Brand Finance’s Cosmetics 50 2026 reveals that the industry’s total brand value drops by 6% to $149.8 billion
SEOUL, 6 May 2026 – The global cosmetics sector is facing a slowdown as geopolitical and economic uncertainties impact major economies, leading consumers to focus more on products that deliver real value and quality. According to the Cosmetics 50 2026 ranking by Brand Finance, the world's leading brand valuation consultancy, South Korea’s cosmetics sector was also impacted by these headwinds, as reflected in a 55% brand value drop to USD574 million, with only one brand in the ranking (down from two brands in 2025).
In recent years, South Korea’s wider cosmetics industry has seen a significant rise in the mainstream market. However, this growth is mainly due to newer and small- and medium-sized brands, as opposed to the larger and more mature industry players. This shift aligns with the global cosmetics market, which shows that consumers are opting for effective products that are sold at reasonable prices instead of paying for premium-priced products.
Sulwhasoo (brand value down 4% to USD574 million) shows signs of stabilisation in 2026 and becomes South Korea’s sole representative in the ranking, as the 47th most valuable cosmetics brand. In 2024, the brand faced a financial downturn after Amorepacific, its parent company, recorded a 64% plunge in its operating profits, causing Sulwhasoo’s brand value to drop to USD608 million (down 52%). This year, Amorepacific highlighted Sulwhasoo as a leader in luxury skincare, with renewed emphasis on its First Care Activating Serum (Yunjo Essence) and Concentrated Ginseng Anti-Aging line, cited as the key growth drivers for the skincare brand.
Alex Haigh, Managing Director Asia Pacific, Brand Finance, commented:
“South Korea’s cosmetics sector is at a turning point, as economic pressures and shifting consumer preferences drive demand towards value and efficacy. While overall brand value has declined, the growth of smaller, more accessible brands reflects a more price-conscious market. Against this backdrop, Sulwhasoo’s stabilisation highlights the resilience of established brands that continue to innovate and reinforce their premium positioning in an increasingly competitive landscape.”
Global Insights
France’s cosmetics sector remains the largest contributor to the ranking, accounting for 46% (USD68.5 billion) of the total brand value this year. The US follows in second place with a 34% share (USD50.4 billion) and Germany in third with a 7% share (USD10.1 billion). The cosmetics sector’s overall brand value shows a 6% decline due to industry-wide headwinds such as geopolitical uncertainties and economic slowdowns.
Chanel (brand value down 11% to USD24.4 billion) maintains its position as the most valuable brand, while rising two spots to become the strongest brand in the 2026 ranking, with a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score of 89.8/100 and an AAA+ brand strength rating. Chanel’s brand value experiences a drop due to a decline in revenue forecasts in China and the US, the sector’s largest markets, amid challenging macroeconomic conditions.
Bulgari emerges as the fastest growing brand this year, following a 41% increase in brand value to USD1 billion. The brand experienced a noteworthy year, driven by record multi-million-dollar sales of its ‘Polychroma’ fragrance collection, the establishment of new flagship stores across various continents, and the launch of successful brand campaigns throughout the year.
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organisations make strategic decisions.
Headquartered in London, Brand Finance operates in over 25 countries. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 6,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on 6,000 brands, surveying more than 175,000 respondents across 41 countries and 31 industry sectors. By combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database — the largest brand value database in the world — Brand Finance equips ambitious brand leaders with the data, analytics, and the strategic guidance they need to enhance brand and business value.
In addition to calculating brand value, Brand Finance also determines the relative strength of brands through a balanced scorecard of metrics, compliant with ISO 20671.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm and a committed leader in the standardisation of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.
Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.
Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.
Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.
Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.
The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.
Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.
The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance's proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.
