Alphabet

GOOGL
3.5
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Sundar Pichai has not made many high-risk public statements. Brin and Page sometimes show up in the news but are very lowkey for founders of a large company. Google has a normal company website most people will never see. It mentions diversity and sustainability. YouTube, as a social media platform, occasionally gets in hot water on the left for monetizing right-wing advocates and on the right, for having terms of service they sometimes enforce. Google also sometimes encounters problems with censorship, especially with regard to their products in the Chinese market. Their recent marketing tends to focus on diversity; however, Google has control over how most people interact with the internet.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Alphabet was the largest contributor in the computers/technology sector and had highly partisan contributions favoring Democrats. While it is common for this sector to favor Democrats, the highly partisan nature of Alphabet's contributions, their total amount, and Google's high-profile nature makes this a fairly significant risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Alphabet is a very Democratic-leaning company but has a politically mixed customer base. 80% of their 2022 revenue came from ads, so an advertiser boycott could have significant ramifications on the business. Google also has a largely liberal C-suite, so this dichotomy is not likely to change soon.

Associational Risk

3

Alphabet's senior executives mostly donate to Democrats, including Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, which is a risk. Their PAC (Google LLC NetPAC) contributes more evenly between parties, however. Larry Page, one of Google's co-founders, has been subpoenaed in the JPM/Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit. He also has a rift with Elon Musk over AI. The other co-founder, Sergey Brin, has some news headlines about drug use and drama with his ex-wife and Musk.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Google is so big and so ubiquitous that the company has been somewhat insulated from controversy. Google is in a similar spot to Apple, where they have a near-monopoly on the things they provide. 'Google' has an extremely high search volume; however, the company controls search.

Political Hazard (pH) Ratings Explained

A corporation’s Political Hazard Rating, or pH rating, is an overall assessment of the corporation’s likelihood of facing a material consumer boycott or investor backlash from a controversy caused by the company’s or its executives’ political activities and proclivities. The pH ratings range from 1 to 5, with a higher rating correlating with higher risk. The categories below are the components considered when setting a company’s pH rating.

Public Statements Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and the corporations’ own prior public political statements, including their frequency and whether they have tended to be, or actually have been, controversial or high-profile.

Political Dichotomy Risk

Rates the corporation based on the dichotomy, if any, between the executives’ and/or corporations’ own prior political contributions or statements and the likely political leaning of the corporation’s consumer base.

Political Contributions Risk

Rates the corporation based on the magnitude of the executives’ and/or corporations’ total political contributions to politicians and PACs, benchmarked to sector, and the weighted nature of those contributions as between political parties.

Associational Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and/or the corporation’s own prior political contributions and/or public association with particularly controversial people or high-profile politicians or PACs.

Brand Visibility Risk

Rates the corporation's risk relative to sector with higher risk being associated with higher brand visibility

Alphabet

GOOGL
3.5
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Sundar Pichai has not made many high-risk public statements. Brin and Page sometimes show up in the news but are very lowkey for founders of a large company. Google has a normal company website most people will never see. It mentions diversity and sustainability. YouTube, as a social media platform, occasionally gets in hot water on the left for monetizing right-wing advocates and on the right, for having terms of service they sometimes enforce. Google also sometimes encounters problems with censorship, especially with regard to their products in the Chinese market. Their recent marketing tends to focus on diversity; however, Google has control over how most people interact with the internet.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Alphabet was the largest contributor in the computers/technology sector and had highly partisan contributions favoring Democrats. While it is common for this sector to favor Democrats, the highly partisan nature of Alphabet's contributions, their total amount, and Google's high-profile nature makes this a fairly significant risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Alphabet is a very Democratic-leaning company but has a politically mixed customer base. 80% of their 2022 revenue came from ads, so an advertiser boycott could have significant ramifications on the business. Google also has a largely liberal C-suite, so this dichotomy is not likely to change soon.

Associational Risk

3

Alphabet's senior executives mostly donate to Democrats, including Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, which is a risk. Their PAC (Google LLC NetPAC) contributes more evenly between parties, however. Larry Page, one of Google's co-founders, has been subpoenaed in the JPM/Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit. He also has a rift with Elon Musk over AI. The other co-founder, Sergey Brin, has some news headlines about drug use and drama with his ex-wife and Musk.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Google is so big and so ubiquitous that the company has been somewhat insulated from controversy. Google is in a similar spot to Apple, where they have a near-monopoly on the things they provide. 'Google' has an extremely high search volume; however, the company controls search.

Political Hazard (pH) Ratings Explained

A corporation’s Political Hazard Rating, or pH rating, is an overall assessment of the corporation’s likelihood of facing a material consumer boycott or investor backlash from a controversy caused by the company’s or its executives’ political activities and proclivities. The pH ratings range from 1 to 5, with a higher rating correlating with higher risk. The categories below are the components considered when setting a company’s pH rating.

Public Statements Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and the corporations’ own prior public political statements, including their frequency and whether they have tended to be, or actually have been, controversial or high-profile.

Political Dichotomy Risk

Rates the corporation based on the dichotomy, if any, between the executives’ and/or corporations’ own prior political contributions or statements and the likely political leaning of the corporation’s consumer base.

Political Contributions Risk

Rates the corporation based on the magnitude of the executives’ and/or corporations’ total political contributions to politicians and PACs, benchmarked to sector, and the weighted nature of those contributions as between political parties.

Associational Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and/or the corporation’s own prior political contributions and/or public association with particularly controversial people or high-profile politicians or PACs.

Brand Visibility Risk

Rates the corporation's risk relative to sector with higher risk being associated with higher brand visibility

Alphabet

GOOGL
3.5
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Sundar Pichai has not made many high-risk public statements. Brin and Page sometimes show up in the news but are very lowkey for founders of a large company. Google has a normal company website most people will never see. It mentions diversity and sustainability. YouTube, as a social media platform, occasionally gets in hot water on the left for monetizing right-wing advocates and on the right, for having terms of service they sometimes enforce. Google also sometimes encounters problems with censorship, especially with regard to their products in the Chinese market. Their recent marketing tends to focus on diversity; however, Google has control over how most people interact with the internet.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Alphabet was the largest contributor in the computers/technology sector and had highly partisan contributions favoring Democrats. While it is common for this sector to favor Democrats, the highly partisan nature of Alphabet's contributions, their total amount, and Google's high-profile nature makes this a fairly significant risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Alphabet is a very Democratic-leaning company but has a politically mixed customer base. 80% of their 2022 revenue came from ads, so an advertiser boycott could have significant ramifications on the business. Google also has a largely liberal C-suite, so this dichotomy is not likely to change soon.

Associational Risk

3

Alphabet's senior executives mostly donate to Democrats, including Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, which is a risk. Their PAC (Google LLC NetPAC) contributes more evenly between parties, however. Larry Page, one of Google's co-founders, has been subpoenaed in the JPM/Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit. He also has a rift with Elon Musk over AI. The other co-founder, Sergey Brin, has some news headlines about drug use and drama with his ex-wife and Musk.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Google is so big and so ubiquitous that the company has been somewhat insulated from controversy. Google is in a similar spot to Apple, where they have a near-monopoly on the things they provide. 'Google' has an extremely high search volume; however, the company controls search.

Political Hazard (pH) Ratings Explained

A corporation’s Political Hazard Rating, or pH rating, is an overall assessment of the corporation’s likelihood of facing a material consumer boycott or investor backlash from a controversy caused by the company’s or its executives’ political activities and proclivities. The pH ratings range from 1 to 5, with a higher rating correlating with higher risk. The categories below are the components considered when setting a company’s pH rating.

Public Statements Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and the corporations’ own prior public political statements, including their frequency and whether they have tended to be, or actually have been, controversial or high-profile.

Political Dichotomy Risk

Rates the corporation based on the dichotomy, if any, between the executives’ and/or corporations’ own prior political contributions or statements and the likely political leaning of the corporation’s consumer base.

Political Contributions Risk

Rates the corporation based on the magnitude of the executives’ and/or corporations’ total political contributions to politicians and PACs, benchmarked to sector, and the weighted nature of those contributions as between political parties.

Associational Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and/or the corporation’s own prior political contributions and/or public association with particularly controversial people or high-profile politicians or PACs.

Brand Visibility Risk

Rates the corporation's risk relative to sector with higher risk being associated with higher brand visibility

Alphabet

GOOGL
3.5
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Sundar Pichai has not made many high-risk public statements. Brin and Page sometimes show up in the news but are very lowkey for founders of a large company. Google has a normal company website most people will never see. It mentions diversity and sustainability. YouTube, as a social media platform, occasionally gets in hot water on the left for monetizing right-wing advocates and on the right, for having terms of service they sometimes enforce. Google also sometimes encounters problems with censorship, especially with regard to their products in the Chinese market. Their recent marketing tends to focus on diversity; however, Google has control over how most people interact with the internet.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Alphabet was the largest contributor in the computers/technology sector and had highly partisan contributions favoring Democrats. While it is common for this sector to favor Democrats, the highly partisan nature of Alphabet's contributions, their total amount, and Google's high-profile nature makes this a fairly significant risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Alphabet is a very Democratic-leaning company but has a politically mixed customer base. 80% of their 2022 revenue came from ads, so an advertiser boycott could have significant ramifications on the business. Google also has a largely liberal C-suite, so this dichotomy is not likely to change soon.

Associational Risk

3

Alphabet's senior executives mostly donate to Democrats, including Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, which is a risk. Their PAC (Google LLC NetPAC) contributes more evenly between parties, however. Larry Page, one of Google's co-founders, has been subpoenaed in the JPM/Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit. He also has a rift with Elon Musk over AI. The other co-founder, Sergey Brin, has some news headlines about drug use and drama with his ex-wife and Musk.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Google is so big and so ubiquitous that the company has been somewhat insulated from controversy. Google is in a similar spot to Apple, where they have a near-monopoly on the things they provide. 'Google' has an extremely high search volume; however, the company controls search.

Political Hazard (pH) Ratings Explained

A corporation’s Political Hazard Rating, or pH rating, is an overall assessment of the corporation’s likelihood of facing a material consumer boycott or investor backlash from a controversy caused by the company’s or its executives’ political activities and proclivities. The pH ratings range from 1 to 5, with a higher rating correlating with higher risk. The categories below are the components considered when setting a company’s pH rating.

Public Statements Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and the corporations’ own prior public political statements, including their frequency and whether they have tended to be, or actually have been, controversial or high-profile.

Political Dichotomy Risk

Rates the corporation based on the dichotomy, if any, between the executives’ and/or corporations’ own prior political contributions or statements and the likely political leaning of the corporation’s consumer base.

Political Contributions Risk

Rates the corporation based on the magnitude of the executives’ and/or corporations’ total political contributions to politicians and PACs, benchmarked to sector, and the weighted nature of those contributions as between political parties.

Associational Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and/or the corporation’s own prior political contributions and/or public association with particularly controversial people or high-profile politicians or PACs.

Brand Visibility Risk

Rates the corporation's risk relative to sector with higher risk being associated with higher brand visibility

Alphabet

GOOGL
3.5
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Sundar Pichai has not made many high-risk public statements. Brin and Page sometimes show up in the news but are very lowkey for founders of a large company. Google has a normal company website most people will never see. It mentions diversity and sustainability. YouTube, as a social media platform, occasionally gets in hot water on the left for monetizing right-wing advocates and on the right, for having terms of service they sometimes enforce. Google also sometimes encounters problems with censorship, especially with regard to their products in the Chinese market. Their recent marketing tends to focus on diversity; however, Google has control over how most people interact with the internet.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Alphabet was the largest contributor in the computers/technology sector and had highly partisan contributions favoring Democrats. While it is common for this sector to favor Democrats, the highly partisan nature of Alphabet's contributions, their total amount, and Google's high-profile nature makes this a fairly significant risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Alphabet is a very Democratic-leaning company but has a politically mixed customer base. 80% of their 2022 revenue came from ads, so an advertiser boycott could have significant ramifications on the business. Google also has a largely liberal C-suite, so this dichotomy is not likely to change soon.

Associational Risk

3

Alphabet's senior executives mostly donate to Democrats, including Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, which is a risk. Their PAC (Google LLC NetPAC) contributes more evenly between parties, however. Larry Page, one of Google's co-founders, has been subpoenaed in the JPM/Jeffrey Epstein lawsuit. He also has a rift with Elon Musk over AI. The other co-founder, Sergey Brin, has some news headlines about drug use and drama with his ex-wife and Musk.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Google is so big and so ubiquitous that the company has been somewhat insulated from controversy. Google is in a similar spot to Apple, where they have a near-monopoly on the things they provide. 'Google' has an extremely high search volume; however, the company controls search.

Political Hazard (pH) Ratings Explained

A corporation’s Political Hazard Rating, or pH rating, is an overall assessment of the corporation’s likelihood of facing a material consumer boycott or investor backlash from a controversy caused by the company’s or its executives’ political activities and proclivities. The pH ratings range from 1 to 5, with a higher rating correlating with higher risk. The categories below are the components considered when setting a company’s pH rating.

Public Statements Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and the corporations’ own prior public political statements, including their frequency and whether they have tended to be, or actually have been, controversial or high-profile.

Political Dichotomy Risk

Rates the corporation based on the dichotomy, if any, between the executives’ and/or corporations’ own prior political contributions or statements and the likely political leaning of the corporation’s consumer base.

Political Contributions Risk

Rates the corporation based on the magnitude of the executives’ and/or corporations’ total political contributions to politicians and PACs, benchmarked to sector, and the weighted nature of those contributions as between political parties.

Associational Risk

Rates the corporation based on its executives’ and/or the corporation’s own prior political contributions and/or public association with particularly controversial people or high-profile politicians or PACs.

Brand Visibility Risk

Rates the corporation's risk relative to sector with higher risk being associated with higher brand visibility

See this company on INDEXALIGN

Read the reports of these top S&P 500 companies

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

AB InBev

AT&T

Adobe

Advance Auto Parts

Alphabet

Amazon

American Express

Apple

AutoZone

Bath & Body Works

Best Buy

Biogen

Brown Forman

CVS

Caesar's

Campbell

CarMax

Carnival

Charter

Chipotle

Clorox

Coke

Colgate Palmolive

Comcast

Constellation Brands

Costco

Digital Realty

Disney

Dollar General

Dollar Tree

Domino's

EA

Equinix

Estee Lauder

Etsy

Expedia

FedEx

First Energy

Ford

Fox

Garmin

General Mills

General Motors

Hasbro

Hershey's

Hilton

Home Depot

Hormel

Intuit

JM Smucker

JP Morgan

Keurig Dr. Pepper

Kraft Heinz

Kroger

Las Vegas Sands

Lowe's

MGM Resorts

Marriott

McCormick

McDonald's

Meta

Microsoft

Moderna

Molson Coors

Monster

Motorola

Netflix

Nike

Norwegian Cruise

Nvidia

Oracle

Paramount

Pepsi

Pfizer

Procter & Gamble

Ralph Lauren

Ross

Royal Caribbean

Salesforce

Starbucks

Sysco

T-Mobile

TJX

Take Two

Tapestry

Target

Tesla

Tyson

UPS

Ulta

United Airlines

VF Corp

Verizon

Walgreens

Walmart

Warner Bros. Discovery

Waste Management

Wynn

Yum!

eBay

“As a political data company, we are uniquely positioned to measure a company’s pH.” Abigail Wuest, CEO