Every year, leading brand valuation and strategy consultancy Brand Finance puts thousands of the world’s top brands to the test, evaluating which are the most powerful and valuable, publishing the Brand Finance Top 100 Singaporean Brands.
The three local banks have been performing well for several years and again in 2020, we see no other contenders being able to challenge the top three spots and it’s also unlikely that DBS, with a brand value of US$ 8.4 billion, will be dethroned from the top of the Brand Finance Top 100 Most Valuable Singapore Brands table for a sometime. OCBC and UOB continues to be jostling each other against for the 2nd and 3rd position ranking, respectively.
OCBC has managed to climb back into second position this year with a brand value of US$ 4.8 billion, while UOB is not far behind with a brand value of US$ 4.7 billion.
The three banks have contributed 37% of the total brand value in Singapore, down marginally from 38% last year.
The focus on brand strength
The brand strength, measured by Brand Strength Index (BSI), shows that the average BSI of the Top 100 brands has reduced further again from 62.4/100 last year to 61.5/100 in 2020. Most brands, however, have remained stagnant in terms of brand strength and while they may be doing well locally, they have been losing out to some of the key competitors in the region as they lack competitiveness outside of the Singapore market.
Singtel replaces Changi Airport to become the strongest brand in 2020 and dominates the brand strength ranking with a score of 86 out of 100. Changi Airport has fallen following a small drop in score but still continues to retain its AAA brand strength rating as well as DBS, making them the only 3 brands with the AAA brand strength rating while OCBC and UOB dropped a level down from their AAA brand rating this year.
ComfortDelGro made its way into the top 10 last year for the first time and has maintained its 10th position ranking. Wilmar has recorded a huge drop in brand value and ranking, although it has still maintained its strong foothold in the top 10 position. Capitaland has perform well this year, jumping from 14th to 8th position. Singtel, Singapore Airlines and Capitaland are the only three brands in the top 10 that have recorded a brand value increase.
NTUC Income is a new entrant into the ranking in 11th place, with a brand value of US$995 million.
This year also sees many further new entrants including: NTUC Income and JTC, SP Group, Thomson Medical, Soup Restaurant and Achieva.
Samir Dixit, Manging Director of Brand Finance Asia Pacific highlighted that “Unless companies have a strong brand agenda and are managing the strength and value of their in a concentrated manner, we will continue to see large year on year variations in brand value, brand strength and brand rankings”.
Samir continues “The big problem is the brand is left to a few people in the organisation to manage and is never a serious agenda for the board”. This is clearly evident as most of the top management or the boards have no brand KPIs for themselves or their firms”
“Most Singapore brands are typically very communications focussed and misunderstand their campaigns – which are mostly digital these days - to be brand building initiatives and that’s where they miss the big picture about the brand”. Added Samir.
Samir Dixit challenges that Singapore companies to be more brand-driven and not sales or offers-driven. This destroys the long-term value and the strength of the brand. Brand has to be a strategic agenda for the senior management and boards and must be managed like any other business asset and not just a legal trademark.”
“Financial companies continue to make up 37% of the top 100 value. As Singapore further develops, we expect consolidation in the banking sector, so it will be interesting to see which brands remain. Banks who can digitalise and remain relevant will be the ones who will win.”
Samir Dixit, Manging Director of Brand Finance Asia Pacific highlighted that “While Singaporean brands have grown, they will likely face strong headwinds ahead as they lose out to some other brands in the region in terms of brand competitiveness and value growth”.
“It is the brand strength for most brands that still remains a concern and also a significant risk. Brands must recognise this work towards mitigating it” stressed Samir.
Samir Dixit further commented that “The rankings still remains very top heavy raising further concern as the top 10 contributes over 62% of the total brand value. We would like to see more diverse mix at the top and a more significant value increase at the bottom, meaning other brands must start focussing on their value and brand strength.”
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 of all kinds make strategic decisions.
Headquartered in London, Brand Finance has offices in over 20 countries, offering services on all continents. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 5,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes nearly 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm, leading 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.