Target has eliminated its 12-year price matching policy effective July 28, 2025. No more matching Amazon prices.
No more Walmart comparisons.
Only internal price adjustments between Target stores and Target.com within 14 days of purchase.
Target’s internal analysis revealed something crucial: price matching trains customers to disloyalty. The policy was conditioning shoppers to hunt for better deals instead of trusting Target’s value proposition.
Why Target Abruptly Ended Its Price Matching
Target’s sales declined from $24.5 billion in Q1 2024 to $23.8 billion in Q1 2025. That’s nearly a billion dollars in lost revenue.
Comparable sales dropped 3.8%. Store traffic fell 5.7%. Even digital growth slowed to just 4.7%.
In a statement, Target stated that shoppers “overwhelmingly price match Target and not other retailers,” implying that most customers use the policy to match prices within Target, not against Amazon or Walmart.
The Industry Context Changes Everything
This move eliminates one of the last major price-match safety nets in big-box retail. Walmart killed its Savings Catcher in 2019. Amazon never offered price matching at all.
Target was holding onto a customer acquisition strategy that had become a margin killer.
The policy shift reflects a fundamental change in retail competitive dynamics. Companies are moving from reactive price competition to proactive ecosystem building.
What This Means for Retail Strategy
Target’s decision prioritizes margin protection over aggressive price competition. The company is betting that its existing customers value convenience and experience more than guaranteed lowest prices.
The timing ahead of holiday shopping season is deliberate. Target is establishing new customer expectations before the crucial fourth quarter revenue period.
Other retailers are watching closely. Best Buy and Home Depot still offer comprehensive price matching, but they’re operating with different cost structures and customer bases.
The Real Strategic Shift
Target is transitioning from a defensive pricing posture to an offensive value creation strategy. Instead of matching competitor prices, they’re focusing resources on exclusive products, improved experience, and operational efficiency.
This represents a broader industry evolution where retailers must choose between margin preservation and price competition. Target chose margins.
The policy change signals confidence in their core value proposition while acknowledging the financial reality of sustained price wars. Sometimes strategic retreat enables stronger positioning for future growth.
Target’s move will likely accelerate similar decisions across retail. The era of comprehensive price matching is ending, replaced by ecosystem-focused customer retention strategies.
