McCormick

MKC
2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

McCormick's CEO, Brendan Foley, is not active on social media, only having a LinkedIn account. He is still relatively new to the company, assuming the CEO position in the latter half of 2023. Foley has not appeared a lot in the media, nor does he make statements regarding politics. McCormick as a company is active on socials, but most of their posts apolitically promote their products through recipe ideas; they do post for holidays and Pride Month, however. Their website mentions a commitment to net-zero by 2050 as well as ESG and deeper in the section, "championing equality" is highlighted as a brand goal, with percentages of leadership positions held by women and minorities specified.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Contributes with a substantial Democratic skew, entirely from senior executives. Combined contribution level, however, is minimal and ranks in the lower-middle threshold of the Consumer Staple sector. Past contributions to controversial political figures like Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz elevate risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

2

Due to the B2B operations that McCormick utilizes to generate their revenue, political boycotts are much less likely. While the customer base is politically diverse, contributions are primarily to Democrats. However, this apparent dichotomy can be seen as insignificant due to the lack of public partisan stance by the company. Additionally, with the valued-based nature of their products, McCormick has a low risk of consumers concern for company integrity for the production of spices. Considering these factors, the corporation has a low risk of facing political boycott.

Associational Risk

1

Research revealed no articles regarding associations between the company and controversial figures. The CEO does not present any political risks. Their Instagram page does not include posts with influencers or celebrities. Overall low risk in terms of associations.

Brand Visibility Risk

1

Much of McCormick's revenue is from B2B dealings, which insulates them from controversy greatly, being one level removed from end-user consumers. Additionally, its operations in the food industry maintain a low pH risk level. The historic implications of spice sales could minimally raise the pH, but it is unlikely.

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

McCormick

MKC
2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

McCormick's CEO, Brendan Foley, is not active on social media, only having a LinkedIn account. He is still relatively new to the company, assuming the CEO position in the latter half of 2023. Foley has not appeared a lot in the media, nor does he make statements regarding politics. McCormick as a company is active on socials, but most of their posts apolitically promote their products through recipe ideas; they do post for holidays and Pride Month, however. Their website mentions a commitment to net-zero by 2050 as well as ESG and deeper in the section, "championing equality" is highlighted as a brand goal, with percentages of leadership positions held by women and minorities specified.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Contributes with a substantial Democratic skew, entirely from senior executives. Combined contribution level, however, is minimal and ranks in the lower-middle threshold of the Consumer Staple sector. Past contributions to controversial political figures like Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz elevate risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

2

Due to the B2B operations that McCormick utilizes to generate their revenue, political boycotts are much less likely. While the customer base is politically diverse, contributions are primarily to Democrats. However, this apparent dichotomy can be seen as insignificant due to the lack of public partisan stance by the company. Additionally, with the valued-based nature of their products, McCormick has a low risk of consumers concern for company integrity for the production of spices. Considering these factors, the corporation has a low risk of facing political boycott.

Associational Risk

1

Research revealed no articles regarding associations between the company and controversial figures. The CEO does not present any political risks. Their Instagram page does not include posts with influencers or celebrities. Overall low risk in terms of associations.

Brand Visibility Risk

1

Much of McCormick's revenue is from B2B dealings, which insulates them from controversy greatly, being one level removed from end-user consumers. Additionally, its operations in the food industry maintain a low pH risk level. The historic implications of spice sales could minimally raise the pH, but it is unlikely.

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

McCormick

MKC
2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

McCormick's CEO, Brendan Foley, is not active on social media, only having a LinkedIn account. He is still relatively new to the company, assuming the CEO position in the latter half of 2023. Foley has not appeared a lot in the media, nor does he make statements regarding politics. McCormick as a company is active on socials, but most of their posts apolitically promote their products through recipe ideas; they do post for holidays and Pride Month, however. Their website mentions a commitment to net-zero by 2050 as well as ESG and deeper in the section, "championing equality" is highlighted as a brand goal, with percentages of leadership positions held by women and minorities specified.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Contributes with a substantial Democratic skew, entirely from senior executives. Combined contribution level, however, is minimal and ranks in the lower-middle threshold of the Consumer Staple sector. Past contributions to controversial political figures like Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz elevate risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

2

Due to the B2B operations that McCormick utilizes to generate their revenue, political boycotts are much less likely. While the customer base is politically diverse, contributions are primarily to Democrats. However, this apparent dichotomy can be seen as insignificant due to the lack of public partisan stance by the company. Additionally, with the valued-based nature of their products, McCormick has a low risk of consumers concern for company integrity for the production of spices. Considering these factors, the corporation has a low risk of facing political boycott.

Associational Risk

1

Research revealed no articles regarding associations between the company and controversial figures. The CEO does not present any political risks. Their Instagram page does not include posts with influencers or celebrities. Overall low risk in terms of associations.

Brand Visibility Risk

1

Much of McCormick's revenue is from B2B dealings, which insulates them from controversy greatly, being one level removed from end-user consumers. Additionally, its operations in the food industry maintain a low pH risk level. The historic implications of spice sales could minimally raise the pH, but it is unlikely.

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

McCormick

MKC
2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

McCormick's CEO, Brendan Foley, is not active on social media, only having a LinkedIn account. He is still relatively new to the company, assuming the CEO position in the latter half of 2023. Foley has not appeared a lot in the media, nor does he make statements regarding politics. McCormick as a company is active on socials, but most of their posts apolitically promote their products through recipe ideas; they do post for holidays and Pride Month, however. Their website mentions a commitment to net-zero by 2050 as well as ESG and deeper in the section, "championing equality" is highlighted as a brand goal, with percentages of leadership positions held by women and minorities specified.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Contributes with a substantial Democratic skew, entirely from senior executives. Combined contribution level, however, is minimal and ranks in the lower-middle threshold of the Consumer Staple sector. Past contributions to controversial political figures like Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz elevate risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

2

Due to the B2B operations that McCormick utilizes to generate their revenue, political boycotts are much less likely. While the customer base is politically diverse, contributions are primarily to Democrats. However, this apparent dichotomy can be seen as insignificant due to the lack of public partisan stance by the company. Additionally, with the valued-based nature of their products, McCormick has a low risk of consumers concern for company integrity for the production of spices. Considering these factors, the corporation has a low risk of facing political boycott.

Associational Risk

1

Research revealed no articles regarding associations between the company and controversial figures. The CEO does not present any political risks. Their Instagram page does not include posts with influencers or celebrities. Overall low risk in terms of associations.

Brand Visibility Risk

1

Much of McCormick's revenue is from B2B dealings, which insulates them from controversy greatly, being one level removed from end-user consumers. Additionally, its operations in the food industry maintain a low pH risk level. The historic implications of spice sales could minimally raise the pH, but it is unlikely.

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

McCormick

MKC
2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

McCormick's CEO, Brendan Foley, is not active on social media, only having a LinkedIn account. He is still relatively new to the company, assuming the CEO position in the latter half of 2023. Foley has not appeared a lot in the media, nor does he make statements regarding politics. McCormick as a company is active on socials, but most of their posts apolitically promote their products through recipe ideas; they do post for holidays and Pride Month, however. Their website mentions a commitment to net-zero by 2050 as well as ESG and deeper in the section, "championing equality" is highlighted as a brand goal, with percentages of leadership positions held by women and minorities specified.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Contributes with a substantial Democratic skew, entirely from senior executives. Combined contribution level, however, is minimal and ranks in the lower-middle threshold of the Consumer Staple sector. Past contributions to controversial political figures like Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz elevate risk.

Political Dichotomy Risk

2

Due to the B2B operations that McCormick utilizes to generate their revenue, political boycotts are much less likely. While the customer base is politically diverse, contributions are primarily to Democrats. However, this apparent dichotomy can be seen as insignificant due to the lack of public partisan stance by the company. Additionally, with the valued-based nature of their products, McCormick has a low risk of consumers concern for company integrity for the production of spices. Considering these factors, the corporation has a low risk of facing political boycott.

Associational Risk

1

Research revealed no articles regarding associations between the company and controversial figures. The CEO does not present any political risks. Their Instagram page does not include posts with influencers or celebrities. Overall low risk in terms of associations.

Brand Visibility Risk

1

Much of McCormick's revenue is from B2B dealings, which insulates them from controversy greatly, being one level removed from end-user consumers. Additionally, its operations in the food industry maintain a low pH risk level. The historic implications of spice sales could minimally raise the pH, but it is unlikely.

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