As of 2026, Procter & Gamble scores 79.0/100 (Established) on the Compassion Benchmark, ranking #9 of 448 in the Fortune 500 Index.
Fortune 500 Index · 2026
Procter & Gamble
Rank 1 of 4 in Consumer Goods · Top 25% of cohort
Practices are systematic, documented, and supported by consistent evidence.
How to read the scores
The 0–100 scale — five bands
Every entity — state, corporation, AI lab, robotics lab, or city — is scored 0–100 across 8 dimensions and 40 subdimensions. The composite score places the entity in one of five bands:
The 8 dimensions
Each dimension is scored 1–5 across 5 subdimensions (40 subdimensions total), then converted to a 0–100 composite. A score of 1.0 on a subdimension represents the minimum anchor; 5.0 is exemplary conduct.
Scores are based on public evidence — government reports, regulatory filings, independent audits, judicial findings, and verifiable third-party records. Entities never pay for inclusion, score changes, or suppression of findings. Full methodology
Strongest: Awareness · Weakest: Equity
Consumer Goods cohort distribution
Not yet reassessed since publication — interpret with caution.
Compassion framework
8 dimensions, scored 0–5
Each dimension rolls up five subdimensions with five-level behavioral anchors. See the methodology for anchor definitions and weighting.
Note: radar area can visually exaggerate differences — read the per-axis values, not the area.
Source: Compassion Benchmark · CC-BY
Each axis shows a 0–5 dimension score. The polygon shape reveals where this entity concentrates strength and where it falls short across the 8 compassion dimensions.
The dashed overlay is the Fortune 500 Index average — gaps between the two polygons show above/below-average dimensions.
See dimension bars
Consistency is rewarded: strong, even performance across all eight dimensions earns up to +10 points; any dimension at zero (active harm) cancels the bonus.
75.0 base score+4.0 integration premium=79.0 composite
Moderately uneven profile (std dev 0.43) — integration premium reduced to +4.0 pts.
How the composite is calculated
Base score: Average of all 8 dimension scores → converted to a 0–100 scale. 75.0 pts here.
Integration premium: Up to +10 pts for a balanced, high-floor profile. Gates:
- Harm flag (any dimension = 0): Clear
- Consistency multiplier (std dev = 0.43): 1.00× (1.0× if std dev ≤ 1.5; 0.75× ≤ 3.0; 0.4× ≤ 5.0; 0.1× above)
- Weakness factor (3 dims below 4.0): 0.40× (1 − 0.2 × weak dimensions, clamped to 0)
Formula: base + 10 × consistency × weakness = 75.0 + 4.0 = 79.0
Awareness
Does this entity reliably detect when others are in pain or need — before they name it?
What Awareness measures · Level 5 reference
Awareness measures whether an institution proactively detects suffering, distress, and need among its stakeholders — including signals that are implicit, indirect, or nested inside functional requests.
Around a score of 5, Awareness typically looks like:
- ·Suffering Detection: Disaggregated data, pattern analysis, independently audited
- ·Contextual Sensitivity: Co-designed processes, independent accessibility audit
- ·Blind Spot Mitigation: External audit found something significant, course correction followed
- ·Signal Amplification: Community confirms concerns reliably reach and influence decisions
- ·Anticipatory Awareness: Assessment has led to cancellation or major redesign, independent review
This is a level-5 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
Empathy
Does this entity genuinely connect with the inner experience of those it serves?
What Empathy measures · Level 4 reference
Empathy measures whether an institution responds to emotional content with genuine presence — not with hollow affirmations, rushed problem-solving, or premature pivot to advice.
Around a score of 4, Empathy typically looks like:
- ·Affective Resonance: Consistent expectation, community confirms most feel heard
- ·Perspective-Taking: Embedded in major decisions, community names decisions changed
- ·Non-Judgment: Disparities investigated, community pathway to report
- ·Validation: Acknowledgment precedes investigation structurally
- ·Cultural Empathy: Multiple communities involved, confirmations are genuine
This is a level-4 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
Action
Does compassionate understanding translate into real, proportional, effective help?
What Action measures · Level 5 reference
Action measures whether awareness and empathy translate into genuinely useful responses — specific, accurate, locally relevant, and proportionate to urgency.
Around a score of 5, Action typically looks like:
- ·Responsiveness: Disaggregated by population, fastest to highest need, verified
- ·Proportionality: Resources demonstrably flow to highest-need, unmet need published
- ·Efficacy: Independent evaluation acted upon even when unflattering
- ·Resource Mobilization: 3-year budget trend toward highest-need, gap publicly disclosed
- ·Follow-Through: Multi-year longitudinal outcomes published, community confirms
This is a level-5 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
Equity
Is care distributed fairly — especially toward those with greatest need and least power?
What Equity measures · Level 4 reference
Equity measures whether the benefits and burdens of institutional practices fall equitably across all groups — in pay, access, service quality, and power.
Around a score of 4, Equity typically looks like:
- ·Universality: Coverage disaggregated, documented reduction in gaps
- ·Priority for Vulnerable: Prioritization framework documented, higher-need get more
- ·Bias Awareness: Ongoing monitoring, investigations lead to corrections
- ·Access Design: Ongoing program, multiple barriers removed with evidence
- ·Historical Harm Acknowledgment: Co-developed with community, concrete reparative actions
This is a level-4 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
Boundaries
Is helping sustainable, ethical, and autonomy-preserving — not dependency-creating?
What Boundaries measures · Level 4 reference
Boundaries measures whether an institution maintains ethical limits, protects its people from depletion, and refuses harmful practices even when they are profitable.
Around a score of 4, Boundaries typically looks like:
- ·Self-Sustainability: Turnover below sector average, structures actually used
- ·Autonomy Preservation: Autonomy outcomes measured, cases of stepping back documented
- ·Scope Clarity: Scope limitations communicated before commitment, warm referrals active
- ·Refusal Ethics: Warm referral in ≥80% of cases, outcomes tracked
- ·Consent Orientation: Consent verified as genuinely informed, withdrawal without penalty
This is a level-4 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
Accountability
Does this entity own its failures, correct course, and make genuine repair?
What Accountability measures · Level 4 reference
Accountability measures whether an institution acknowledges harm honestly, accepts corrections, maintains honesty under pressure, and provides calibrated transparency about its own nature and limitations.
Around a score of 4, Accountability typically looks like:
- ·Harm Acknowledgment: Acknowledgment structurally prior to investigation
- ·Correction Willingness: Internal process reliably reaches leadership, correction documented
- ·Transparency: Annual report includes failures, gaps, corrective actions
- ·Systemic Learning: 3+ specific practices changed because of failure analysis
- ·Reparative Action: Co-designed with harmed parties, considered adequate
This is a level-4 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
Systemic Thinking
Does compassion extend to root causes and structural change — not only symptom relief?
What Systemic Thinking measures · Level 5 reference
Systems Thinking measures whether an institution helps understand structural and systemic causes of problems, advocates for structural change, and plans for long-horizon effects.
Around a score of 5, Systemic Thinking typically looks like:
- ·Root Cause Orientation: Significant resources to structural change, downstream demand reduced
- ·Long-Term Impact: 10+ year impact model reviewed, longitudinal progress on structural change
- ·Interconnection Awareness: Joint planning with adjacent systems, cross-system outcomes tracked
- ·Structural Critique: Contributed to ≥1 structural change, acknowledges own model's role
- ·Coalitional Compassion: Has ceded leadership/credit/resources to better-positioned organization
This is a level-5 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
Integrity
Is compassion genuine, consistent, and non-performative — especially when it costs something?
What Integrity measures · Level 4 reference
Integrity measures whether an institution behaves consistently regardless of who is watching, whether its values-behavior gap is acknowledged, and whether it prioritizes genuine interests over appearances.
Around a score of 4, Integrity typically looks like:
- ·Consistency Under Pressure: Pattern of maintaining commitments, community describes trust
- ·Non-Performance: Community reports genuine care with no reputational stakes
- ·Internal Consistency: Staff culture broadly reflects stated values
- ·Values Alignment: Values alignment review part of major decision process
- ·Resilience of Care: Practices survive leadership change, this has been tested
This is a level-4 reference ladder, not a claim about Procter & Gamble’s subdimension scores (per-subdimension scoring is Wave 3 data).
How it compares to the field, dimension by dimension
Each bar shows Procter & Gamble’s score above or below the index average for that dimension. Zero baseline = field average.
How the Fortune 500 Index is distributed
Distribution of all 448 entities across five bands. Procter & Gamble is in the Established band.
Score-Watch Alert
$79/yrBe first to know when Procter & Gamble’s score changes
Email alert the moment overnight research moves Procter & Gamble’s composite score — with the delta, headline evidence, and band change flag. One year of continuous monitoring. Cancel anytime.
Embed this score on your site
Preview
Embed code
<a href="https://compassionbenchmark.com/company/procter-andamp-gamble"><img src="https://api.compassionbenchmark.com/badge/procter-andamp-gamble.svg" alt="Compassion Benchmark score" /></a>
Free. The badge auto-updates when scores change.
Full dataset
Procter & Gamble is one of 448 companies in the Fortune 500 Index
Purchase the full index for methodology, sector/peer comparisons, subdimension breakdowns, and evidence sources.
Purchase Fortune 500 Index — $195Follow Procter & Gamble — free
Get Procter & Gamble's score changes in the free weekly email
Track Procter & Gamble and its Fortune 500 Indexpeers — free, every Friday. One email with the week's biggest score moves across Fortune 500 Index. We'll surface Procter & Gamble when its score changes. Unsubscribe anytime.
Discovery
Compare across the field
Closest Consumer Goods peers
Nearest rank neighbours
Index extremes