Molson Coors

TAP
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

2

Generally boilerplate messaging, somewhat left-leaning and has shown support for LGBT issues and public figures. The CEO maintains a low public profile, besides public statements that their market share has surged in light of the Bud Light controversy, which the company believes is likely to be a "permanent shift".

Political Contributions Risk

1

Donations are almost entirely to Republicans, including to Trump. Molson Coors' contributions trends are consistent with their competitors in the beer industry. Despite a high donation level, contributions are significantly lower than major competitor Anheuser-Busch.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

After the Bud Light controversy, the alcohol industry has been proven to be extremely volatile. With Molson Coors being a major competitor, many ex-Bud Light consumers switched to their brands. The company's 10K confirms this volatility, saying that geopolitical tension and marketing mistakes could lead to large risks for revenue. The company remains at high risk to boycotts from consumers who may be against LGBTQ+ marketing like Bud Light's. This is especially true given Miller Lite's highly criticized feminist ad around the time of the Bud Light boycott. Beer companies are all incentivized to target younger, more left-leaning consumers, which opposes the ideology of many older, republican-oriented consumers. Beer is now part of the Culture War, with Bud Light representing just the first casualty. Additionally, the 10K states that unions are heavily involved throughout the corporation, so labor disputes pose substantial threats to production and distribution operations. The company is heavily dependent on third-party retailers to display and sell their product, so employing polarizing PR campaigns could alienate vendors who make final sales.

Associational Risk

4

No social media posts indicating controversial relationships. Around the same time as Anheuser-Busch's Dylan Mulvaney PR crisis, their subsidiary, Miller Lite, had a controversial ad supporting female brewers and women in the industry. Despite receiving some negative public attention, it was significantly less controversial than their competitor's campaign. In 2022, press coverage reported on Molson Coors donating to LGBTQ+ organizations, which elevates risk, as do their donations to former President Trump.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

A lifestyle brand, people buy Coors for its reputation and cultural value, not for price or quality. Many of the firm's other subsidiary brands, such as Miller and Blue Moon, have similar demand positioning. Brand visibility as a main draw to consumers directly links their sales to brand value.

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

Molson Coors

TAP
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

2

Generally boilerplate messaging, somewhat left-leaning and has shown support for LGBT issues and public figures. The CEO maintains a low public profile, besides public statements that their market share has surged in light of the Bud Light controversy, which the company believes is likely to be a "permanent shift".

Political Contributions Risk

1

Donations are almost entirely to Republicans, including to Trump. Molson Coors' contributions trends are consistent with their competitors in the beer industry. Despite a high donation level, contributions are significantly lower than major competitor Anheuser-Busch.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

After the Bud Light controversy, the alcohol industry has been proven to be extremely volatile. With Molson Coors being a major competitor, many ex-Bud Light consumers switched to their brands. The company's 10K confirms this volatility, saying that geopolitical tension and marketing mistakes could lead to large risks for revenue. The company remains at high risk to boycotts from consumers who may be against LGBTQ+ marketing like Bud Light's. This is especially true given Miller Lite's highly criticized feminist ad around the time of the Bud Light boycott. Beer companies are all incentivized to target younger, more left-leaning consumers, which opposes the ideology of many older, republican-oriented consumers. Beer is now part of the Culture War, with Bud Light representing just the first casualty. Additionally, the 10K states that unions are heavily involved throughout the corporation, so labor disputes pose substantial threats to production and distribution operations. The company is heavily dependent on third-party retailers to display and sell their product, so employing polarizing PR campaigns could alienate vendors who make final sales.

Associational Risk

4

No social media posts indicating controversial relationships. Around the same time as Anheuser-Busch's Dylan Mulvaney PR crisis, their subsidiary, Miller Lite, had a controversial ad supporting female brewers and women in the industry. Despite receiving some negative public attention, it was significantly less controversial than their competitor's campaign. In 2022, press coverage reported on Molson Coors donating to LGBTQ+ organizations, which elevates risk, as do their donations to former President Trump.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

A lifestyle brand, people buy Coors for its reputation and cultural value, not for price or quality. Many of the firm's other subsidiary brands, such as Miller and Blue Moon, have similar demand positioning. Brand visibility as a main draw to consumers directly links their sales to brand value.

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

Molson Coors

TAP
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

2

Generally boilerplate messaging, somewhat left-leaning and has shown support for LGBT issues and public figures. The CEO maintains a low public profile, besides public statements that their market share has surged in light of the Bud Light controversy, which the company believes is likely to be a "permanent shift".

Political Contributions Risk

1

Donations are almost entirely to Republicans, including to Trump. Molson Coors' contributions trends are consistent with their competitors in the beer industry. Despite a high donation level, contributions are significantly lower than major competitor Anheuser-Busch.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

After the Bud Light controversy, the alcohol industry has been proven to be extremely volatile. With Molson Coors being a major competitor, many ex-Bud Light consumers switched to their brands. The company's 10K confirms this volatility, saying that geopolitical tension and marketing mistakes could lead to large risks for revenue. The company remains at high risk to boycotts from consumers who may be against LGBTQ+ marketing like Bud Light's. This is especially true given Miller Lite's highly criticized feminist ad around the time of the Bud Light boycott. Beer companies are all incentivized to target younger, more left-leaning consumers, which opposes the ideology of many older, republican-oriented consumers. Beer is now part of the Culture War, with Bud Light representing just the first casualty. Additionally, the 10K states that unions are heavily involved throughout the corporation, so labor disputes pose substantial threats to production and distribution operations. The company is heavily dependent on third-party retailers to display and sell their product, so employing polarizing PR campaigns could alienate vendors who make final sales.

Associational Risk

4

No social media posts indicating controversial relationships. Around the same time as Anheuser-Busch's Dylan Mulvaney PR crisis, their subsidiary, Miller Lite, had a controversial ad supporting female brewers and women in the industry. Despite receiving some negative public attention, it was significantly less controversial than their competitor's campaign. In 2022, press coverage reported on Molson Coors donating to LGBTQ+ organizations, which elevates risk, as do their donations to former President Trump.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

A lifestyle brand, people buy Coors for its reputation and cultural value, not for price or quality. Many of the firm's other subsidiary brands, such as Miller and Blue Moon, have similar demand positioning. Brand visibility as a main draw to consumers directly links their sales to brand value.

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

Molson Coors

TAP
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

2

Generally boilerplate messaging, somewhat left-leaning and has shown support for LGBT issues and public figures. The CEO maintains a low public profile, besides public statements that their market share has surged in light of the Bud Light controversy, which the company believes is likely to be a "permanent shift".

Political Contributions Risk

1

Donations are almost entirely to Republicans, including to Trump. Molson Coors' contributions trends are consistent with their competitors in the beer industry. Despite a high donation level, contributions are significantly lower than major competitor Anheuser-Busch.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

After the Bud Light controversy, the alcohol industry has been proven to be extremely volatile. With Molson Coors being a major competitor, many ex-Bud Light consumers switched to their brands. The company's 10K confirms this volatility, saying that geopolitical tension and marketing mistakes could lead to large risks for revenue. The company remains at high risk to boycotts from consumers who may be against LGBTQ+ marketing like Bud Light's. This is especially true given Miller Lite's highly criticized feminist ad around the time of the Bud Light boycott. Beer companies are all incentivized to target younger, more left-leaning consumers, which opposes the ideology of many older, republican-oriented consumers. Beer is now part of the Culture War, with Bud Light representing just the first casualty. Additionally, the 10K states that unions are heavily involved throughout the corporation, so labor disputes pose substantial threats to production and distribution operations. The company is heavily dependent on third-party retailers to display and sell their product, so employing polarizing PR campaigns could alienate vendors who make final sales.

Associational Risk

4

No social media posts indicating controversial relationships. Around the same time as Anheuser-Busch's Dylan Mulvaney PR crisis, their subsidiary, Miller Lite, had a controversial ad supporting female brewers and women in the industry. Despite receiving some negative public attention, it was significantly less controversial than their competitor's campaign. In 2022, press coverage reported on Molson Coors donating to LGBTQ+ organizations, which elevates risk, as do their donations to former President Trump.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

A lifestyle brand, people buy Coors for its reputation and cultural value, not for price or quality. Many of the firm's other subsidiary brands, such as Miller and Blue Moon, have similar demand positioning. Brand visibility as a main draw to consumers directly links their sales to brand value.

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

Molson Coors

TAP
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

2

Generally boilerplate messaging, somewhat left-leaning and has shown support for LGBT issues and public figures. The CEO maintains a low public profile, besides public statements that their market share has surged in light of the Bud Light controversy, which the company believes is likely to be a "permanent shift".

Political Contributions Risk

1

Donations are almost entirely to Republicans, including to Trump. Molson Coors' contributions trends are consistent with their competitors in the beer industry. Despite a high donation level, contributions are significantly lower than major competitor Anheuser-Busch.

Political Dichotomy Risk

4

After the Bud Light controversy, the alcohol industry has been proven to be extremely volatile. With Molson Coors being a major competitor, many ex-Bud Light consumers switched to their brands. The company's 10K confirms this volatility, saying that geopolitical tension and marketing mistakes could lead to large risks for revenue. The company remains at high risk to boycotts from consumers who may be against LGBTQ+ marketing like Bud Light's. This is especially true given Miller Lite's highly criticized feminist ad around the time of the Bud Light boycott. Beer companies are all incentivized to target younger, more left-leaning consumers, which opposes the ideology of many older, republican-oriented consumers. Beer is now part of the Culture War, with Bud Light representing just the first casualty. Additionally, the 10K states that unions are heavily involved throughout the corporation, so labor disputes pose substantial threats to production and distribution operations. The company is heavily dependent on third-party retailers to display and sell their product, so employing polarizing PR campaigns could alienate vendors who make final sales.

Associational Risk

4

No social media posts indicating controversial relationships. Around the same time as Anheuser-Busch's Dylan Mulvaney PR crisis, their subsidiary, Miller Lite, had a controversial ad supporting female brewers and women in the industry. Despite receiving some negative public attention, it was significantly less controversial than their competitor's campaign. In 2022, press coverage reported on Molson Coors donating to LGBTQ+ organizations, which elevates risk, as do their donations to former President Trump.

Brand Visibility Risk

4

A lifestyle brand, people buy Coors for its reputation and cultural value, not for price or quality. Many of the firm's other subsidiary brands, such as Miller and Blue Moon, have similar demand positioning. Brand visibility as a main draw to consumers directly links their sales to brand value.

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