Only 7% of consumers would cut pet health spending, Elanco survey finds

Only 7% of consumers said they would cut pet health spending if money got tight, according to new national survey data from Elanco Animal Health. Dining out and entertainment (54%), travel (44%) and digital subscriptions (33%) would all go first. For practices worried about a demand slowdown, the October numbers point the other way.

Elanco's Pet Health Trends Omnibus survey ran online from October 16 to 21, 2026, among 2,018 US adults aged 18 and older, a sample the company describes as nationally representative. Of those respondents, 1,495 own dogs or cats, with owners ranging in age from 18 to 80 years. The release did not name the firm that fielded the survey or report a margin of error, so practitioners should read the percentages as directional rather than precise.

How stable is pet spending?

Very stable, by the survey's own tracking. Among pet owners, 93% said they had maintained or increased their pet spending over the past three months, and 32% said they had actually increased it during that period. The forward-looking figure matches: 93% expect to keep spending level or higher over the next year.

That consistency holds across the year. Elanco's February and May waves produced nearly identical results, at 93% and 91% respectively. Whatever macroeconomic pressure consumers have felt in 2026, it has not yet reached the pet budget.

The survey also probes why. 87% of pet owners said their pet's happiness and well-being is as important as their own, and 63% said it is more important. The top motivations for spending were health and longevity (65%), happiness and comfort (59%), and treating pets as family (54%).

Bobby Modi, executive vice president of US pet health and digital transformation at Elanco, said in the release: "Our October data reinforces what we see every day across the marketplace: pet health is not a discretionary luxury, but a deeply emotional, non-negotiable commitment."

He added: "Even in challenging macroeconomic environments, pet parents consistently prioritize the health, comfort and longevity of their animals."

The takeaway: client demand for pet health services has held firm through three consecutive survey waves in 2026.

Where do clients actually buy medications?

The purchase-channel data may matter more to practices than the spending totals. Thirty-eight percent of pet owners said they had taken their pet medication purchases outside the clinic within the past year or two.

Respondents reported buying pet medications through:

• In-person veterinary clinics (37%)
• Online pet specialty pharmacies (31%)
• Mass retail or grocery stores (28%)
• Physical pet specialty retail stores (27%)
• General e-commerce sites (25%)
• Home delivery through a veterinarian's online pharmacy (17%)

Read that list again. No single channel holds a majority, and the in-person clinic sits at just 37%. Every competing channel — online pet pharmacies, mass retail, pet specialty stores, general e-commerce — now captures a comparable share of the same clients who say they will not cut pet health spending.

Modi's framing in the release is blunt: veterinary visits "are no longer a leading economic indicator for pet spend." Client money is still flowing to pet health, but less of it flows through the clinic's pharmacy counter by default.

The takeaway: loyalty to pet spending does not equal loyalty to the practice's dispensary, and inventory and pharmacy strategy should reflect that.

What actually makes clients switch medications?

Not price, at least not as a one-off. Respondents ranked a doctor's recommendation as the No. 1 reason they would switch their pet's medication. One-time discounts or rebates drew just 3%.

That 3% figure deserves attention from anyone who has leaned on manufacturer rebates or coupon programs to defend pharmacy revenue. The survey suggests the recommendation itself, not the attached incentive, moves the decision. Practitioners who explain the clinical rationale for a product appear to hold more sway than any discount ladder.

The takeaway: the exam-room conversation outperforms the rebate, by a wide margin.

Is the client base growing?

Yes, according to adoption intentions. Among all consumers surveyed, 21% said they expect to add a pet in the next year. Among current pet owners, the figure rises to 25%.

If those intentions translate even partially into new animals, practices could see new-patient intake pressure in 2027 on top of stable spending from existing clients. Combined with the 93% who plan to maintain or increase spending, the demand picture for companion-animal medicine looks resilient heading into next year.

What should practices take from this?

Three practical signals stand out. First, fears of a pet-spending pullback are not supported by this dataset; clients rank pet health last among cuts, behind restaurants, trips and streaming services. Second, the pharmacy is the contested ground — 38% of owners have already moved medication buying outside the clinic, and the clinic channel leads all alternatives at just 37%. Third, the doctor's recommendation remains the strongest switching lever, with discounts near irrelevant at 3%.

The survey's limits are worth keeping in view. Elanco, a company with a commercial stake in pet health spending, both commissioned and released the data, and no margin of error or polling firm was disclosed. Still, the consistency across three waves in February, May and October gives the trend line some weight.

With 21% of all consumers planning to add a pet next year and spending intentions holding above 90% for the third consecutive survey wave, Elanco's next quarterly omnibus will show whether that commitment survives whatever the broader economy does in 2027.