotional drivers and social influence. However, they consistently underperform on operational fundamentals such as abandoned cart recovery, shipping thresholds, delivery reliability, and product integrity. For a category where consumer trust, trial, and repeat purchase cycles are critical, these gaps represent a structural vulnerability. Brands in this industry that bind their strength in experience with disciplined operational execution will be best positioned to sustain loyalty in an increasingly competitive, socially-influenced market.
Food & Beverage
A majority of Food & Beverage brands do not deploy abandoned cart reminders despite the category’s high replenishment cadence and time-sensitive purchases. Flight-of-fancy treats, pantry staples, and beverage replenishments all benefit from timely nudges that re-engage consumers before perishable intent cools. Without them, brands forfeit recurring revenue opportunities and lose share to competitors who surface at the point of reconsideration.
Free shipping minimums averaged $60 across the Food & Beverage cohort, with most thresholds clustering between $50 and $70. While these levels align with grocery delivery baskets, they are significantly higher than single-SKU discovery buys that drive trial. Brands that rely on large thresholds to protect margins risk suppressing first-time orders. By contrast, tiered incentives or bundle-based thresholds can balance cost-to-serve with growth while encouraging multi-item baskets that increase lifetime value.
Only 31% of Food & Beverage brands consistently met their delivery promises. Perishability heightens consumer anxiety around timing, making delays or vague commitments especially damaging. For replenishment cycles tied to household usage or special occasions, unreliable delivery erodes trust quickly and sends shoppers to omnichannel competitors with in-store pickup or faster delivery infrastructure.
Most Food & Beverage shipments relied on utilitarian packaging designed for protection rather than presentation. While cold-chain integrity and product safety are non-negotiable, the lack of branded touches or educational inserts misses an opportunity to reinforce brand identity, cross-sell complementary items, or educate consumers on preparation. Taste-driven categories that win on experience can extend that narrative through copy, recipes, or sampling that turns a delivery into a touchpoint.
Return policies in Food & Beverage skew restrictive for understandable reasons, yet most brands provide little guidance beyond “no returns.” The result is consumer uncertainty—particularly when trialing new products—which can depress conversion. Clear satisfaction guarantees, partial credits, or “try another flavor” exchanges can offset the operational risks while preserving trust and loyalty.
Bottom Line: Operational Rigor Over Customer Flexibility
Food & Beverage brands lean heavily toward operational safeguards at the expense of consumer expectations and first-time trials. While these measures are understandable given the perishable nature of the products in this category, they limit acquisition potential and weaken loyalty-building touchpoints. The strategic imperative for brands in this sector is to find ways to balance product integrity with customer-centric design. Those that introduce creative trial models, clearer delivery promises, and trust-building packaging will be better positioned to scale in an increasingly competitive market.
Closing the Gaps in Consumer Experience
Stord’s Mystery Shopping findings highlight a stark reality consumers expect everything. They want speed and flexibility in delivery, transparency in returns, branded experiences that feel personal, and risk-free trial mechanisms, without having to pay for premium. Yet for brands, the path to meeting these expectations varies widely. Each industry faces distinct structural challenges that shape how these demands can be met.
However, regardless of vertical, the true challenge is execution at scale. Meeting these rising expectations requires not only creativity in customer engagement and acquisition but also operational capabilities that can adapt to unique industry needs. Stord has been building decades of infrastructure and expertise to help close these gaps in consumer experience. With an integrated fulfillment network, brands can position inventory closer to consumers, thereby reducing delivery times and costs. Advanced Order Management System (OMS) and Warehouse Management System (WMS) capabilities provide the control and visibility needed to mitigate perishability risks, maintain inventory accuracy, and safeguard order integrity. Stord’s packaging and kitting solutions enable brands to deliver differentiated experiences through AI-powered hyper-personalized branded inserts, curated kits, or subscription-ready bundles, without the operational complexity and added overhead. And with reliable reverse logistics capabilities, even restrictive categories can address consumer concerns seamlessly.
Closing the gaps in consumer experience demands more than incremental changes. It requires disciplined execution tailored to industry realities backed by infrastructure that enables scale. The brands that move fastest to align customer expectations with what their operations can reliably deliver will set the new standard for e-commerce.
