Meta

META
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

5

Mark Zuckerberg is one of the most visible CEOs in the world. And, as a media company, Meta is under extreme scrutiny from all segments of the political compass with respect to its policies on political speech. At various times, it has angered both the Right and Left, to the point where there's now a relatively bipartisan coalition intent on regulating its power. While its well hidden 'About' section contains statements on sustainability and human rights, its power as a modern media company and arbiter of discourse puts it in a constant state of angering multiple coalitions over its handling of speech. Congress also seems intent on generating press for the company, pushing it to release press statements that remind people just how much power they have.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Meta highly favors Democrats and is the third highest contributor in the computers/tech sector.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Meta highly favors Democrats with its political contributions, but its users and advertisers are likely relatively evenly split between political parties. Substantially all' of Meta's revenue is generated by advertising. Meta is therefore deeply vulnerable to ad and/or user boycotts. Meta has some insulation, however, given the popularity of its platforms.

Associational Risk

4

Past political donations include Hillary Clinton. Their riskiest association is probably with their CEO, Mark Zuckerberg. He is currently in headlines regarding the investigation into Facebook's 'stifling free speech." Zuckerberg also has a risky relationship with Musk: there are headlines about a potential cage fight between the two of them. The company's social media campaigns, however, appear to have so far been with uncontroversial celebrities such as Keke Palmer and Brenda Chen.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

Huge press presence, one of the most talked about companies in the world. This many eyes on them creates higher risk, though it is slightly insulated by it's diversification of platforms (Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, etc), and its sheer size, where many users simply won't care what they do.

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

Meta

META
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

5

Mark Zuckerberg is one of the most visible CEOs in the world. And, as a media company, Meta is under extreme scrutiny from all segments of the political compass with respect to its policies on political speech. At various times, it has angered both the Right and Left, to the point where there's now a relatively bipartisan coalition intent on regulating its power. While its well hidden 'About' section contains statements on sustainability and human rights, its power as a modern media company and arbiter of discourse puts it in a constant state of angering multiple coalitions over its handling of speech. Congress also seems intent on generating press for the company, pushing it to release press statements that remind people just how much power they have.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Meta highly favors Democrats and is the third highest contributor in the computers/tech sector.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Meta highly favors Democrats with its political contributions, but its users and advertisers are likely relatively evenly split between political parties. Substantially all' of Meta's revenue is generated by advertising. Meta is therefore deeply vulnerable to ad and/or user boycotts. Meta has some insulation, however, given the popularity of its platforms.

Associational Risk

4

Past political donations include Hillary Clinton. Their riskiest association is probably with their CEO, Mark Zuckerberg. He is currently in headlines regarding the investigation into Facebook's 'stifling free speech." Zuckerberg also has a risky relationship with Musk: there are headlines about a potential cage fight between the two of them. The company's social media campaigns, however, appear to have so far been with uncontroversial celebrities such as Keke Palmer and Brenda Chen.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

Huge press presence, one of the most talked about companies in the world. This many eyes on them creates higher risk, though it is slightly insulated by it's diversification of platforms (Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, etc), and its sheer size, where many users simply won't care what they do.

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

Meta

META
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

5

Mark Zuckerberg is one of the most visible CEOs in the world. And, as a media company, Meta is under extreme scrutiny from all segments of the political compass with respect to its policies on political speech. At various times, it has angered both the Right and Left, to the point where there's now a relatively bipartisan coalition intent on regulating its power. While its well hidden 'About' section contains statements on sustainability and human rights, its power as a modern media company and arbiter of discourse puts it in a constant state of angering multiple coalitions over its handling of speech. Congress also seems intent on generating press for the company, pushing it to release press statements that remind people just how much power they have.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Meta highly favors Democrats and is the third highest contributor in the computers/tech sector.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Meta highly favors Democrats with its political contributions, but its users and advertisers are likely relatively evenly split between political parties. Substantially all' of Meta's revenue is generated by advertising. Meta is therefore deeply vulnerable to ad and/or user boycotts. Meta has some insulation, however, given the popularity of its platforms.

Associational Risk

4

Past political donations include Hillary Clinton. Their riskiest association is probably with their CEO, Mark Zuckerberg. He is currently in headlines regarding the investigation into Facebook's 'stifling free speech." Zuckerberg also has a risky relationship with Musk: there are headlines about a potential cage fight between the two of them. The company's social media campaigns, however, appear to have so far been with uncontroversial celebrities such as Keke Palmer and Brenda Chen.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

Huge press presence, one of the most talked about companies in the world. This many eyes on them creates higher risk, though it is slightly insulated by it's diversification of platforms (Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, etc), and its sheer size, where many users simply won't care what they do.

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

Meta

META
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

5

Mark Zuckerberg is one of the most visible CEOs in the world. And, as a media company, Meta is under extreme scrutiny from all segments of the political compass with respect to its policies on political speech. At various times, it has angered both the Right and Left, to the point where there's now a relatively bipartisan coalition intent on regulating its power. While its well hidden 'About' section contains statements on sustainability and human rights, its power as a modern media company and arbiter of discourse puts it in a constant state of angering multiple coalitions over its handling of speech. Congress also seems intent on generating press for the company, pushing it to release press statements that remind people just how much power they have.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Meta highly favors Democrats and is the third highest contributor in the computers/tech sector.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Meta highly favors Democrats with its political contributions, but its users and advertisers are likely relatively evenly split between political parties. Substantially all' of Meta's revenue is generated by advertising. Meta is therefore deeply vulnerable to ad and/or user boycotts. Meta has some insulation, however, given the popularity of its platforms.

Associational Risk

4

Past political donations include Hillary Clinton. Their riskiest association is probably with their CEO, Mark Zuckerberg. He is currently in headlines regarding the investigation into Facebook's 'stifling free speech." Zuckerberg also has a risky relationship with Musk: there are headlines about a potential cage fight between the two of them. The company's social media campaigns, however, appear to have so far been with uncontroversial celebrities such as Keke Palmer and Brenda Chen.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

Huge press presence, one of the most talked about companies in the world. This many eyes on them creates higher risk, though it is slightly insulated by it's diversification of platforms (Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, etc), and its sheer size, where many users simply won't care what they do.

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

Meta

META
4.3
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

5

Mark Zuckerberg is one of the most visible CEOs in the world. And, as a media company, Meta is under extreme scrutiny from all segments of the political compass with respect to its policies on political speech. At various times, it has angered both the Right and Left, to the point where there's now a relatively bipartisan coalition intent on regulating its power. While its well hidden 'About' section contains statements on sustainability and human rights, its power as a modern media company and arbiter of discourse puts it in a constant state of angering multiple coalitions over its handling of speech. Congress also seems intent on generating press for the company, pushing it to release press statements that remind people just how much power they have.

Political Contributions Risk

5

Meta highly favors Democrats and is the third highest contributor in the computers/tech sector.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

Meta highly favors Democrats with its political contributions, but its users and advertisers are likely relatively evenly split between political parties. Substantially all' of Meta's revenue is generated by advertising. Meta is therefore deeply vulnerable to ad and/or user boycotts. Meta has some insulation, however, given the popularity of its platforms.

Associational Risk

4

Past political donations include Hillary Clinton. Their riskiest association is probably with their CEO, Mark Zuckerberg. He is currently in headlines regarding the investigation into Facebook's 'stifling free speech." Zuckerberg also has a risky relationship with Musk: there are headlines about a potential cage fight between the two of them. The company's social media campaigns, however, appear to have so far been with uncontroversial celebrities such as Keke Palmer and Brenda Chen.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

Huge press presence, one of the most talked about companies in the world. This many eyes on them creates higher risk, though it is slightly insulated by it's diversification of platforms (Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, etc), and its sheer size, where many users simply won't care what they do.

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