Procter & Gamble vs Colgate: Household Brands, Opposite Ethics
You probably have products from both companies in your bathroom right now. Tide and Crest from P&G. Colgate toothpaste and Palmolive soap from Colgate-Palmolive.
On ethics, they diverge more than you would expect.
The Comparison
| Value | P&G | Colgate |
|---|---|---|
| Honest & Fair Business | +20 | -20 |
| Fair Pay | 0 | +20 |
| Planet-Friendly | +10 | -40 |
| Safe & Smart Tech | +10 | +10 |
| Better Health | +10 | +10 |
| Kind to Animals | 0 | -40 |
| Respect for Cultures | -10 | -30 |
| Fair Trade | 0 | -30 |
| Zero Waste | -20 | -10 |
| No War, No Weapons | -50 | 0 |
| Average | -2 | -7 |
P&G's Surprise: Weapons
P&G's worst score is -50 on No War, No Weapons. A soap company scoring -50 on weapons is not intuitive. The score reflects P&G's industrial chemicals division and documented supply relationships with military contractors. P&G's portfolio includes industrial cleaning and chemical products that serve government and defence applications.
On the positive side, P&G scores +20 on Honest & Fair Business and +10 on Planet-Friendly Business, reflecting stronger corporate governance and more credible environmental programs.
Colgate's Problem: Animals and Climate
Colgate scores -40 on both Kind to Animals and Planet-Friendly Business. The animal welfare score reflects documented animal testing practices. Colgate-Palmolive has been flagged by animal welfare organisations for ongoing testing in markets where it is not legally required.
The -30 on Respect for Cultures & Communities and -30 on Fair Trade & Ethical Sourcing add supply chain concerns, particularly around palm oil sourcing and community impact in sourcing regions.
Different Failures
P&G is better overall but carries a weapons score that no consumer would expect. Colgate is worse overall and fails hardest on animal welfare -- awkward for a company whose products go in your mouth.
Same bathroom shelf. Different ethical footprint.