Store Check: Easter 2026 – Between Brand Continuity and Tentative Innovation Initiatives

For this year’s Easter store check, we took a look around select Berlin retail stores—at KaDeWe, Karstadt, and Ullrich. What stood out: The market in 2026 appears significantly more subdued than in previous years. At the same time, there are individual products and brands that stand out positively thanks to precise design, clear visual guidance, and a compelling interpretation of seasonal themes.

Our impression: an Easter market with the brakes on. Less opulent, less staged, and in places surprisingly lacking in inspiration—but not without bright spots.

Less stage time for Easter

In brick-and-mortar retail, the Easter season had a noticeably lower profile this year than usual. Compared to the Christmas season—but also to previous Easter displays—many sales areas appear scaled back. Where themed displays, seasonal setups, and eye-catching secondary placements usually dominate the space, 2026 is characterized instead by more condensed product ranges and smaller display areas.

There could be various reasons for this. The most obvious explanation is that high raw material prices and an overall tight market have led to more cautious investments in marketing and point-of-sale displays. This trend is particularly evident where Easter is observed in form but lacks emotional resonance. This is especially noteworthy because seasonal confectionery, in particular, thrives on emotional appeal, its gift-giving nature, and ritual.

Between Nostalgia, Indifference, and Design Ambiguity

At the product level, a recurring pattern emerged across several brands: many designs rely on familiar Easter motifs without truly developing them further. The result is often not traditional in a positive sense, but rather static, interchangeable, or indecisive.

This was particularly noticeable with Niederegger. For its “Alcoholic Marzipan Variation,” the brand uses a nostalgic Easter visual style featuring floral borders, pastel spring colors, and childlike illustrations of rabbits, strongly reminiscent of classic children’s book aesthetics. However, especially when combined with the bright, friendly packaging design and the decorative Easter presentation, this creates a jarring contradiction with the actual product contents: The display window contains alcoholic praline eggs, the varieties of which are clearly aimed at an adult target audience. The design thus visually communicates something different from the product itself. For alcoholic variants, a visual language that more clearly and confidently conveys maturity, indulgence, and the target audience would be more convincing.

Lindt also presented an ambivalent image in parts of its product range. Two very different product types stood out as particularly problematic. First, a large-format gold bunny in an additional cardboard display box featuring an integrated carrying handle, a generous viewing window, and a spring-like visual theme of flowers, tulips, and butterflies. Especially for a product whose shape has long spoken for itself as a brand, this additional packaging feels like a case of overpacking: The use of materials is excessive without resulting in corresponding functional or design value. Furthermore, the combination of the carrying packaging, nature illustration, and gold bunny appears visually more additive than truly cohesive.

On the other hand, the classic gold bunny in a special edition also exhibited design overkill. The printed floral ornaments, small icons, and decorative elements lie like appliquéd symbols on the iconic gold foil and rob the figure of some of its otherwise commanding presence. Instead of carefully evolving the Goldhase for the season, the result is an impression that feels more arbitrary than high-quality—almost like a decorative tattoo on what is actually a strong brand icon.

At Lauenstein, one package stood out for its visual style, which strongly resembles AI-generated design. On the egg-shaped aluminum box, floral ornaments, egg motifs, blossoms, and curved forms converge to create an opulent, almost surreal surface that is intended to appear high-quality at first glance but reveals design inconsistencies upon closer inspection. Individual blossoms do not appear to be consistently defined in terms of shape, structure, and number of petals; the ornamentation also veers into the vague and arbitrary in places. The problem here is less the potential use of new tools than the lack of final attention to detail in the execution. Especially in the premium and gift segments, such an incompletely curated visual language directly undermines the perceived quality.

Another example of outdated mechanics is provided by Niederegger’s “Männersache” line. While the design language is consistently applied, it relies on a very bold, almost caricature-like coding of masculinity: harsh contrasts, honeycomb-like structures, torn surfaces in black, rough typography, and eggshell-like fracture motifs present the product with a demonstrative harshness that is more reminiscent of stereotypical gift items or drugstore special lines than of contemporary packaging design. The color scheme of blue, yellow, and black further reinforces this effect. Instead of originality or subtle humor, the result is primarily the impression of a design that falls back on long-established clichés—loud, predictable, and uninnovative.

Kinkartz and Lambertz also failed to make a strong impression in a direct shelf comparison. Both brands rely on a very familiar Easter aesthetic for their wafer egg products—featuring pastel tones, flowers, butterfly motifs, eggs, and soft spring color gradients—without, however, developing a distinctive or contemporary visual language. With Kinkartz, the combination of gold foil, a light green center panel, playful typography, and decorative scattered flowers comes across as generic rather than distinctive. Lambertz presents its bags with a cream-colored background, delicate cursive script, meadow motifs, and a chocolate bunny silhouette in a somewhat more classic style, yet it too remains firmly within the realm of the expected. As a result, both products create an impression that relies heavily on seasonal decoration and surface appeal, yet generates little new relevance in terms of design. Today, high quality can no longer be asserted solely through appearance and familiar Easter codes—it must be designed to be more precise, distinctive, and brand-specific.

When the shape no longer tells its own story

The market proved surprisingly weak in some areas, not only visually but also in terms of form. Especially with seasonal confectionery, the shape is essential because it often conveys symbolism, appeal, and recognizability more effectively than any packaging.

Thus, the Niederegger “bunnies” remain strangely ambiguous in their form. Despite being labeled as marzipan bunnies, the figure is only vaguely recognizable as a rabbit: the body appears compact and poorly defined, the head, back, and front merge rather softly into one another, and the overall proportions are more reminiscent of a roughly modeled marzipan figure than a clearly defined Easter figure. This difference is particularly striking when viewed in direct contrast to the packaging, which features a clearly recognizable, illustrative rabbit. For a seasonal product that relies heavily on appeal, iconography, and instant recognition, this lack of formal definition is a clear shortcoming.

The same applies to many imitations of the Lindt Gold Bunny. Attempts to adapt an iconic figure often result in faces and proportions that appear misshapen or unappealing. What has become a culturally charged form in the original over decades simply cannot be easily copied. The difference between the original and the adaptation is immediately apparent on the shelf.

A recurring problem also emerged with more abstract chick designs. The meringue figures shown here are essentially almost perfectly round, softly modeled bodies that are only assigned the role of a chick through two small eyes and an attached beak. In the bright yellow box with its floral-decorative felt frame, this coding still works to some extent within the staged Easter context. However, if one mentally removes this frame, formally little more remains than a round, light-colored sweet with minimal details. This is precisely where the weakness lies: the abstraction has been taken so far that the figure quickly loses its distinctiveness and is more reminiscent of mochi, small meringue balls, or other generic sweet pastries than of a clearly defined chick. Abstraction can be powerful, but it needs a more precise formal anchor.

Where Easter 2026 Shines in Design

Despite all the criticism, there were several products that demonstrated just how compelling seasonal packaging can be when brand identity, form, and occasion come together seamlessly.

A real highlight was the Duplo egg. The design translates the brand very precisely into the seasonal context without losing its distinctiveness. The Duplo logo remains the clear focal point of the surface, while the stylized white rabbit ears immediately identify the product as an Easter item. This is supported by an eye-catching yet harmonious color palette of red, gold, and green, which works very well on the shelf while clearly differentiating between different varieties. Complementary graphic elements such as small lines, Easter icons, and product images break up the surface without disrupting the visual hierarchy. This is precisely where the design’s strength lies: it is brand-aligned, instantly recognizable, and seasonally charged without slipping into decorative arbitrariness.

La Colomba by Flamigni also made a very high-quality impression. On the shelf, the generously presented packaging—tied with wide satin ribbons—stands out, with its floral surfaces in pastel tones creating an almost boutique-like feel. The combination of delicate floral illustrations, soft color gradients, and generous white space is reminiscent less of classic food packaging than of elegant perfume or gift packaging. It is precisely this that clearly positions the Easter cake in the gift segment. The design appears sophisticated, carefully composed, and emotionally charged, without seeming overly staged.

Lakritsfabriken stood out with a distinctive, illustrative approach that immediately catches the eye on the shelf. Instead of minimalism, the brand relies on densely arranged, hand-drawn architectural illustrations in shades of pink, yellow, blue, and red, which almost resemble a small urban Easter wonderland. Despite this colorfulness, the design remains cohesive because the black band clearly unifies the surface and gives the packaging structure. It is precisely this interplay of playful detail, graphic originality, and clean branding that creates a high-quality, modern look that clearly sets itself apart from the often formulaic Easter designs found among competitors.

Le Chocolat des Français is a highly successful example of how color, illustration, and brand identity can come together seamlessly. Particularly compelling is the use of the 60-30-10 principle of color harmony: each egg features a distinct primary color, complemented by contrasting striped areas and bold accent colors in facial elements, typography, and small graphic details. As a result, the designs appear structured and balanced despite their high color intensity. The visual style oscillates between modern cartoon, pop art, and influences from street art—featuring strikingly simplified figures, strong contours, large swaths of color, and a very immediate, almost poster-like impact. Especially on display, this visual language exudes an enormous presence and recognizability. The fact that the brand regularly collaborates with various artists is evident in a distinctive, culturally rich design that appears playful, contemporary, and high-quality at the same time.

Café-Tasse was also a positive example of how minimalism can work. The packaging directly takes up the shape of a classic egg carton and translates it into a surprisingly distinctive, highly credible packaging concept. The light, almost untreated-looking material, the understated typography, and the traditional, slightly nostalgic illustrations create an impression that is at once down-to-earth, authentic, and high-quality. Precisely because the design relies not on visual effects but on materiality, formal references, and consistency in execution, a quiet yet highly convincing sense of value emerges here.

Successful Design: Approachable, Clear, Distinctive

In terms of design, Reese’s Peanut Butter Bunny stood out in particular. The figure has a charming retro look, is clearly recognizable as a rabbit, and comes across as approachable rather than misshapen. This is no small detail, but a real advantage on the shelf.

Ferrero, on the other hand, demonstrated that Easter-themed design doesn’t necessarily have to rely on fully rendered animal figures. The Ferrero Küsschen packages, in particular, do incorporate the bunny motif but interpret it in a more minimalist way: The silhouette of the outer packaging clearly evokes upright bunny ears without veering into an illustrative or cute full-figure design. Alongside this, the golden, metallic-looking, egg-shaped gift packaging represents a second product type in the range that focuses more on perceived value and presentation. Floral elements and a viewing window complement this presentation without overloading the design. It is precisely in this interplay that it becomes clear how Ferrero varies different Easter motifs within the same brand universe—sometimes through abstracted rabbit ears, sometimes through the classic egg shape within a higher-end gifting context.

Conclusion: plenty of routine, little boldness—and a few standout exceptions

The 2026 Easter Store Check reveals a market that is diverging in two directions. On the one hand, there are brands and products that rely heavily on the familiar and, in doing so, barely generate any new relevance in terms of design. On the other hand, there are individual examples, often with an international flair, that demonstrate how tradition, gift appeal, and seasonality can be translated in a contemporary way.

What stands out is not only the limited innovative capacity of many traditional German manufacturers, but also a persistent problem of overpackaging—especially where additional materiality creates no discernible added value for the product or brand experience.

Our conclusion: Easter remains an emotionally and economically highly relevant occasion for the confectionery industry. This makes it all the more surprising how rarely this significance is reflected in genuine design quality. For 2027, more boldness would be desirable—toward clearer design, more precise form, and a more conscious use of new design elements.

Highlights: Duplo Egg, Lakritsfabriken, Le Chocolat des Français, La Colomba.
Lows: Niederegger in terms of visual language and form, Lindt in parts of the special editions, packaging with an unreflective AI aesthetic.