Keeta unleashes Kiki: Do brand mascots still matter in 2026?

By now, most of us have seen Keeta’s new face—KiKi, a lively cheetah inspired by the "cheetah" roots of the Keeta name. Whether you love her or question the choice, one thing's for sure: she's got people talking. The buzz across social platforms signals a bold shift in the brand’s identity.

Don't miss: Keeta debuts new mascot to blend global vision with local vibes

KiKi embodies speed, stamina, and a forward-thinking spirit—qualities deeply ingrained in Keeta’s DNA. According to the brand, her signature features—sonic ears, a friendly smile, and a balancing tail—symbolise Keeta’s attentive listening, passionate service, and trusted delivery.

For Danley Stone, managing director, Design Bridge & Partners Hong Kong, a mascot’s true power lies in making the intangible tangible, helping brands connect with people on a deeper, more emotional level. 

“Strategically, they serve a dual purpose: helping a brand ‘stand for’ its core strategic values while enabling it to ‘stand out’ in a competitive marketplace. The 'stand for' helps to drive feelings, whereas 'stand out' drives familiarity.” 

Echoing her thoughts was Virginia Ngai, associate partner, Prophet, who said a brand mascot is essentially a symbol of meaning. “It gives people a consistent character they can recognise quickly and attach feelings to, which makes the brand easier to remember and easier to choose.” 

She added that mascots turn abstract benefits into something tangible and human, often communicating those ideas more intuitively than copy or product claims can. “They also provide a repeatable storytelling device that can live across advertising, packaging, apps, and social content, helping the brand build continuity over time.” 

Are mascots still relevant in 2026?

Despite their emotional power, brand mascots may feel like a relic of marketing past. Icons such as Koko the Koala or Tony the Tiger have mostly faded. Even the still-visible M&M’s characters and Geico Gecko first appeared in 1954 and 1999, respectively.

Yet, this decline doesn't reflect mascots’ effectiveness—it mirrors shifts in how marketing operates, according to Donna Tam, client director at Landor Hong Kong. "Media is fragmented and many teams are under intense short‑term performance pressure. That pushes investment into tactical assets and away from long‑horizon character building.”  

There’s a bias that mascots feel childish or ‘un‑premium’ versus clean, type‑driven systems, so they’re often the first thing stripped out in a redesign, she added. “Committing to a character that needs years of content, iteration and community management can feel like a risk in fast‑moving organisations.” 

On the other hand, in a world of algorithmic feeds and generative content, distinct, ownable IP is more valuable than ever, she said. “A character is much harder to commoditise than a piece of graphic styling.” 

Yet paradoxically, in today’s algorithm-driven world, distinctive intellectual properties are more valuable than ever, said Ngai. "In a fragmented attention environment, a distinctive character drives instant recognition in feeds and translates naturally into digital-native formats such as stickers, GIFs, and animations.” 

Furthermore, with the rise of AI, a mascot serves as a vital tool for humanising chatbots and virtual assistants, providing a relatable identity for automated services, she added.

Instead of marketing decorations Jacopo Pesavento, CEO, Branding Records, said mascots are weapons. "The problem isn't that mascots stopped working. It's that brands got too scared to let them be real. A mascot with no edge, no jokes, no weirdness is just expensive decoration nobody remembers."

Andy Reynolds, founder, creative director, Imagination Riots puts it simply: “I think a well considered mascot can create flex in a system, and connect in ways a bland logotype cant. The question isn’t ; ‘is a mascot still relevant to brands?’ It’s: ‘is a mascot relevant to the brand's audience?’” 

So, who actually needs a mascot?

While new mascots are rare, they still play a critical role—especially in boring or parity-driven industries, said Pesavento. “If your product does exactly what the competition does, a mascot is how you make people pick you for no logical reason. Food delivery, insurance, phone plans, these categories are dying for personality.” 

He added that brands aiming to build emotional rapport with families or daily-use habits also benefit greatly. “Mascots work when you need people to remember you even when they're not paying attention. Children, tired parents, anyone scrolling half asleep. What connects them? Brands that win by being liked, not just respected.” 

“Mascots that start with the brand feel real. Mascots added later as desperate moves feel fake. But there's a smart middle ground: bring in a mascot when you're entering new markets and need something that works everywhere without translation,” he added. 

Landor’s Tam said food delivery, QSR, beverages, mobility, utilities, banking apps, and telco are classic examples. “People don’t spend much time thinking about the category, which is precisely why memorable, likeable characters can move the needle.” 

Furthermore, digital‑first ecosystems that lack a “face” may also need a brand mascot, she added. “If most of your brand lives inside an app icon, a push notification or a transactional email, a mascot can humanise those small but constant interactions – onboarding flows, empty states, error messages, rewards.”

Still, before sketching out a character, Reynolds emphasised the importance of strategic clarity, "The brand’s strategy and positioning should be clear with its audience identified. “With those vibe checks complete, you’ll know if a mascot is right or not."

Related articles:

Is Keeta’s drone delivery launch a hype or the new normal for HK?
Keeta and LUBUDS redefine premium food delivery with new partnership