The Vampire Effect: Ranking the Best and Worst $8 Million+ Super Bowl 2026 Commercials
USA Today and Bloomberg reported that 30-second Super Bowl commercials in 2026 cost a record $8 million, with premium spots reaching as high as $10 million. For media managers, the math is simple: With 125 million viewers, that’s a pricey $64 CPM.
But the real question isn’t how many people saw your ad—it’s how many people remembered it was yours. At Pollfish, we used our rapid-response survey platform to analyze consumer sentiment the day after the game to see which ads delivered ROI and which fell victim to the most dangerous trend in marketing: The Vampire Effect.
What is the “Vampire Effect” in Advertising?
Before we dive into the data, we have to address the biggest risk of Super Bowl advertising: The Vampire Effect.
The Vampire Effect occurs when the creative elements of a commercial—like a massive celebrity, a catchy song, or a shocking visual—are so powerful that they “suck the life” out of the brand. Viewers remember the joke or the star, but they have no idea what product was being sold.
In a high-stakes environment like the Super Bowl, brands often pay $3–5 million for a celebrity on top of the $8 million airtime fee. If that celebrity “vampires” your brand, you’ve essentially paid millions to entertain the audience without building your business.
What Were the Best Super Bowl Ads in 2026?
The 2026 “Big Game” was a tale of two strategies: Nostalgia vs. Shock. Our Pollfish survey of 400 respondents revealed that while everyone was watching, not everyone was “buying.”
The Big Winners: Dunkin’ and Budweiser
When it comes to breaking through the noise, Dunkin’ took the crown. Their “Good Will Dunkin’” sitcom parody was a masterclass in brand linkage.
- 23% of respondents recalled Dunkin’ unaided (the highest of the night).
- 57% aided recall: Dunkin’ was the most recognized brand when prompted.
- 43% “Very Positive” sentiment, making it the highest-rated ad for brand love.
Budweiser remains a Super Bowl heavyweight. Their classic “Clydesdale & Eagle” spot earned them the second-highest unaided recall at 21% and were named the “Favorite Commercial” by 14%.
The “Vampire Effect” Victims of 2026
Our data highlighted two massive “attribution gaps” where the creative overshadowed the brand:
- Guy Fieri for Bosch: While 34% of people remembered seeing Guy Fieri, only 14% of respondents remembered the brand was Bosch.
- Kendall Jenner for Fanatics: This was the most expensive “fumble” of the night. While 31% remembered Kendall, only 17% correctly linked her to Fanatics.
The $8 Million Gift to the Competition: Our survey found that 14% of respondents actually thought the Kendall Jenner ad was for DraftKings. Fanatics essentially paid for a premium Super Bowl spot that drove recall for their biggest competitor.
The “Coke Bear” Attribution Fail
In one of the night’s boldest moves, Pepsi used the iconic Coca-Cola Polar Bear in their “Choice” ad. It worked… maybe too well. 44% of people actually thought they saw a Coke ad, despite Pepsi being the advertiser.
This is a different kind of “Vampire”—where a competitor’s brand assets are so strong that they hijack your own creative. However, there was a silver lining: Pepsi still secured a 59% purchase intent score, trailing only Pringles (67%).
Viral Moments: Sentiment vs. Action
Manscaped’s “Singing Hair”: While it got people talking, it wasn’t all good. Manscaped had the highest negative sentiment score of the night. In fact, 34% of respondents said they are unlikely to buy from Manscaped in the next 30 days—a stark reminder that “viral” doesn’t always mean “valuable.”
2026 Commercial Rankings: By the Numbers
- Most Memorable Celebrity: Backstreet Boys (Coinbase/T-Mobile) with 39% recall
- Highest Purchase Intent: Pringles (Sabrina Carpenter) with 67% likely to buy
| Metric | Brand / Celebrity | Result |
| Most Memorable Celebrity | Backstreet Boys (Coinbase/T-Mobile) | 39% Recall |
| Highest Purchase Intent | Pringles (Sabrina Carpenter) | 67% Likely to Buy |
| Worst Aided Recall | eos | 3% |
| Highest “Ick” Factor | Manscaped (Singing Hair) | 17% Negative Sentiment |
Does AI Affect Brand Trust?
AI took center stage this year with deep-faked celebrities and AI-generated backgrounds. Surprisingly, 53% of respondents said AI had no impact on their trust in the company. It seems the “uncanny valley” is becoming the new normal for 2026 consumers.
Why Ad Testing is the Real MVP
When a single second of airtime costs $266,000, you cannot afford a “Vampire” ad. The ads that flopped this year weren’t necessarily “bad”—they were just untested for brand linkage.
Whether you’re running a Super Bowl spot or a targeted social campaign, pre-testing your creative on Pollfish.com ensures your brand is the hero. Don’t wait until Monday morning to find out if your audience remembered your name. Learn more about ad testing on Pollfish.
Ready to run your ad testing?
Start your first ad testing survey on Pollfish today and get results in hours, not weeks.
Ready to Try Pollfish?
Create your survey with AI, target high-quality respondents starting at $0.95 per complete, and start getting results in just minutes in real-time. From running a simple product concept survey to managing a constant stream of trackers for dozens of clients in dozens of countries, we’ve got you.