Study finds Kroger’s basket costs far more than Walmart’s, while Costco undercuts both

Walmart may catch a tailwind in the grocery pricing conversation after a new comparison published through Yahoo Finance, citing a Consumer Reports-commissioned study that benchmarked the cost of buying the same items across major retailers.

According to the study described in the report, it costs 14.8% more to shop at Kroger than it does to buy the same set of grocery items at Walmart. The comparison frames the difference as an “apples to apples” basket test, centered on what shoppers would pay for the same products rather than on store-by-store marketing or promotions.

The same analysis also places Costco at the low end of the pricing range. For the items included in the study’s basket, Costco’s prices are 21.8% cheaper than Walmart’s, reinforcing the perception that Costco can be aggressive on unit pricing for staples.

Taken together, the numbers imply a wide gap between Kroger and the lowest-priced option: if Costco is 21.8% cheaper than Walmart, and Kroger is 14.8% more expensive than Walmart, then Kroger’s basket cost is materially higher than Costco’s for the same items included in the test.

The report’s framing highlights why price comparisons are such a sensitive issue in retail grocery. Consumers increasingly use price as a sorting criterion, especially for household staples that do not vary much by brand, and grocery chains often face scrutiny not just for promotions but for day-to-day pricing.

For Walmart, the immediate takeaway from this kind of study is not a change in its operating model, but the opportunity to benefit from favorable price narratives. Walmart has long positioned itself around everyday low prices, and results like these can influence how shoppers think about value when planning where to buy groceries.

For Kroger, the reported premium underscores a challenge that has followed much of U.S. grocery retail in recent years: defending margins and competitiveness while managing input costs and store-level execution, where a small pricing disadvantage can translate into share pressure if customers perceive the difference as persistent rather than temporary.

Still, the post does not provide all the methodological details readers would typically want, such as the exact basket composition, geography, timing of price checks, and whether membership programs or store brands were treated uniformly across retailers. It also does not describe any follow-up from the companies themselves, leaving open how each retailer would characterize pricing differences in other conditions or locations.