Disney

DIS
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Bob Iger is one of the most famous and visible CEOs in the world, presiding over one of the most famous and visible brands in history. He's an extremely competent, even-keeled executive but in his position, even minor mistakes dominate news cycles. This is how the Florida feud came about, not through any particular fault of the company, but because of the political landscape, Disney's placement in the entertainment industry, and its attempt to straddle sales to both very liberal and very conservative customers. News, press releases, and public statements have been dominated by this feud and the wider conservative pushback against LGBTQ+ visibility in entertainment and marketing material. The company is as well positioned as any firm to handle this volatility. Whether or not it's possible to do so is what's uncertain.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Disney and its senior executives are the fourth largest contributor in the consumer discretionary sector, and they have contributions that heavily favor Democrats. Disney suspended political donations in Florida after they passed the 'don't say gay' bill, which is what arguably sparked the feud with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Political Dichotomy Risk

5

Disney is extremely visible and suffers the classic misalignment of blue entertainment companies compared to consumers who span both political parties. They're too easy to target and too visible not to attract similar attacks from the right or pushback from the left if they give in. Additionally, their parks and movies are somewhat of a lifestyle brand for many right leaning people adding to the difficulties. This is all alluded to as changing consumer taste in the 10K.

Associational Risk

4

Major controversy with Ron DeSantis and the lawsuit over Disney's revoked self-governing privileges. DeSantis is a controversial figure. Relations with Musk are also potentially risky - Disney continues to be one of the biggest advertisers on the Twitter platform (while many others have stopped ads on Twitter).

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Very prominent and historical brand; however, the company is somewhat insulated from controversy due to their size and sprawl. Serious controversy has been brushed off in the past.

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

Disney

DIS
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Bob Iger is one of the most famous and visible CEOs in the world, presiding over one of the most famous and visible brands in history. He's an extremely competent, even-keeled executive but in his position, even minor mistakes dominate news cycles. This is how the Florida feud came about, not through any particular fault of the company, but because of the political landscape, Disney's placement in the entertainment industry, and its attempt to straddle sales to both very liberal and very conservative customers. News, press releases, and public statements have been dominated by this feud and the wider conservative pushback against LGBTQ+ visibility in entertainment and marketing material. The company is as well positioned as any firm to handle this volatility. Whether or not it's possible to do so is what's uncertain.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Disney and its senior executives are the fourth largest contributor in the consumer discretionary sector, and they have contributions that heavily favor Democrats. Disney suspended political donations in Florida after they passed the 'don't say gay' bill, which is what arguably sparked the feud with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Political Dichotomy Risk

5

Disney is extremely visible and suffers the classic misalignment of blue entertainment companies compared to consumers who span both political parties. They're too easy to target and too visible not to attract similar attacks from the right or pushback from the left if they give in. Additionally, their parks and movies are somewhat of a lifestyle brand for many right leaning people adding to the difficulties. This is all alluded to as changing consumer taste in the 10K.

Associational Risk

4

Major controversy with Ron DeSantis and the lawsuit over Disney's revoked self-governing privileges. DeSantis is a controversial figure. Relations with Musk are also potentially risky - Disney continues to be one of the biggest advertisers on the Twitter platform (while many others have stopped ads on Twitter).

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Very prominent and historical brand; however, the company is somewhat insulated from controversy due to their size and sprawl. Serious controversy has been brushed off in the past.

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

Disney

DIS
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Bob Iger is one of the most famous and visible CEOs in the world, presiding over one of the most famous and visible brands in history. He's an extremely competent, even-keeled executive but in his position, even minor mistakes dominate news cycles. This is how the Florida feud came about, not through any particular fault of the company, but because of the political landscape, Disney's placement in the entertainment industry, and its attempt to straddle sales to both very liberal and very conservative customers. News, press releases, and public statements have been dominated by this feud and the wider conservative pushback against LGBTQ+ visibility in entertainment and marketing material. The company is as well positioned as any firm to handle this volatility. Whether or not it's possible to do so is what's uncertain.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Disney and its senior executives are the fourth largest contributor in the consumer discretionary sector, and they have contributions that heavily favor Democrats. Disney suspended political donations in Florida after they passed the 'don't say gay' bill, which is what arguably sparked the feud with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Political Dichotomy Risk

5

Disney is extremely visible and suffers the classic misalignment of blue entertainment companies compared to consumers who span both political parties. They're too easy to target and too visible not to attract similar attacks from the right or pushback from the left if they give in. Additionally, their parks and movies are somewhat of a lifestyle brand for many right leaning people adding to the difficulties. This is all alluded to as changing consumer taste in the 10K.

Associational Risk

4

Major controversy with Ron DeSantis and the lawsuit over Disney's revoked self-governing privileges. DeSantis is a controversial figure. Relations with Musk are also potentially risky - Disney continues to be one of the biggest advertisers on the Twitter platform (while many others have stopped ads on Twitter).

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Very prominent and historical brand; however, the company is somewhat insulated from controversy due to their size and sprawl. Serious controversy has been brushed off in the past.

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

Disney

DIS
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Bob Iger is one of the most famous and visible CEOs in the world, presiding over one of the most famous and visible brands in history. He's an extremely competent, even-keeled executive but in his position, even minor mistakes dominate news cycles. This is how the Florida feud came about, not through any particular fault of the company, but because of the political landscape, Disney's placement in the entertainment industry, and its attempt to straddle sales to both very liberal and very conservative customers. News, press releases, and public statements have been dominated by this feud and the wider conservative pushback against LGBTQ+ visibility in entertainment and marketing material. The company is as well positioned as any firm to handle this volatility. Whether or not it's possible to do so is what's uncertain.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Disney and its senior executives are the fourth largest contributor in the consumer discretionary sector, and they have contributions that heavily favor Democrats. Disney suspended political donations in Florida after they passed the 'don't say gay' bill, which is what arguably sparked the feud with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Political Dichotomy Risk

5

Disney is extremely visible and suffers the classic misalignment of blue entertainment companies compared to consumers who span both political parties. They're too easy to target and too visible not to attract similar attacks from the right or pushback from the left if they give in. Additionally, their parks and movies are somewhat of a lifestyle brand for many right leaning people adding to the difficulties. This is all alluded to as changing consumer taste in the 10K.

Associational Risk

4

Major controversy with Ron DeSantis and the lawsuit over Disney's revoked self-governing privileges. DeSantis is a controversial figure. Relations with Musk are also potentially risky - Disney continues to be one of the biggest advertisers on the Twitter platform (while many others have stopped ads on Twitter).

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Very prominent and historical brand; however, the company is somewhat insulated from controversy due to their size and sprawl. Serious controversy has been brushed off in the past.

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

Disney

DIS
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Bob Iger is one of the most famous and visible CEOs in the world, presiding over one of the most famous and visible brands in history. He's an extremely competent, even-keeled executive but in his position, even minor mistakes dominate news cycles. This is how the Florida feud came about, not through any particular fault of the company, but because of the political landscape, Disney's placement in the entertainment industry, and its attempt to straddle sales to both very liberal and very conservative customers. News, press releases, and public statements have been dominated by this feud and the wider conservative pushback against LGBTQ+ visibility in entertainment and marketing material. The company is as well positioned as any firm to handle this volatility. Whether or not it's possible to do so is what's uncertain.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Disney and its senior executives are the fourth largest contributor in the consumer discretionary sector, and they have contributions that heavily favor Democrats. Disney suspended political donations in Florida after they passed the 'don't say gay' bill, which is what arguably sparked the feud with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Political Dichotomy Risk

5

Disney is extremely visible and suffers the classic misalignment of blue entertainment companies compared to consumers who span both political parties. They're too easy to target and too visible not to attract similar attacks from the right or pushback from the left if they give in. Additionally, their parks and movies are somewhat of a lifestyle brand for many right leaning people adding to the difficulties. This is all alluded to as changing consumer taste in the 10K.

Associational Risk

4

Major controversy with Ron DeSantis and the lawsuit over Disney's revoked self-governing privileges. DeSantis is a controversial figure. Relations with Musk are also potentially risky - Disney continues to be one of the biggest advertisers on the Twitter platform (while many others have stopped ads on Twitter).

Brand Visibility Risk

3

Very prominent and historical brand; however, the company is somewhat insulated from controversy due to their size and sprawl. Serious controversy has been brushed off in the past.

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