View the full Brand Finance Malaysia 100 2020 report here
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 globally and across Malaysia. Brand Finance Asia Pacific has just released their annual Malaysia 100 2020 report, showcasing the top 100 most valuable and strongest Malaysian brands.
PETRONAS, Maybank and Genting continue to dominate the top 3 once again this year, with a combined brand value of over US$22 billion, while the remaining 7 brands in the top 10 maintain their positions following minimal movement in the ranking.
PETRONAS maintains the top spot for a 10th consecutive year, with a brand value of US$15.2 billion - the only brand to break the US$10 billion mark in Malaysia. Maybank retains 2nd position (brand value US$3.9 billion) followed by Genting (brand value US$3.4 billion) in 3rd.
The brand value gap between first and second has widened further to US$11 billion, showcasing just how dominant the oil & gas giant is. PETRONAS posted a healthy and positive brand value increase of 14% this year.
In addition to measuring overall brand value, Brand Finance also evaluates the relative strength of brands, based on factors such as marketing investment, customer familiarity, staff satisfaction, and corporate reputation. Alongside revenue forecasts, brand strength is a crucial driver of brand value. According to these criteria, PETRONAS has overtaken Digi to clinch the title of Malaysia’s strongest brand, with a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score of 86.3 out of 100 and a corresponding AAA brand strength rating. Digi’s BSI score is 86.1 and Maybank follows just marginally behind with a BSI score of 86.1 also.
Brand strength, a more accurate measure of brand competitiveness in the market, has remained stagnant for most Malaysian brands, 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 their home market.
The top 10 account for 64% of the total brand value in the Brand Finance Malaysia 100 2020 ranking, while the bottom 50 brands contribute only 7% of total brand value, highlighting the significant effort required from brands outside the top 10 should they wish to rise to become genuine competitors across the nation.
There are 5 new entrants in this year’s ranking: Malaysia Airports, Scientex, UEM, Serba Dinamik and United Plantations.
The brand with the highest intangible value continues to be Padini with a brand value to enterprise value ratio of 65%, and Bonia at 63%, highlighting the role of brands in business success, especially in the retail sector.
Samir Dixit, Managing Director of Brand Finance Asia Pacific commented:
“The Malaysia 100 2020 ranking remains very top heavy this year - we would like to see a more diverse mix at the top and more significant brand value increases at the bottom. To do so, brands must start to focus on building both brand value and strength, rather than being sales and offers driven. These tactics will help in the short term but might destroy the long-term value and strength of brands. It is the brand strength for most Malaysian brands that remains a concern – these have remained stagnant this year. Brand has to be a strategic agenda for senior management and boards and must be treated like any other business asset and not just a legal trademark.”
Note to Editors
2020 brand values are calculated in USD with a valuation date of 1/1/2020.
More information on our methodology can be found on our website here.
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance for more than 25 years, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organizations 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 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 over 5,000 brands, surveying more than 150,000 respondents across 38 countries and 31 industry sectors. Combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database enables Brand Finance to arm brand leaders with the data and analytics they need to enhance brand and business value.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm, leading the standardization 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.
