10/02/2026
DUNKIN’S NEXT FORMAT BATTLE: DRIVE-THRU, WALK-UP OR CONVENIENCE STORE?
The next battle for your coffee dollar may come down to how easily you can pick up your order—and what it costs the operator to serve you.
Dutch Bros is testing walk-up-only stores for densely populated markets. The Wall Street Journal reported October 2 that its location near the University of Southern California became the chain’s highest-volume shop before a Chicago-area opening surpassed it. That’s a promising sales signal, although it doesn’t establish profitability. (wsj.com)
Meanwhile, convenience stores are substantial food-and-beverage competitors. According to NACS, foodservice—including prepared food and dispensed beverages—accounted for 28.5% of convenience-store inside sales in 2025 and 38.9% of inside gross-profit dollars. (convenience.org)
For Dunkin franchisees, the question is straightforward: Which format leaves the best return after paying the bills?
THE SALES ADVANTAGE
Franchise Evidence’s tabulation of Dunkin’s 2026 franchise disclosure document reports these average annual sales for 2025:
• Traditional stores with drive-thrus: approximately $1.55 million.
• Traditional stores without drive-thrus: approximately $1.12 million.
• Gas-and-convenience-store locations: approximately $1.14 million.
That puts the drive-thru group roughly $423,000, or 38%, above the traditional non-drive-thru group. But these are different groups of stores—not proof that adding a window increases an individual store’s sales by 38%. Location, hours and other differences matter. (franchiseevidence.com)
These categories also don’t isolate compact walk-up stores or dining-room performance. A dining room and a drive-thru can operate in the same restaurant.
HOW THE FOUR FORMATS COMPARE
Drive-thru: My strongest starting candidate for a car-oriented market with easy access and adequate room for vehicle queues. The challenge is paying for the land, construction and staffing without letting congestion limit sales. A busy road helps only if customers can enter, order and exit conveniently.
Compact walk-up: Worth a serious look near campuses, transit and dense residential or employment centers. A smaller footprint may reduce occupancy and construction costs, but prime urban rent can erase those savings. Less seating also doesn’t automatically mean fewer employees behind the counter.
Gas-and-convenience co-location: Potentially attractive when existing customer traffic and shared facilities reduce investment. The economics depend on rent, shared expenses, signage, operating hours and competition from the host store’s own coffee and food. Fuel customers must actually become Dunkin customers.
Full dining room: Valuable where customers want to gather, sit or eat. But the extra space needs to generate enough business to cover its rent, cleaning, utilities and upkeep. Franchisees should test that contribution rather than assume every store needs the same seating capacity.
WHAT SURVIVES AFTER COSTS?
Consider a purely hypothetical comparison—not a Dunkin earnings projection.
Suppose a larger format generates $400,000 in additional annual sales. If 25% remains after the costs that rise with those sales—including ingredients, packaging, additional labor, royalties and advertising—that leaves $100,000.
If additional annual occupancy and other fixed operating costs total $60,000, only $40,000 remains before financing and income taxes. If that format required another $500,000 upfront, the incremental operating return would be 8% before financing and taxes.
Change the assumptions, and the winner can change.
My view: Drive-thrus deserve close consideration in commuter markets, while compact and co-located stores can compete on investment efficiency. The available sales figures don’t establish a universal profit winner.
The deciding question is how much sustainable cash each location produces relative to the money invested.
Franchisees and employees: Which format works best in your market? Customers: Do you prefer a drive-thru, a quick walk-up window, a convenience-store stop or a place to sit?