SAMPLE REPORT · every figure on this page is illustrative, not a real brand’s data · back to Reports
Walmart Expert Report · WM 2026 wk 30
Walmart POS $48,308, +0.1% versus last week
Sample Brand · Walmart 1P retail (store POS)
Expert narrative unavailable for this run; every figure below is computed deterministically and reconciled to the retailer's own scorecard. Against last year sales are +16.3% on a traited store count +14.4%, while units per store per week are -0.3% — the annual gap is footprint, not demand.
What we should do next
POS $48,308, +0.1% versus last week and +16.3% versus last year.
Against last year the store count is +14.4% and units per store per week are -0.3% — the annual gap is footprint, not demand.
Recovering last year's per-store rate on today's doors is worth $3,089 a week.
Actions: 3 fix, 3 maintain.
Section 1
Scorecard — this week against last week, the last four, and last year
POS is +0.1% against last week. Against last year sales are +16.3% on a store count +14.4% and per-store velocity -0.3% — read the sequential rows first.
POS sales
$48,308
+0.1%
Units
4,745
+0.1%
Units/store/wk
0.28
+0.1%
In-stock
92.3%
Compared with
Their POS $
Sales
Units
Velocity
Stores
Price
vs prior week WM 2026 wk 29
$48,244
+0.1%
+0.1%
+0.1%
+0.0%
+0.0%
vs prior 4-week average 4 weeks
$48,151
+0.3%
+0.3%
+0.3%
+0.0%
+0.0%
vs prior 13-week average 13 weeks
$47,271
+2.2%
+1.8%
+0.5%
+1.3%
+0.3%
vs same week last year same week, LY
$41,529
+16.3%
+14.1%
-0.3%
+14.4%
+1.9%
Velocity is units per store per week. "Stores" is the traited store count — when it moves, the sales change beside it is partly footprint, not demand.
Cumulative windows
Window
POS $
Units
vs last year
Last week
$48,308
4,745
+16.3%
Last 4 weeks
$192,853
18,948
+16.0%
Last 13 weeks
$619,342
60,959
+14.3%
Year to date
$1,358,925
135,022
+7.6%
Last 52 weeks
$1,358,925
135,022
+7.6%
Weekly POS sales, last 26 weeks. Dashed line is the same week last year.
Sequential comparisons lead this report and year-over-year follows. A modular reset moves an item into or out of hundreds of stores, so a year-over-year change is partly a different store count and not a read on how the item performs where it sits. The prior-week and prior-4-week baselines hold distribution roughly constant; the traited-store column beside each one shows how much it actually moved.
Section 2
Every SKU — what each item did
Action split this week: 3 to fix, 3 to maintain. Sequential columns lead; year-over-year sits below them.
Grow · 0
—
Fix · 3
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill
Maintain · 3
SAMPLE Whitening Toothpaste 2pk
SAMPLE Brush Heads 4pk
SAMPLE Whitening Pen Travel
Exit · 0
—
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct — in-stock 91.0% is under the 95% target
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste — in-stock 78.0% is under the 95% target
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill — in-stock 94.2% is under the 95% target
Item
This week $
vs last wk
vs 4-wk avg
Units/store/wk
Velocity vs 4wk
Stores
In-stock
SAMPLE Whitening Toothpaste 2pk SMP-TP-2PK
$20,658
+0.4%
+1.0%
0.66
+1.0%
3,120
97.3%
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct SMP-STRP-28
$10,400
-0.7%
-1.7%
0.33
-1.7%
3,120
91.0%
SAMPLE Brush Heads 4pk SMP-BRSH-4PK
$8,207
+0.6%
+1.5%
0.26
+1.5%
3,120
97.3%
SAMPLE Whitening Pen Travel SMP-PEN-TRV
$3,011
-0.1%
-0.2%
0.10
-0.3%
3,120
97.3%
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste SMP-TP-CHAR
$1,447
-1.8%
-4.5%
0.05
-4.8%
3,120
78.0%
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill new · SMP-FLOSS-PK
$4,585
+0.8%
+2.0%
0.25
+2.1%
1,450
94.2%
Sequential columns first — they hold the store count roughly constant. Year-over-year for the same items is in the table below.
Item
Last 13 wk $
Last 52 wk $
vs last year
Share of sales
SAMPLE Whitening Toothpaste 2pk SMP-TP-2PK
$262,232
$585,244
+14.0%
43.1%
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct SMP-STRP-28
$141,071
$346,097
-12.0%
25.5%
SAMPLE Brush Heads 4pk SMP-BRSH-4PK
$102,957
$226,060
+31.0%
16.6%
SAMPLE Whitening Pen Travel SMP-PEN-TRV
$39,384
$91,664
+2.0%
6.7%
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste SMP-TP-CHAR
$21,022
$57,182
-39.0%
4.2%
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill new · SMP-FLOSS-PK
$52,678
$52,678
no LY
3.9%
Trailing 52-week POS sales by item. Vendor codes merged to the item.
Product identity is the Walmart ITEM NUMBER, not the vendor stock id. A packaging change issues a new supplier code against the same item, so per-code reporting invents a launch and a collapse out of one product handing off.
1 item(s) show no year-over-year because they genuinely had no sales a year ago (new items). Their change column is blank on purpose rather than showing a percentage against zero: SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill.
The action column is deterministic, judged against the 4-WEEK baseline with a 3% dead band — last year's assortment is a different set of stores, and a matrix that flips an item on weekly noise stops being trusted. It is a starting point for the commercial conversation, not a decision.
Section 3
What moved it — distribution, velocity or price
Vs prior week, the move is velocity-led (+0.1%). Distribution changes are won back only at a reset; velocity is actionable this week.
Compared with
Sales change
Distribution
Velocity
Price
Unallocated
vs prior week WM 2026 wk 29
+0.1% $65
+0.0% $0
+0.1% $51
+0.0% $14
$0
vs prior 4-week average 4 weeks
+0.3% $157
+0.0% $0
+0.3% $140
+0.0% $17
$0
vs same week last year same week, LY
+16.3% $6,780
+14.4% $5,992
-0.3% $-113
+1.9% $804
$97
Each driver shows its percentage change and the dollars that change is worth against the comparison period. Distribution is the traited store count; velocity is units per store per week.
Cumulative windows, versus last year
Window
Sales
Distribution
Velocity
Price
Last week
+16.3%
+469.8%
—
—
Last 4 weeks
+16.0%
—
—
—
Last 13 weeks
+14.3%
—
—
—
Year to date
+7.6%
+469.8%
—
—
Sales = distribution x velocity x price, exactly. A decline from lost DISTRIBUTION is a modular/assortment outcome decided at a category review months ago and won back only at the next reset; a decline from lost VELOCITY is a consumer or execution problem actionable this week. They call for opposite responses, which is why this section exists.
READ THE SEQUENTIAL ROWS FIRST. Year-over-year here is contaminated by assortment: the traited store count is down about a quarter versus last year, so most of the year-over-year dollar gap is a smaller footprint rather than weaker selling. The prior-week and prior-4-week rows compare against roughly the same store set.
Distribution is the TRAITED STORE COUNT — the stores authorised to carry the item. That denominator reconstructs the retailer's own units-per-store-per-week to ten decimal places, so these are measured figures, not estimates. (The workbook's own 'Points of Distribution' column is a different number, exactly half the traited count, and is not used.)
Dollar impacts use the retailer's first-order convention (base sales x change%), verified to the dollar against its Sales Briefing tab. The three effects do not sum to the total change — the remainder is shown as 'interaction'.
Section 4
Size of the prize — what is actually recoverable
Computed below.
New items, this week
$4,585
Items they replaced, LY
$0
Net
$4,585
—
The assortment swap, with no assumptions in it: what the exited items rang in this week last year against what the new ones ring now.
Velocity recovery — today's doors at last year's per-store rate
Item
This week
At LY rate
+25%
+50%
Full
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct 3,120 stores · $3.33 vs $3.97 per store/wk
$10,400
$12,374
$493
$987
$1,973
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste 3,120 stores · $0.46 vs $0.80 per store/wk
$1,447
$2,483
$259
$518
$1,036
SAMPLE Whitening Pen Travel 3,120 stores · $0.97 vs $0.99 per store/wk
$3,011
$3,091
$20
$40
$80
Recovering the full per-store gap is worth $3,089 a week.
NO ITEM HAS LOST DOORS. The live assortment holds 17,050 authorised stores against 14,900 for the same items a year ago. The headline distribution decline is exited SKUs taking their doors with them, not shelf taken from the items we still sell — so there is no door-recovery case to make at the next reset for these items, and the prize is per-store rate.
A restored door does not sell at the average of the doors you kept. Retailers cut the weakest stores first, so the marginal door is below-average by construction and every door-recovery figure here is an UPPER BOUND. Treat it as the ceiling of the ask, not the forecast.
Velocity recovery assumes last year's per-store rate is achievable again on today's store set. Where distribution GREW, the new doors are also marginal ones, so part of any per-store decline is mix rather than lost demand — which is an argument for recovering rate, not evidence that the rate was stolen.
Section 5
New items — ramp and what they replaced
1 item(s) in launch. SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill is 12 weeks in at 52,678 dollars this week.
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill · 12 weeks since launch · 1,450 stores · 0.25 units/store/wk · 4-wk ramp +4.2%
Measure
Value
This week
$52,678
Attainment vs the retailer's forecast
89.4%
Dollars per store per week
$3.03
Units per store per week since launch.
A new item has no last year, so its year-over-year column is blank on purpose. This section is how you judge it instead: weeks since launch, doors, per-store rate, its own 4-week trend, and attainment against the retailer's own forecast.
'Versus replaced' compares this item's dollars per store per week to what the EXITED items in the same category earned per store a year ago. It answers whether the shelf is more productive now than before the reset — which is the number the buyer cares about — and it is a category average, not a like-for-like product swap.
A percent-of-mature-velocity target is not computed: no such target exists in the data. Give the report a target per item and it will track against it.
Section 6
Velocity by item — units per store per week
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill moved most on per-store demand (+4.2% over four weeks). Velocity divides out the store count, so it separates demand from footprint.
Units per store per week divides out the store count, so it isolates DEMAND from DISTRIBUTION. An item whose dollars fell while this line held flat did not get weaker — it got smaller. An item whose dollars held while this line fell is being propped up by distribution and is the one to worry about.
Trend compares the last 4 weeks of velocity to the 4 before them — sequential, so a modular reset between this year and last does not distort it.
Charted for the top 6 item(s) by trailing-52-week sales, over the last 26 weeks. Excluded rather than drawn as noise: items with fewer than 6 readable weeks, and items whose authorised store count has since fallen below 25 — a delisted item selling residual stock in a handful of stores produces a per-store rate that is arithmetically true and factually absurd (one item in this file reads 43 units per store per week off a single store).
Section 7
Economics — your revenue, the retailer's margin, and markdowns
Computed below.
Your revenue, week
$23,472
POS at retail
$48,308
Retailer margin
51.4%
Markdown rate YTD
0.0%
—
Markdowns
This year
Last year
Change
Year to date
$0
$0
—
Rate on POS, YTD
0.0%
0.0%
This week
$0
$0
Item
Shelf price
Your price to Walmart
Walmart's margin
Your revenue, week
SAMPLE Whitening Toothpaste 2pk
$9.98
$4.85
51.4%
$10,035
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct
$9.98
$4.85
51.4%
$5,054
SAMPLE Brush Heads 4pk
$9.98
$4.85
51.4%
$3,987
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill
$12.48
$6.10
51.1%
$2,239
SAMPLE Whitening Pen Travel
$9.98
$4.85
51.4%
$1,460
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste
$9.98
$4.85
51.4%
$698
Markdown as a percent of POS, by week. Negative weeks (markdown reversals) render as zero.
WHOSE NUMBER IS WHOSE: 'your revenue' is POS units priced at the cost Walmart pays you — the value of what sold through, at your price into the account. 'Retailer margin' is Walmart's take on the shelf price, NOT your gross margin. Your true margin needs a COGS this workbook does not carry; when NetSuite COGS is wired in, this section can carry it.
Verified two ways on this file: the Supplier Scorecard's ships-at-retail versus ships-at-cost gives a 37.3% retailer margin, and POS units priced at cost gives 37.6%. Two independent paths to the same number is why the cost column's meaning is settled.
Markdown funding depends on the trade agreement. This section reports the amount and does not assert who absorbed it — confirm against your deductions before treating it as a hit to your P&L.
Section 8
In-stock, lost sales and supply
In-stock is 92.3% against a 95% target, with 3 item(s) below it. Modelled lost sales were $1,498 this week.
In-stock
92.3%
-4.0%
Lost sales, week
$1,498
+8979.3%
Lost sales, YTD
$42,127
Item
In-stock
Stores
On hand
On order
POS $
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste
78.0%
3,120
489
172
$1,447
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct
91.0%
3,120
3,542
1,250
$10,400
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill
94.2%
1,450
1,137
513
$4,585
SAMPLE Whitening Toothpaste 2pk
97.3%
3,120
7,034
2,482
$20,658
SAMPLE Brush Heads 4pk
97.3%
3,120
2,794
986
$8,207
SAMPLE Whitening Pen Travel
97.3%
3,120
1,023
361
$3,011
Weekly in-stock %. Target 95%.
Target is 95% on a traited item; below 90% the item is losing sales it will not recover — the shopper buys what is on the shelf rather than waiting.
Out-of-stock lost sales is Walmart's own estimate, carried verbatim from the workbook. It is a modelled number, not measured POS: treat it as the size of the prize, not as revenue already earned.
Section 9
Forecast vs actual
Actuals ran under plan in 30 of 30 forecasted weeks, currently 30 in a row. A sustained shortfall ratchets replenishment down.
Weeks under plan
30 of 30
Current streak
30 wk
Item
Actual units
Forecast units
vs forecast
Store WOS
Whse WOS
SAMPLE Water Flosser Refill
367
389
-5.7%
4.6
3.70
SAMPLE Whitening Toothpaste 2pk
2,069
2,193
-5.7%
6.4
5.10
SAMPLE Whitening Pen Travel
301
319
-5.6%
9.2
7.40
SAMPLE Brush Heads 4pk
822
871
-5.6%
5.8
4.60
SAMPLE Whitening Strips 28ct
1,042
1,104
-5.6%
2.1
1.70
SAMPLE Charcoal Toothpaste
144
152
-5.3%
14.8
11.80
Actual units as a percent of Walmart's forecast, by week. 100% is on plan; below it the plan ratchets down.
Gap is actual minus Walmart's forecast. A persistent NEGATIVE gap (selling under plan) pulls replenishment down and shrinks future orders; a persistent positive gap risks in-stock problems because the plan under-buys.
One week's gap is noise — the direction week after week is the signal, because Walmart's replenishment learns from it. The trend below is the number to watch.
Weeks of supply is Walmart's, split store on-hand / store pipeline / warehouse. Warehouse WOS near zero with healthy store WOS is normal for a direct-ship item, not a stockout signal on its own.
UNDER PLAN 30 WEEKS RUNNING (and 30 of the last 30 weeks with a forecast). A sustained shortfall is how a plan ratchets down: Walmart buys to its own forecast, so weeks of selling under it shrink next season's orders even when in-stock is healthy.
Section 10
Supply compliance — OTIF and fill
Latest OTIF is 93.5%.
OTIF (latest)
93.5%
OTIF 13-week
93.5%
Receipts, week
5,000
On-time in-full by week, as far as Walmart's compliance feed has reported.
On-time in-full is Walmart's vendor compliance measure and carries chargebacks when it slips. This is computed from the workbook's own numerator/denominator.
FILL RATE IS WITHHELD, not missing: the workbook's fill-rate numerator and denominator yield roughly 5%, while the identical construction reproduces in-stock % to twelve decimal places. The field does not mean what its name says, and a false 5% would read as a crisis. Ask the retail agency what the two columns count, and it turns on.
Generated 2026-08-11T20:16:39.507939+00:00 · Source: Walmart Retail Link weekly workbook, reconciled to its own supplier scorecard.