Brand Finance logo

Maersk Rocks Boat to Claim Title of Second Most Valuable Danish Brand

11 September 2019
This article is more than 4 years old.
  • Long-standing leader Lego remains Denmark’s most valuable and strongest brand despite brand value falling 9%
  • Maersk brand value surges 45% to DKK 28.6 billion, moves up ranking to second most valuable Danish brand
  • Mixed results for retail brands: Rema 1000 brand value up 51%; Coop Danmark drops out of top 10
  • Carlsberg slides into top 10, brand value up 9% to DKK 8.8 billion
  • Swedish brands dominate regional Brand Finance Nordic 50 ranking, 16 Danish brands make the cut

View the full Brand Finance Denmark 50 2019 report here

Lego remains Denmark’s most valuable brand despite its brand value dropping by 9% to DKK 43.4 billion, according to the latest report by Brand Finance, the world’s leading independent brand valuation consultancy.

The iconic global toy brand has successfully built adoration and a renowned reputation across several generations of children worldwide. However, Lego’s brand value has dropped due to a reduction in forecast revenue growth, a consequence of the challenges increasingly faced from new children’s entertainment options, especially in the digital sphere. Lego is currently attempting to leverage its brand value to increase its product range and thus put that brand in a better position to compete with other electronic entertainment brands, for example through the launch of its Lego Life mobile app.

In addition to measuring overall brand value, Brand Finance also evaluates the relative strength of brands, based on factors such as marketing investment, familiarity, loyalty, staff satisfaction, and corporate reputation. Alongside revenue forecasts, brand strength is a crucial driver of brand value. According to these criteria, Lego still claims the title of Denmark’s strongest brand despite its brand strength rating dropping from the elite AAA+ rating to AAA.

David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance, commented:

“Lego’s brand has been built over many years, and it is facing existential challenges from new technologies. Its iconic status is under threat, but Lego are working hard to leverage its existing brand strength into new product categories. So far, while its core business certainly remains threatened, they appear to be avoiding the risk of extinction faced by other businesses which have seen fundamental challenges to their markets from new technology.”

Maersk powers ahead
Shipping giant Maersk achieved remarkable brand growth, up 45% to DKK 28.6 billion, while simultaneously jumping from 4th to 2nd position, as it continues to reap the rewards of seismic changes to its operation. These changes have included the integration of Hamburg Süd, creating a single team to share best practices, resources and strengths. While the Hamburg Süd brand remains independent of the Maersk brand, the combined team means that Maersk has more ocean shipping capacity than any other brand, creating a genuine global leader for Denmark. As a result, the scale of the integrated teams is already delivering improved performance for the Maersk brand. In addition, Maersk’s earnings have jumped significantly over the last year, bolstered by the lower container handling costs.

Mixed results for retail brands
Rema 1000 (brand value up 51% to DKK 2.1 billion) is one of the fastest growing brands in the Denmark 50 ranking, with its brand value growing as a result of its solid forecast revenue growth. In a world where many retail brands are facing significant competitive challenges from online retailing, the low-cost, high-efficiency model of the Rema supermarkets may allow them to retain market share amongst its key customer groups, namely customers who may be unlikely to shop online, particularly for low-cost, routine, household groceries and supplies.

Meanwhile, Coop Danmark (down 16% to DKK 7.7 billion) has struggled this year, falling out of the top ten, down from 9th position to 13th. Coop Danmark’s supermarkets are facing an extremely competitive market, with Coop’s brand value dropping due to both a reduction in forecast revenue and also a reduction in brand strength. With Danish consumers having a variety of choices, especially with new, online, alternatives entering the market, Coop is facing difficulties to retain its customer loyalty.

Cheers to Carlsberg
Carlsberg has entered the top 10 after achieving a solid 9% brand value growth to DKK 8.8 billion. Carlsberg’s leadership has implemented a comprehensive internal strategy called “Funding the Journey” to help build the brand, which focuses on improving efficiency, reducing costs and growing revenue. Carlsberg is also focusing on product diversification outside of the traditional, mass-marketed, alcoholic beers to include a broader range of craft beers and non-alcoholic beers in Europe. This re-alignment to improve the public perception of Carlsberg has included new packaging which will reduce plastic usage by 76% with commensurate reductions in carbon emissions.

As well as Carlsberg and Carlsberg-owned Tuborg (up 6% to DKK 4.9 billion), 11 further food and drink brands are amongst the Denmark 50, with Arla and Danish Crown portfolios featuring prominently. In addition to the Arla brand itself (up 1% to DKK 22.0 billion) there are a number of other brands owned by the Arla group, including Lurpak (up 39% to DKK 3.8 billion) and Harmonie (down 15% to DKK 873 million). Meat producer, Steff Houlberg, (up 72% to DKK 1.7 billion) is the fastest-growing brand in the Denmark 50 ranking, jumping from 45th to 36th place.

Brand Finance Nordic 50 2019: Sweden reigns supreme
Looking at the classification in the wider region, Swedish brands have claimed one in every two positions in the Brand Finance Nordic 50 ranking and six out of the top 10 spots, with Ikea crowned most valuable (up 13% to DKK 138.2 billion), H&M in second (down 15% to DKK 101.9 billion), and Volvo in third (up 11% to DKK 88.4 billion).

Engineering and construction leads among sectors with 10 brands included in the ranking. Sweden’s Skanska is the highest ranked in 20th, with a brand value of DKK 14.6 billion, followed closely by Vestas, in 21st position, with a brand value of DKK 14.4 billion. Other notable sectors across the region are banking with 7 brands and retail with 5 brands.

Sixteen brands from Denmark feature in the Brand Finance Nordic 50 rankings, fewer than from Sweden (24), but more than from Finland (6) or Norway (4). Lego – named 6th most valuable brand across the region – is the only Danish brand to feature in the top 10.

View the full Brand Finance Denmark 50 2019 report here

Note to Editors
Every year, Brand Finance values 5,000 of the world’s biggest brands. The 50 most valuable Danish brands are included in the Brand Finance Denmark 50 2019 ranking, and the 50 most valuable brands across the Nordic countries are included in the Brand Finance Nordic 50 2019 ranking.

Brand value is understood as the net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market. Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors.

Additional insights, charts, and more information about the methodology, as well as definitions of key terms are available in the Brand Finance Denmark 50 2019 report.

Data compiled for Brand Finance’s rankings and reports are provided for the benefit of the media and are not to be used for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.

Media Contacts

Penny Erricker
Communications Executive
Brand Finance

About Brand Finance

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.

Definition of Brand

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

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 Valuation Approach

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.

Get in Touch