Procter & Gamble

PG
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Jon R. Moeller, CEO of P&G, is not very active on social media, only posting the company's achievements on LinkedIn. Recently, the company did brush off shareholders who were raising concerns over deforestation policies and environmental sustainability; however, no public statements were made although it did generate press. The battle between P&G and the environmentalists is long standing and has grown more acute in recent years. P&G does have a lengthy statement on their website regarding political involvement, and they admit to having a team in DC that supports legislative/public policies which support their business.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Proctor & Gamble contributes with a slightly red lean, mostly from its PAC. The company's contribution size is very high, but lands the firm in the middle of the Personal Care Product industry. The bipartisan nature of contributions brings pH down, especially given the heavier skew of many competitors.

Political Dichotomy Risk

3

Due to its vast array of products, Procter & Gamble has a large and politcally diverse customer base. Contributing to politicians with a slight skew in favor of Republicans, Procter & Gamble stays relatively silent when it comes to potentially boycott-producing actions. However, one of the risks mentioned in the company 10K is the environmental impact of the corporation. Procter & Gamble acknowledges that keeping up with ESG standards will be difficult for the firm. In combination with all the consumers who have stated their discomfort with the corporation's lack of environmental integrity, this could lead to a potential boycott if the company fails to respond.

Associational Risk

4

The company and/or its senior executives have donated to Mitch McConnel, which raises pH for the company. News articles also reveal donations to politicians Lisa Murkowski and Todd Young, but these are not particularly well known figures outside their home states. The company has an association with Russia as they pay substantial taxes for their factories located in Russia, which contributes to the Russian government's budget. Euromaidan Press alleges that they also participate in the process of conscripting Russian employees into the army in support of the ongoing war.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

P&G is a product-based company which somewhat sells with its brand. It has good market penetration and high brand awareness. As it has such a diversified set of products and sub-brands, it is somewhat insulated from controversies.

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

Procter & Gamble

PG
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Jon R. Moeller, CEO of P&G, is not very active on social media, only posting the company's achievements on LinkedIn. Recently, the company did brush off shareholders who were raising concerns over deforestation policies and environmental sustainability; however, no public statements were made although it did generate press. The battle between P&G and the environmentalists is long standing and has grown more acute in recent years. P&G does have a lengthy statement on their website regarding political involvement, and they admit to having a team in DC that supports legislative/public policies which support their business.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Proctor & Gamble contributes with a slightly red lean, mostly from its PAC. The company's contribution size is very high, but lands the firm in the middle of the Personal Care Product industry. The bipartisan nature of contributions brings pH down, especially given the heavier skew of many competitors.

Political Dichotomy Risk

3

Due to its vast array of products, Procter & Gamble has a large and politcally diverse customer base. Contributing to politicians with a slight skew in favor of Republicans, Procter & Gamble stays relatively silent when it comes to potentially boycott-producing actions. However, one of the risks mentioned in the company 10K is the environmental impact of the corporation. Procter & Gamble acknowledges that keeping up with ESG standards will be difficult for the firm. In combination with all the consumers who have stated their discomfort with the corporation's lack of environmental integrity, this could lead to a potential boycott if the company fails to respond.

Associational Risk

4

The company and/or its senior executives have donated to Mitch McConnel, which raises pH for the company. News articles also reveal donations to politicians Lisa Murkowski and Todd Young, but these are not particularly well known figures outside their home states. The company has an association with Russia as they pay substantial taxes for their factories located in Russia, which contributes to the Russian government's budget. Euromaidan Press alleges that they also participate in the process of conscripting Russian employees into the army in support of the ongoing war.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

P&G is a product-based company which somewhat sells with its brand. It has good market penetration and high brand awareness. As it has such a diversified set of products and sub-brands, it is somewhat insulated from controversies.

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

Procter & Gamble

PG
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Jon R. Moeller, CEO of P&G, is not very active on social media, only posting the company's achievements on LinkedIn. Recently, the company did brush off shareholders who were raising concerns over deforestation policies and environmental sustainability; however, no public statements were made although it did generate press. The battle between P&G and the environmentalists is long standing and has grown more acute in recent years. P&G does have a lengthy statement on their website regarding political involvement, and they admit to having a team in DC that supports legislative/public policies which support their business.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Proctor & Gamble contributes with a slightly red lean, mostly from its PAC. The company's contribution size is very high, but lands the firm in the middle of the Personal Care Product industry. The bipartisan nature of contributions brings pH down, especially given the heavier skew of many competitors.

Political Dichotomy Risk

3

Due to its vast array of products, Procter & Gamble has a large and politcally diverse customer base. Contributing to politicians with a slight skew in favor of Republicans, Procter & Gamble stays relatively silent when it comes to potentially boycott-producing actions. However, one of the risks mentioned in the company 10K is the environmental impact of the corporation. Procter & Gamble acknowledges that keeping up with ESG standards will be difficult for the firm. In combination with all the consumers who have stated their discomfort with the corporation's lack of environmental integrity, this could lead to a potential boycott if the company fails to respond.

Associational Risk

4

The company and/or its senior executives have donated to Mitch McConnel, which raises pH for the company. News articles also reveal donations to politicians Lisa Murkowski and Todd Young, but these are not particularly well known figures outside their home states. The company has an association with Russia as they pay substantial taxes for their factories located in Russia, which contributes to the Russian government's budget. Euromaidan Press alleges that they also participate in the process of conscripting Russian employees into the army in support of the ongoing war.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

P&G is a product-based company which somewhat sells with its brand. It has good market penetration and high brand awareness. As it has such a diversified set of products and sub-brands, it is somewhat insulated from controversies.

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

Procter & Gamble

PG
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Jon R. Moeller, CEO of P&G, is not very active on social media, only posting the company's achievements on LinkedIn. Recently, the company did brush off shareholders who were raising concerns over deforestation policies and environmental sustainability; however, no public statements were made although it did generate press. The battle between P&G and the environmentalists is long standing and has grown more acute in recent years. P&G does have a lengthy statement on their website regarding political involvement, and they admit to having a team in DC that supports legislative/public policies which support their business.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Proctor & Gamble contributes with a slightly red lean, mostly from its PAC. The company's contribution size is very high, but lands the firm in the middle of the Personal Care Product industry. The bipartisan nature of contributions brings pH down, especially given the heavier skew of many competitors.

Political Dichotomy Risk

3

Due to its vast array of products, Procter & Gamble has a large and politcally diverse customer base. Contributing to politicians with a slight skew in favor of Republicans, Procter & Gamble stays relatively silent when it comes to potentially boycott-producing actions. However, one of the risks mentioned in the company 10K is the environmental impact of the corporation. Procter & Gamble acknowledges that keeping up with ESG standards will be difficult for the firm. In combination with all the consumers who have stated their discomfort with the corporation's lack of environmental integrity, this could lead to a potential boycott if the company fails to respond.

Associational Risk

4

The company and/or its senior executives have donated to Mitch McConnel, which raises pH for the company. News articles also reveal donations to politicians Lisa Murkowski and Todd Young, but these are not particularly well known figures outside their home states. The company has an association with Russia as they pay substantial taxes for their factories located in Russia, which contributes to the Russian government's budget. Euromaidan Press alleges that they also participate in the process of conscripting Russian employees into the army in support of the ongoing war.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

P&G is a product-based company which somewhat sells with its brand. It has good market penetration and high brand awareness. As it has such a diversified set of products and sub-brands, it is somewhat insulated from controversies.

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

Procter & Gamble

PG
3.2
Companies list

Public Statements Risk

3

Jon R. Moeller, CEO of P&G, is not very active on social media, only posting the company's achievements on LinkedIn. Recently, the company did brush off shareholders who were raising concerns over deforestation policies and environmental sustainability; however, no public statements were made although it did generate press. The battle between P&G and the environmentalists is long standing and has grown more acute in recent years. P&G does have a lengthy statement on their website regarding political involvement, and they admit to having a team in DC that supports legislative/public policies which support their business.

Political Contributions Risk

3

Proctor & Gamble contributes with a slightly red lean, mostly from its PAC. The company's contribution size is very high, but lands the firm in the middle of the Personal Care Product industry. The bipartisan nature of contributions brings pH down, especially given the heavier skew of many competitors.

Political Dichotomy Risk

3

Due to its vast array of products, Procter & Gamble has a large and politcally diverse customer base. Contributing to politicians with a slight skew in favor of Republicans, Procter & Gamble stays relatively silent when it comes to potentially boycott-producing actions. However, one of the risks mentioned in the company 10K is the environmental impact of the corporation. Procter & Gamble acknowledges that keeping up with ESG standards will be difficult for the firm. In combination with all the consumers who have stated their discomfort with the corporation's lack of environmental integrity, this could lead to a potential boycott if the company fails to respond.

Associational Risk

4

The company and/or its senior executives have donated to Mitch McConnel, which raises pH for the company. News articles also reveal donations to politicians Lisa Murkowski and Todd Young, but these are not particularly well known figures outside their home states. The company has an association with Russia as they pay substantial taxes for their factories located in Russia, which contributes to the Russian government's budget. Euromaidan Press alleges that they also participate in the process of conscripting Russian employees into the army in support of the ongoing war.

Brand Visibility Risk

3

P&G is a product-based company which somewhat sells with its brand. It has good market penetration and high brand awareness. As it has such a diversified set of products and sub-brands, it is somewhat insulated from controversies.

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