· L’Oréal Paris is the most valuable cosmetics brand for the third consecutive year
· The brand has reached a record value of US $13.7 billion
· Avon drops 11 places to 21st with brand value down over 50%
· Brazilian Brand, Natura, fell 67%, more than any other
· Lynx loses laddish image to increase brand value by 69%
Every year, leading brand valuation and strategy consultancy Brand Finance analyses thousands of the world’s top brands to determine which are the most powerful and most valuable. The top cosmetics brands grouped in the Brand Finance Cosmetics 50.
L’Oréal Paris remains the world’s most valuable cosmetics brand. A 22% increase on its 2015 brand value brings the total to US $13.7bn, a record for the industry. It also has the strongest brand; Brand Finance creates a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100 for each brand based on indicators such as familiarity, consideration, loyalty, investment, social responsibility and preference. L’Oréal Paris’ score is 91.5, making it not just the strongest cosmetics brand, but the third strongest from any industry, beaten only by Disney and Lego.
Commenting on the label’s strong performance, Brand Finance’s Cosmetics Analyst Emilie Milton-Stevens stated, “L’Oréal Paris continues to impress: bettering itself and raising its game the whole time. It is performing well in three key respects: it is investing in trends and technology; it is innovating digitally; and it continues to inspire trust. Across the Brand Finance Cosmetics 50, brands based outside the US have been negatively impacted by foreign exchange rate changes, but L’Oréal revenue and brand performance was so strong that it not only counteracted that impact but actually grew 22%.”
Brazilian brand Natura did not experience the same good fortune this year. 81% of the brand's revenue comes from the domestic market and the combined effects of recession, inflation and the depreciation of the Real against the dollar have contributed to a 67% decline in brand value.
Brazil is also the biggest market for American cosmetic brand, Avon. It too has seen a severe decline in brand value, which is down 54% to US$1.8 billion. Avon’s problems stem as much from its home market in North America as from Brazil however. The brand has admitted that eroding relevance, a declining base of representatives and profitability are serious problems in the US.
One of the best performers of the year was Unilever’s Lynx (Axe) deodorant brand. It has pursued a concerted strategy to shed its ‘laddish’ image as more nuanced portrayals of masculinity are popularized. In January, Lynx launched its ‘Find Your Magic’ brand campaign, which encourages men to break free from assumptions about how they should behave and express themselves, a particularly suitable message for a brand seeking to redefine itself. Its brand value is up 69% to US$1.7 billion.
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 over 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.