A day doesn’t pass that I don’t come across a study lecturing me about how Millennials are different from other consumers. “Millennials are thrifty,” “Millennials crave convenience,” “Millennials want financial providers that are authentic,” blah blah blah.
The purpose of segmenting consumers is to identify traits–behavioral, attitudinal, and demographic–that tend to identify and distinguish one segment over another. If I have to tell you that all members of a segment aren’t homogeneous, or that members of other segments will share some traits with members of other segments, then you shouldn’t be reading the Snarketing column.
From a marketing perspective, if a segment you’ve defined has too many overlapping traits with other segments, then you probably haven’t defined a segment that will help you differentiate your marketing efforts. This is why you can’t “market to women.”
Conversely, if there are too many differentiating traits within a single segment, you probably haven’t adequately defined that segment. Which is exactly why it’s high time to stop treating Millennials as a single consumer segment.
Financial Goals of Millennials
The Shullman Research Center recently surveyed consumers about their financial goals, and found interesting differences between sub-segments of Millennials regarding:
- Meeting daily living expenses. Six of 10 Millennials between 18 and 24 say having enough money for daily living expenses is a financial goal. That percentage drops to roughly four in 10 25-29 year-olds, and back up to half of Millennials between the ages of 30 and 34. This pattern is repeated for goals like “improving standing of living,” and “becoming financially independent.”
- Dealing with emergencies. Nearly 60% of 18-24 year-olds are concerned with having enough money for unexpected emergencies. Among 30-34 year-olds, that percentage drops to 34%.
- Having fun. Well, there you have it, folks! The data that proves that life sucks the fun out of you at 30 years old. Forty percent of 18-24 year-olds have a financial goal to have fun. By 30 years old, the percentage drops to 22%.
- Becoming rich. Damn! If it wasn’t bad enough life sucks the fun out of you by 30, apparently any hope of becoming rich fades by 30, as well.
| Millennials (18-24) |
Millennials (25-29) |
Millennials (30-34) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| To have enough money for daily living expenses | 61% | 39% | 51% |
| To improve your standard of living | 61% | 45% | 40% |
| To become financially independent | 59% | 29% | 34% |
| To have enough money for unexpected emergencies | 58% | 49% | 34% |
| To have fun | 40% | 34% | 22% |
| To become rich | 27% | 23% | 13% |
| To provide for children’s college expenses | 19% | 28% | 35% |
| To keep up with inflation | 16% | 30% | 13% |
These trends make sense: no job and/or not much money in your early 20s, living large as a single person in your late 20s, and dealing with the realities of real life (i.e., family) in your early 30s.
Millennials’ Financial Health
Research conducted by the Center for Financial Services Innovation (CFSI) emphasizes the differences between the sub-segments. Looking at Millennials across three sub-segments — 18 to 20 year-olds, 21 to 27 year-olds, and 28 to 36 year-olds — CFSI found differences regarding:
- Shopping for financial products. Among the youngest group, 50% turned to friends and family for advice when shopping for financial products. That percentage drops to 35% among the middle group, and again down to 31% among the oldest sub-segment.
- Risk tolerance. When asked how willing they are to take financial risk when saving or making investments, 57% of the youngest sub-segment said they’re “not willing to take any risks.” Forty-five percent of 21 to 27 year-olds gave that answer, and 34% of the 28 to 36 year-olds responded likewise. Conversely, just 10% of the youngest group said they were willing to take above average to substantial risk, in contrast to 25% of the oldest group.
- Overall financial health. CFSI defined seven levels of financial health, corresponding to three categories: Healthy, Coping, and Vulnerable. Surprisingly (to me, at least), a larger percentage of 18 to 20 years olds in the US are financially healthy than 21 to 27 year-olds are. Not surprisingly, a larger percentage of the youngest group are in the Vulnerable category. But this is due to the fact that, at that age, many consumers are just not very engaged in the management of their financial lives.
| Financial Health Categories |
18 to 20 years old |
21 to 27 years old |
28 to 36 years old |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthy | Thriving | 3% | 4% | 5% |
| Focused | 14% | 8% | 19% | |
| Stable | 16% | 12% | 12% | |
| Coping | Striving | 14% | 22% | 21% |
| Tenuous | 6% | 16% | 15% | |
| Vulnerable | Unengaged | 40% | 21% | 14% |
| At Risk | 6% | 17% | 13% |
It’s the last point that’s key. It’s really about engagement with financial lives, financial management, and financial providers that distinguishes the sub-segments of the Millennial generation.
Can We Stop Treating Millennials as a Single Segment?
Let’s face it: There are two reasons why consumer researchers treat Millennials as a single segment: 1) They don’t ask for age at a granular enough level in their surveys to create the sub-segments, and 2) They’re too damn lazy to do the analysis to create the sub-segments. (And I’m not saying that I haven’t been guilty of these reasons myself in the past).
From a financial services perspective, the differences between the sub-segments of Millennials are too big to ignore. Let’s stop treating Millennials as a single segment.