Estee Lauder

EL
4.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Estee Lauder's CEO, Fabrizio Freda, is paratactically invisible on social media. The company is currently experiencing tension between the leadership of family heirs and stockholders. Former executive, John Demsey, caused an uproar in 2022 due to a racist post on Instagram. Additionally, the company was forced to announce plans to hire more black employees due to diversity complaints in 2020, specifically regarding racism with their "skin lightening" products.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Estee Lauder contributions favor Democrats at a 7:3 ratio, with donations coming entirely from senior executives. The company's combined contribution ratio is very high, but on par with direct competitors such as Procter & Gamble and Kenvue. The company's partisanship is more extreme than its competitors, raising risk slightly. Given the company's partisanship and donation size, their risk rating is high.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

The company's customer base is diverse in its political views. They have generated discourse among their consumers due to a former executive's social media remarks. Combined with the risk stated on their 10K regarding their competitive industry and the firm's persistent lack of diversity, this creates significant risk. Estee Lauder acknowledges this in their 10K, stating that changing consumer preferences are crucial to the survival of the business and that straying from those preferences could lead to potential performance failures. Given the above, Estee Lauder has a higher than average risk score.

Associational Risk

5

The company has contributed to controversial politician Hillary Clinton. An heir of the company, Ronald Lauder, is a strong supporter of and donor to the Republican party. He is a Trump supporter and has made massive donations to PACs supporting Republican former representative Lee Zeldin. Additionally, ex-executive vice president John Demsey was ousted from the company for sharing a racist Instagram post. Their social media pages do not contain links to risky figures.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

The brand is quite diversified, with some products bearing their name. They have good market penetration and high brand awareness. Their diversified brands reduce risk somewhat, however the beauty industry is often lifestyle-based, which increases the risk.

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

Estee Lauder

EL
4.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Estee Lauder's CEO, Fabrizio Freda, is paratactically invisible on social media. The company is currently experiencing tension between the leadership of family heirs and stockholders. Former executive, John Demsey, caused an uproar in 2022 due to a racist post on Instagram. Additionally, the company was forced to announce plans to hire more black employees due to diversity complaints in 2020, specifically regarding racism with their "skin lightening" products.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Estee Lauder contributions favor Democrats at a 7:3 ratio, with donations coming entirely from senior executives. The company's combined contribution ratio is very high, but on par with direct competitors such as Procter & Gamble and Kenvue. The company's partisanship is more extreme than its competitors, raising risk slightly. Given the company's partisanship and donation size, their risk rating is high.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

The company's customer base is diverse in its political views. They have generated discourse among their consumers due to a former executive's social media remarks. Combined with the risk stated on their 10K regarding their competitive industry and the firm's persistent lack of diversity, this creates significant risk. Estee Lauder acknowledges this in their 10K, stating that changing consumer preferences are crucial to the survival of the business and that straying from those preferences could lead to potential performance failures. Given the above, Estee Lauder has a higher than average risk score.

Associational Risk

5

The company has contributed to controversial politician Hillary Clinton. An heir of the company, Ronald Lauder, is a strong supporter of and donor to the Republican party. He is a Trump supporter and has made massive donations to PACs supporting Republican former representative Lee Zeldin. Additionally, ex-executive vice president John Demsey was ousted from the company for sharing a racist Instagram post. Their social media pages do not contain links to risky figures.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

The brand is quite diversified, with some products bearing their name. They have good market penetration and high brand awareness. Their diversified brands reduce risk somewhat, however the beauty industry is often lifestyle-based, which increases the risk.

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

Estee Lauder

EL
4.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Estee Lauder's CEO, Fabrizio Freda, is paratactically invisible on social media. The company is currently experiencing tension between the leadership of family heirs and stockholders. Former executive, John Demsey, caused an uproar in 2022 due to a racist post on Instagram. Additionally, the company was forced to announce plans to hire more black employees due to diversity complaints in 2020, specifically regarding racism with their "skin lightening" products.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Estee Lauder contributions favor Democrats at a 7:3 ratio, with donations coming entirely from senior executives. The company's combined contribution ratio is very high, but on par with direct competitors such as Procter & Gamble and Kenvue. The company's partisanship is more extreme than its competitors, raising risk slightly. Given the company's partisanship and donation size, their risk rating is high.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

The company's customer base is diverse in its political views. They have generated discourse among their consumers due to a former executive's social media remarks. Combined with the risk stated on their 10K regarding their competitive industry and the firm's persistent lack of diversity, this creates significant risk. Estee Lauder acknowledges this in their 10K, stating that changing consumer preferences are crucial to the survival of the business and that straying from those preferences could lead to potential performance failures. Given the above, Estee Lauder has a higher than average risk score.

Associational Risk

5

The company has contributed to controversial politician Hillary Clinton. An heir of the company, Ronald Lauder, is a strong supporter of and donor to the Republican party. He is a Trump supporter and has made massive donations to PACs supporting Republican former representative Lee Zeldin. Additionally, ex-executive vice president John Demsey was ousted from the company for sharing a racist Instagram post. Their social media pages do not contain links to risky figures.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

The brand is quite diversified, with some products bearing their name. They have good market penetration and high brand awareness. Their diversified brands reduce risk somewhat, however the beauty industry is often lifestyle-based, which increases the risk.

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

Estee Lauder

EL
4.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Estee Lauder's CEO, Fabrizio Freda, is paratactically invisible on social media. The company is currently experiencing tension between the leadership of family heirs and stockholders. Former executive, John Demsey, caused an uproar in 2022 due to a racist post on Instagram. Additionally, the company was forced to announce plans to hire more black employees due to diversity complaints in 2020, specifically regarding racism with their "skin lightening" products.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Estee Lauder contributions favor Democrats at a 7:3 ratio, with donations coming entirely from senior executives. The company's combined contribution ratio is very high, but on par with direct competitors such as Procter & Gamble and Kenvue. The company's partisanship is more extreme than its competitors, raising risk slightly. Given the company's partisanship and donation size, their risk rating is high.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

The company's customer base is diverse in its political views. They have generated discourse among their consumers due to a former executive's social media remarks. Combined with the risk stated on their 10K regarding their competitive industry and the firm's persistent lack of diversity, this creates significant risk. Estee Lauder acknowledges this in their 10K, stating that changing consumer preferences are crucial to the survival of the business and that straying from those preferences could lead to potential performance failures. Given the above, Estee Lauder has a higher than average risk score.

Associational Risk

5

The company has contributed to controversial politician Hillary Clinton. An heir of the company, Ronald Lauder, is a strong supporter of and donor to the Republican party. He is a Trump supporter and has made massive donations to PACs supporting Republican former representative Lee Zeldin. Additionally, ex-executive vice president John Demsey was ousted from the company for sharing a racist Instagram post. Their social media pages do not contain links to risky figures.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

The brand is quite diversified, with some products bearing their name. They have good market penetration and high brand awareness. Their diversified brands reduce risk somewhat, however the beauty industry is often lifestyle-based, which increases the risk.

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

Estee Lauder

EL
4.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

4

Estee Lauder's CEO, Fabrizio Freda, is paratactically invisible on social media. The company is currently experiencing tension between the leadership of family heirs and stockholders. Former executive, John Demsey, caused an uproar in 2022 due to a racist post on Instagram. Additionally, the company was forced to announce plans to hire more black employees due to diversity complaints in 2020, specifically regarding racism with their "skin lightening" products.

Political Contributions Risk

4

Estee Lauder contributions favor Democrats at a 7:3 ratio, with donations coming entirely from senior executives. The company's combined contribution ratio is very high, but on par with direct competitors such as Procter & Gamble and Kenvue. The company's partisanship is more extreme than its competitors, raising risk slightly. Given the company's partisanship and donation size, their risk rating is high.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

The company's customer base is diverse in its political views. They have generated discourse among their consumers due to a former executive's social media remarks. Combined with the risk stated on their 10K regarding their competitive industry and the firm's persistent lack of diversity, this creates significant risk. Estee Lauder acknowledges this in their 10K, stating that changing consumer preferences are crucial to the survival of the business and that straying from those preferences could lead to potential performance failures. Given the above, Estee Lauder has a higher than average risk score.

Associational Risk

5

The company has contributed to controversial politician Hillary Clinton. An heir of the company, Ronald Lauder, is a strong supporter of and donor to the Republican party. He is a Trump supporter and has made massive donations to PACs supporting Republican former representative Lee Zeldin. Additionally, ex-executive vice president John Demsey was ousted from the company for sharing a racist Instagram post. Their social media pages do not contain links to risky figures.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

The brand is quite diversified, with some products bearing their name. They have good market penetration and high brand awareness. Their diversified brands reduce risk somewhat, however the beauty industry is often lifestyle-based, which increases the risk.

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