Procter & Gamble Co
NYSE:PG
Procter & Gamble Co
In the mid-19th century, Procter & Gamble Co. began its journey as a small soap and candle manufacturer in Cincinnati, Ohio, founded by British candlemaker William Procter and Irish soapmaker James Gamble. These two immigrants saw the booming demand for reliable household essentials, a niche that would eventually fuel the company into the global powerhouse it is today. The firm navigated through the Civil War era, supplying the Union Army with soap and candles, which not only bolstered its reputation but also established a nationwide footprint. Over the decades, Procter & Gamble expanded its product line, becoming a master of brand management and consumer goods innovation. Through savvy marketing strategies and a keen focus on consumer research, P&G transformed a burgeoning chemical industry into a portfolio of legendary brands, including Tide, Pampers, and Gillette, winning the hearts of consumers worldwide.
At its core, Procter & Gamble operates by understanding and responding to the daily needs of consumers with scientific precision and marketing acumen, building an empire of high-frequency consumer products. Its economic engine is fueled by a diverse array of personal health, household, and beauty products sold in over 180 countries. Leveraging economies of scale, P&G capitalizes on global brand recognition to optimize its supply chains and cost structures, ensuring competitive pricing while maintaining healthy margins. The company is a paragon of operational efficiency, continuously investing in research and development to propel product innovation and sustainability initiatives. This vigilant focus allows P&G to maintain a leadership position in the fiercely competitive consumer goods space, generating revenue through both sales of its flagship brands and strategic acquisitions that expand its market reach.
Earnings Calls
Procter & Gamble reported a solid second quarter with a 3% increase in organic sales, driven by strong volume growth across most categories. Core earnings per share reached $1.88, up 2%. Guidance for fiscal 2025 remains steady, projecting organic sales growth of 3% to 5% and core EPS growth of 5% to 7%. However, currency challenges are expected to impact EPS by $0.10 to $0.12 per share. The company is preparing for a more challenging economic environment while continuing to prioritize strong cash returns to shareholders, estimating $16 billion to $17 billion in dividends and share repurchases.
Management
Jon R. Moeller is a prominent business executive known for his long-standing career at Procter & Gamble Co. (P&G), a leading multinational consumer goods company. He joined P&G in 1988 and has held several significant roles within the company, reflecting his expertise and leadership in the industry. Moeller earned his Bachelor of Science degree in biology and his Master of Business Administration from Cornell University. His strong educational background laid the foundation for his successful career at P&G. Over the years, Moeller has served in various financial and operational capacities, gaining extensive experience and insights into the company's global operations. He was appointed Chief Financial Officer in 2009, a role in which he was responsible for overseeing the company's financial strategies and ensuring fiscal discipline. His leadership contributed to the company's growth and profitability during times of economic challenges. In addition to his financial acumen, Moeller played a critical role in P&G's acquisitions and divestitures, helping the company streamline its brand portfolio and focus on its core businesses. His strategic vision has been instrumental in the company’s efforts to innovate and adapt to changing market dynamics. Jon R. Moeller's leadership qualities were further recognized when he became Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer. In 2021, he was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of P&G, marking a new era for the company under his stewardship. As CEO, Moeller continues to guide the organization's strategic direction, focusing on sustainable growth and value creation for shareholders while maintaining P&G's commitment to social responsibility and environmental sustainability.
Andre Schulten is a prominent executive at Procter & Gamble Co (P&G), one of the world's leading consumer goods companies. He has been a part of P&G for several years, during which he has held various key roles within the organization. Schulten's career at P&G demonstrates a strong trajectory in leadership and strategic management. He has a wealth of experience in finance and has served in roles that align with this expertise. Before becoming the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of P&G, Andre held significant positions that contributed to the company's financial planning and operations. His work has spanned several international markets, reflecting his ability to manage and adapt strategies across diverse economic environments. As CFO, Andre Schulten is responsible for overseeing P&G's financial strategies, ensuring the company's fiscal health, and supporting its long-term growth objectives. His role involves engaging with investors, managing financial risks, and guiding the company through financial planning and analysis. His leadership is pivotal in steering P&G through ever-evolving consumer markets globally. Throughout his tenure, Schulten has contributed to maintaining P&G's reputation as a financially robust and strategic leader in the consumer products industry. His vision and strategic approach continue to play a crucial role in shaping the company's future, ensuring it remains competitive and agile.
Shailesh G. Jejurikar is a notable executive at Procter & Gamble Co., serving as the Chief Operating Officer (COO) since 2021. Known for his extensive experience and leadership in the consumer goods industry, Jejurikar has played a significant role in P&G's global operations. Prior to becoming COO, he was the CEO of P&G's largest business sector, Fabric & Home Care. Jejurikar's career at P&G spans several decades, during which he has held various key positions, driving strategic initiatives and business growth across different markets. He joined Procter & Gamble in 1989 and has been instrumental in various transformations within the company. Jejurikar's leadership is marked by a commitment to innovation, sustainability, and improving the lives of consumers worldwide. Under his guidance, P&G has made significant strides in product development and operational efficiency. Jejurikar is recognized for his global perspective, having overseen operations in regions including Europe, Asia, and North America. His strategic vision and ability to adapt to changing market trends have been critical to P&G's success and growth.
R. Alexandra Keith is a notable business executive, recognized for her leadership roles within the global consumer goods industry. She has had a distinguished career at Procter & Gamble (P&G), one of the world's leading companies in personal care and household products. Alexandra Keith joined P&G in 1989 and has held various significant positions within the company. Her roles have spanned across brand management and leadership positions, showcasing her expertise in consumer goods marketing and business operations. One of her prominent roles has been as the CEO of P&G's Beauty division, where she was responsible for overseeing P&G's global beauty business. Under her leadership, the division worked on innovation and expansion in the beauty sector, focusing on brands like Pantene, Olay, and Head & Shoulders. Keith is known for her strategic vision and commitment to driving growth while maintaining P&G's focus on sustainability and social responsibility. Her leadership style emphasizes innovation, consumer understanding, and operational excellence. She is also recognized for her advocacy for diversity and inclusion within the workplace. Her contributions have had a significant impact on P&G's performance and its standing in the competitive market of beauty and personal care products. Through her career at P&G, Alexandra Keith has established herself as a respected leader in the business world, known for her strategic acumen and commitment to excellence.
Ma. Fatima de Vera Francisco is a seasoned executive at Procter & Gamble Co., where she has made significant contributions over her extensive career. Known for her leadership in the consumer goods industry, she has held various roles within the company that highlight her expertise in marketing and management. Fatima Francisco has played a key role in the development and execution of strategies that drive brand growth and innovation. Her ability to lead diverse teams and connect with consumers globally has been instrumental in strengthening P&G’s market position. She is particularly noted for her work in the Baby Care sector of the company, where she has overseen initiatives that enhance product offerings and expand market reach. Throughout her career, she has been recognized for her strategic vision, customer-centric approach, and commitment to fostering an inclusive workplace. Her leadership style emphasizes collaboration and agility, ensuring that P&G continues to thrive in a competitive landscape. Her impact extends beyond P&G, as she is also actively involved in mentoring and supporting future leaders in the industry.
Seth Cohen is associated with Procter & Gamble Co. (P&G) as a notable executive leader. He has held various roles within the organization, contributing significantly to its strategic initiatives and growth. His responsibilities at P&G have included leadership positions that focus on business strategy, driving innovation, and enhancing market competitiveness in the fast-moving consumer goods sector. Cohen's work at P&G has been characterized by his ability to navigate complex market dynamics and his commitment to fostering a collaborative corporate environment. His expertise in managing brand portfolios and optimizing operational efficiency has been pivotal in maintaining P&G's global standing as a leader in consumer products.
John T. Chevalier is a notable executive at Procter & Gamble Co., having served in several leadership roles within the company. His career at P&G has been marked by his expertise in business strategy and his ability to drive growth across various product categories. Chevalier has played a crucial role in P&G's market operations, with a focus on enhancing efficiency and maximizing the company's reach within competitive industries. His leadership style is characterized by a strong emphasis on innovation and adapting to changing consumer needs. Over the years, he has contributed significantly to P&G's success, helping the company maintain its position as a leader in the global consumer goods market.
Susan Street Whaley is an accomplished executive at Procter & Gamble Co., where she has made significant contributions to the company's growth and success. She holds the position of Chief Customer Officer, leading Procter & Gamble's efforts in building strong, strategic partnerships with retailers and enhancing customer service strategies. Whaley is known for her expertise in customer engagement, sales, and strategic business development. Having joined Procter & Gamble in 1991, Whaley has held various roles within the company, which have included leadership positions in sales and marketing. Her extensive experience has been integral in driving innovative initiatives and fostering a customer-centric culture within the company. Her leadership style focuses on collaboration, inclusivity, and achieving sustainable results, which has earned her recognition both within and outside the organization. Additionally, Whaley is actively involved in mentorship and championing diversity and inclusion, reflecting her commitment to building an empowering work environment at Procter & Gamble. She is a respected leader known for her strategic vision and her ability to adapt to the evolving needs of the market.
Ken Patel is the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer at Procter & Gamble Co. In this role, he is responsible for overseeing the company's global ethics and compliance program, ensuring that P&G upholds its strong commitment to ethical conduct and legal compliance across all its operations. Ken Patel's work involves developing policies, training programs, and initiatives to promote a culture of integrity and accountability within the organization. His leadership in this role is key to maintaining P&G's reputation as a company that values ethical business practices. Prior to his role at P&G, Patel has a history of working in compliance and legal fields, bringing a wealth of experience to his position.
Good morning, and welcome to Procter & Gamble's Quarter-End Conference Call. Today's event is being recorded for replay. This discussion will include a number of forward-looking statements. If you will refer to P&G's most recent 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K reports, you will see a discussion of factors that could cause the company's actual results to differ materially from these projections.
As required by Regulation G, Procter & Gamble needs to make you aware that during the discussion, the company will make a number of references to non-GAAP and other financial measures. Procter & Gamble believes these measures provide investors with useful perspective on underlying business trends and has posted on its Investor Relations website, www.pginvestor.com, a whole reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures.
Now I will turn the call over to P&G's Chief Financial Officer, Andre Schulten.
Good morning. Joining me on the call today are Jon Moeller, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer; and John Chevalier, Senior Vice President, Investor Relations. I'll start with an overview of second quarter results. Jon will add perspective on our results and strategy, and we'll close with guidance for fiscal '25 and then take your questions.
Second quarter results were largely in line with our going-in expectations despite a high degree of volatility within the quarter, ultimately, acceleration in organic sales growth, EPS growth, strong cash return to share owners.
Organic sales for the quarter grew 3%. Volume contributed 2 points to organic sales growth, mix added 1 point and pricing was roughly in line with prior year. The top line results were better than anticipated in early December. Our team was able to fully overcome the 2-week outage of our global transportation management system provider and support strong late December customer orders ahead of early January merchandising events.
Growth was broad-based across categories with 9 of 10 product categories growing organic sales for the quarter. Family Care was up double digits. Home Care and Skin and Personal Care were up mid-singles. Personal Health Care, Hair Care, Oral Care, Feminine Care, Fabric Care and Grooming grew low single digits. Baby Care was down low singles.
Organic sales in Focus Markets grew 4%, and Enterprise Markets were in line with prior year. Organic sales in North America grew 4% driven by 4 points of volume growth.
Over the last 6 quarters, North America has grown organic sales 7%, 5%, 3%, 4%, 4% and now again 4% on volume growth of 3% to 4% each quarter. The region delivered broad-based market share growth this quarter with 8 of 10 categories holding or growing volume share and 8 of 10 categories holding or growing value share.
Europe Focus Markets organic sales were up 4% driven by 4 points of volume growth. Over the last 6 quarters, Europe Focus Markets have grown organic sales on average 6% on volume growth of 3%.
Latin America and European Enterprise Markets each grew low single digits. And the Asia, Middle East and Africa region declined low singles. Greater China organic sales declined 3%. While down versus prior year, this is a solid step forward in our second largest market from a 15% decline last quarter. Notably, SK-II in Greater China grew 5% with strong growth during the 11/11 key consumption period and modest growth in travel retail. Underlying market conditions remain soft, and we are trending back toward growth in Greater China.
Global aggregate value share was in line with prior year, with 28 of our top 50 category country combinations holding or growing share for the quarter. On the bottom line, core earnings per share were $1.88, up 2% versus prior year. On a currency neutral basis, core EPS increased 3%. The quarter included roughly $0.02 per share of incremental costs to manage through the transportation services disruption, almost entirely in cost of goods sold.
While gross margin was down 30 basis points and core operating margin declined 80 basis points, currency neutral core operating margin decreased 50 basis points. The quarter included strong productivity improvement of 260 basis points.
Adjusted free cash flow productivity was 84%. We returned over $4.9 billion of cash to shareowners this quarter, $2.4 billion in dividends and $2.5 billion in share repurchases.
To summarize results, accelerating organic sales growth, solid core EPS growth and cash return to shareowners, keeping us on track to deliver within our fiscal year guidance ranges, overall good performance in what continues to be a challenging economic and geopolitical environment.
Over to Jon.
Thanks, Andre. Our team continues to execute our strategy with excellence, enabling strong results over the past 6-plus years, pre-COVID, during COVID, through historic inflationary and pricing cycle and through geopolitical tensions.
We've now delivered 26 consecutive quarters of 2% or better organic sales growth, averaging 5.5% organic sales growth over those 6.5 years. We've now delivered 8.5 fiscal years of 2% or better core earnings per share growth, averaging nearly 8% over that period.
This is the type of long-term -- sorry, turning my page here, balanced top and bottom line growth we strive to deliver, solid, consistent growth over time. As we expected heading into the fiscal year, first half results are below the guidance ranges we set for the full year. And while recent consumer trends and FX rates make the balance of the year more challenging, we continue to expect stronger results in the second half. Andre will discuss this more in the guidance update.
We remain committed to the integrated strategy that has enabled our strong results, and that is the foundation for balanced growth and value creation. We highlighted many of the reasons we're confident in the strategy at our Investor Day in November. If you weren't able to attend, I encourage you to listen to the replay on our IR website.
To recap, we remain very disciplined in our portfolio choices, including some moves over the past year to strengthen our ability to generate U.S. dollar-based returns. We're doubling down on superiority across all 5 vectors. No single vector superiority can carry the day itself. It's all 5 together.
The innovation plans to create and extend superiority across the business are very strong. And we continue to leverage recent innovations by driving more trial and household penetration.
A few examples, Charmin smooth tear with its patented scalloped edge, the biggest innovation in toilet paper in 100 years, continues to drive Charmin volume and value share growth in the U.S. We were first to launch the whole body deodorant sprays now across the Old Spice, Secret and Native brands. And we continue to drive trial in the growing segment -- in this growing segment of the category. P&G U.S. deodorant volume and value share are each up nearly 1 point over the last year.
Dawn Powerwash continues to drive market share up more than 1 point in the U.S. market after nearly 3 years in the market. Swiffer PowerMop has become the largest innovation of Swiffer's history, contributing to 40% growth of the brand portfolio and driving a remarkable 35% growth in the category.
We've launched our most advanced power toothbrush, Oral-B iO 10 early last year. We followed up with iO 2, the first iO designed to help consumers trade up from a manual toothbrush to a power brush. Early results in the U.S. are very encouraging, and we're expanding iO 2 across major markets over the next several months.
We just launched our best-ever whitening toothpaste, Crest 3D white deep stain remover. The new formula works in just 1 day to dissolve the bonds that lock stains to your teeth and better prevent stains from occurring. The early trial period for deep stain remover is off to a great start.
We're expanding Zevo, our insect killing sprays, mosquito repellent and insect traps with worry-free ingredients inspired by plants' natural defenses against bugs. We're building distribution and trial and receiving very strong consumer ratings and reviews.
Tide Oxi Boost Power Pods have just launched online with a great response from retailers and customers. Oxi Boost includes 2x the Oxi power to provide Tide's most powerful clean. Oxi Boost Power Pods will be available in stores soon, and we'll be following up quickly with additional innovations in laundry detergents and fabric enhancers.
Finally, Tide evo, our new laundry detergent developed in our breakthrough functional fibers platform, continues to exceed expectations in our Colorado test market, surpassing our year 1 performance goals in just the first 12 weeks after launch. We're progressing through the last phase of supply chain readiness, and we'll be assessing our expansion plans in the coming months.
There are many more examples we could share considering the next 6 months of innovations across Tide, Gain, Downy, Febreze, Dawn, Cascade, Mr. Clean, Pampers, Luvs, Tampax, Always, Always Discreet, Bounty, Old Spice, Crest, Gillette and Venus brands. And that's just in the U.S.
I hope you can see this is one reason we're confident in our prospects going forward. Improving productivity in all areas of our operations to fuel investments in superiority, mitigate cost and currency headwinds and drive margin expansion, we've extended our visibility to productivity improvement with each business unit building 3-year cost savings master plans, mirroring what we've done for years in our innovation program.
We're driving constructive disruption of ourselves and our industry, a willingness to change, adapt and create new trends, technologies and capabilities that will shape the future of our industry and extend our competitive advantage. We've designed and continue to refine and strengthen P&G's organization structure so that it enables P&G people to be fully empowered, agile and accountable, focused on business outcomes to deliver the greatest value creation.
We call this an integrated strategy for a reason. Each part of the strategy needs to be delivered. It's not a menu to pick and choose from. Each element is incredibly important.
The real advantage comes from being able to do all of these things at the same time, the strategy inherently dynamic. It adapts to the changing needs of consumers, customers and society. It demands that we not sit still.
We continue to believe our best path forward is to double down on this integrated strategy, operating with a focus on driving market growth, creating business versus taking business, to deliver balanced top and bottom line growth in value creation.
With that, I'll hand it back to Andre to discuss guidance.
Thank you, Jon. So with half of the fiscal year complete, our guidance ranges for fiscal '25 are unchanged and remain consistent with our long-term algorithm. We've highlighted we continue to expect the environment around us to remain volatile and challenging from input costs to currencies to consumer, competitor, retailer and geopolitical dynamics.
On the top line, we are maintaining our organic sales growth guidance in the range of 3% to 5%. We continue to expect the markets in which we compete to deliver local currency sales growth in the range of 3% to 4% for the year. And our objective remains to grow organic sales modestly ahead of the underlying growth of these markets.
On the bottom line, our core EPS guidance range for fiscal '25 remains a growth of 5% to 7% versus fiscal '24 core EPS of $6.59. This guidance equates to a range of $6.91 to $7.05 per share.
Our outlook for commodity costs remains consistent with our recent guidance, expecting a commodity cost headwind of approximately $200 million after tax, which equates to a headwind of $0.08 per share for fiscal '25. Since last earnings, foreign exchange rates have moved sharply against us. We are now expecting a headwind of approximately $300 million after tax, which equates to a headwind of $0.12 per share for fiscal '25.
We continue to expect lower nonoperating income benefit this fiscal year and a somewhat higher tax rate versus the prior year. Combined, these additional headwinds amount to $0.10 to $0.12 to core EPS on top of the commodities and FX headwinds I mentioned.
With projected softer market growth and stronger foreign exchange headwinds, we currently have good visibility towards the lower end of the top and bottom line guidance ranges. However, we will continue to push all levers in our control to offset these headwinds that are largely not in our control.
We expect adjusted free cash flow productivity of 90% for the year. And we have plans to pay around $10 billion in dividends and to repurchase $6 billion to $7 billion in common stock combined to returning $16 billion to $17 billion of cash to shareholders for the fiscal year.
This outlook is based on current market growth estimates, commodity prices and foreign exchange rates. Significant additional currency weakness, commodity cost increases, geopolitical disruptions, major supply chain disruptions or store closures are not anticipated within the guidance ranges.
Now I'll hand it over to Jon for closing thoughts.
We're very pleased with the results P&G people have delivered in a very challenging and volatile environment, a good first half of the year and a stronger outlook for the second half. We remain focused on excellent execution of our integrated dynamic market constructive strategy, aimed at delivering balanced top and bottom line growth and value creation, starting with a commitment to deliver irresistibly superior propositions to consumers and retailers.
With that, we'll be happy to take your questions.
[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Dara Mohsenian of Morgan Stanley.
I just wanted to drill down a bit more short term into organic sales growth for the back half of the year, given some of the volatility over the last year. You've talked historically about the OSG split between the robust 85% in country mix versus a lagging 15% in the last few quarters.
Can you just give us a bit of update on the performance in fiscal Q2 in each of those buckets? Do you think you're on track for continued improvement in the 15% in the back half of the year as you look versus Q2? And also just sustainability of growth in 95%, that's stronger, presumably driven by the U.S. and Europe.
Thanks for the question. I'll take a crack at it, and Jon, you'll jump in. So if you look at quarter 2, and I apply the same logic that we've been using to explain the divergence of the majority of the business versus some of the tougher markets, 85% of the business, so comprising of the U.S., Europe, Latin America, the Latin America and Europe Enterprise Markets, that 85% continues to grow at around 4%.
What has improved is the 15%. So the performance of the balance of the markets mainly the Asia, Middle East, Africa markets, but a significant improvement in Greater China. So China was down 15% organic sales in quarter 1 and was down, as we mentioned in the prepared remarks, only 3% in quarter 2. So we see encouraging momentum towards recovery and hopefully, more neutral picture as we go into half 2.
That's exactly what we're expecting as we go into the second half of the year. We expect the U.S. to continue to grow at the pace that we've seen in quarter 2 and quarter 1. We expect some increased momentum across Europe and Latin America specifically as comps ease versus the base period.
And with that, if we are combining, hopefully, a little bit stronger growth in North America, easier comps in Europe, LA and Asia, Middle East, Africa, and if China continues to move towards a more neutral contribution to sales growth, that would actually allow us to be at the midpoint of organic sales growth guidance, maybe a little bit higher.
Conversely, if we saw weakening across some of the core markets of North America and Europe or we saw China returning to more negative territory, that would move us to the lower end or slightly below the current organic sales growth guidance.
Our base case, Dara, to summarize, continued strong performance, around 4% in the 85% of the business, continued recovery on the 15%.
The next question will come from Lauren Lieberman of Barclays.
So Andre, I think you were kind of running through projected performance for P&G's business. But I was hoping you could also comment on what you're seeing in terms of consumer behavior and dynamics.
I think in December, you guys have [indiscernible] a little bit of a softening in the consumer environment in the U.S. as a maybe it's something that sticks, maybe it doesn't. But would just love to get a read on that and same in Europe sort of the consumer dynamic, not just your own performance and market share trajectory.
Yes. Lauren, generally, I would describe the consumer in our categories, which are, again, nondiscretionary and very focused on performance as stable. In Europe, specifically, the market continues to grow at around 4% in Focus Markets and in double digits actually in Enterprise Markets.
Our ability to continue to grow ahead of that, I think, is visible in the volume share numbers. We are growing volume share about 50 basis points in Focus Markets and 60 basis points in Enterprise Markets.
Inflation is down in Europe to about 2%, and we see a relatively stable environment, which we expect to continue going into half 2. And we are investing in strong innovation in half 2 to benefit from that stable consumer environment.
In the U.S., the current quarter has been a bit more volatile in terms of phasing of consumption. We saw very strong consumption in October driven by hurricanes and by port strikes, easing off a little bit in October -- in November and then coming back in December.
It was volatile, but when I step back, I would characterize the situation very similarly to the European consumer, stable in our categories. Market growth continues to be around 4%. Volume growth continues to be around 3%. And again, our job is to encourage consumption in our categories with strong innovation and communication, which we're doing and continue to do across half 2.
The only thing I would add to Andre's comments is in terms of reflecting on consumer behavior. We're also seeing continued flat to declining private label shares in both the United States and in Europe. So that, again, is relatively reassuring in terms of the stable consumer that Andre rightly referred to.
The next question will come from Steve Powers of Deutsche Bank.
I guess, Andre, I'm a little surprised that your currency outlook as it relates to the impacts on the top line didn't move off the negative 1% call you had in place out of October even as the after-tax profit impact stepped up by the $300 million. So maybe you could just talk about any key moving parts there and whether you've assumed further currency movements or if the full year now could have effectively assumed spot rates as we've seen in the last few weeks.
And then relatedly, I guess I'd love a little bit more discussion of the productivity and pricing levers you have available to you as an offset to those dynamics and whether you see any limitations to implementing them over the balance of the year. I'm asking that in the context of historically, 3Q, 4Q gross margins stepped down sequentially. So I think your guidance has seen some fairly strong operating leverage over the balance of the year in SG&A, but just wanted to see if you could clarify those moving parts.
Steve, I think we'll -- we are forecasting right now at spot rates as we always do, both on the P&L side and the organic sales growth side. And Europe, we'll see -- we're seeing high volatility in currencies, obviously, that are moving on a daily basis based on commentary. So we'll reserve our ability to update here.
But for now, we're reflecting spot rates. The impact of foreign exchange rate will mostly hit in the second half. So we saw a lot of the commodity impact in the first half, and the corresponding impact of FX will be mostly in half 2.
That is built into our guidance logic that we've communicated. Our ability to deal with foreign exchange as with any headwind is a combination of productivity, which we feel very good about for the year across all productivity buckets.
So we're confident in our $1.5 billion productivity guidance on cost of goods sold and a $2 billion guidance overall, including SG&A and pricing levers. Pricing is probably most pronounced in Enterprise Markets where we see strong foreign exchange rate exposure, but it's going to be a combination of both. All of that is baked in, in our guidance commentary. But again, we'll watch this closely because there's a lot of volatility in this, as you know.
Just on pricing, Steve, the -- our business model is, hopefully, was reflected again. And my comments this morning is heavily innovation-based. It's at the heart of everything we do. And that's the primary enabler of modest amounts of pricing as we move forward.
If you look at our history, again, is a source of potential confidence in our ability to continue to execute modest amounts of pricing even, as Andre said, in the Focus Markets. Pricing has been a neutral or a positive contributor to our top line growth for 19 of the last 20 years and for 54 of the last 57 quarters.
Andre mentioned we have very strong second half innovation programs across markets. And so that should enable us to continue to put some upward pressure on the top line. Again, modest, but we're in a pretty good position with all of that innovation.
The next question will come from Bryan Spillane of Bank of America.
So just a question or maybe 2 on China. One, just the 3% in the quarter, just how did Chinese New Year's impact that? So I guess is that kind of reflective of consumption? Or is there any timing shift shipment versus consumption?
And then maybe just more broadly, Jon, the market is changing. And does it create opportunities? Are you looking now to kind of use your position as a position of strength and expand in China while the market is soft? Just curious if the change in the marketplace at all has changed the way you're thinking about the market strategically.
Answer the first part?
I can. Bryan, so I think the China results are not impacted by heavy phasing. Within the quarter, there was phasing in China on the timing of preshipments for 11/11, but that kind of evened out across the quarter. So the progress is really what we had anticipated.
We're getting into easier comps part of that. Part of that is SK-II is returning to growth in China at 5%, which is encouraging to see. And the last point I'll make is on the core brands, we're making progress.
We are innovating on Hair Care across Pantene, Head & Shoulders. We're innovating on Fabric Care. We're innovating on Olay, and that is driving progress. We are carefully investing in the fast-growing channel in Douyin to ensure that we create value there, but that allows us to now grow share in that channel.
And the last element is I think the go-to-market interventions that we've made. We talked about in the last call where we improved our collaboration and synchronization with our core distributors is paying dividends.
So all of that is moving in the right direction. I want to be clear, I don't think China is out of the woods. This will continue to be difficult. It will continue to be volatile. As reflected in my guidance commentary, that volatility can drive us to the midpoint or the lower end of the guidance. And so we don't want to get ahead of ourselves, but it's good to see the trend going more positive.
And you make a very, very good point on taking advantage of significant change that's occurring in the marketplace, both with regard to consumer behavior and with regard to customer behavior and channels. And we intend to do exactly as you described, which is to take advantage of those changes.
One of the -- there are a couple of things that I just want to bring a little bit more focus to that are very, very important. One is if you look at our distributor channels, largely feeding the wholesale market and smaller grocery stores, they were being paid based on total P&G business, and we've changed that.
So they're now being paid by category. So they have to deliver against each of the categories that we have products in, in order to be fully compensated. That may not seem like a big deal. That's a big deal. It changes behavior significantly.
We've also moved -- we've taken advantage of all the changes that are going on to move our China operations even closer to, for example, how we manage things in the U.S. or focus Europe in terms of end-to-end, meaning that the categories own everything from the front end of innovation all the way through to the customer discussions. And that wasn't fully the case, say, 2 years ago, even a year ago. So those are big changes.
The third big change is really reoriented the conversation that we're having internally and externally with our customers to one of market growth and demonstrating how we can be the biggest driver -- their strongest partners in driving that market growth, which is something that everyone wants badly.
So that's another example of taking advantage of the current situation to become even stronger and more relevant to our customers. So thanks for asking that question. I think it's an excellent one, and it's something we're very much focused on.
Your next question will come from Peter Grom of UBS.
I wanted to get just some perspective on the input cost environment. I recognize you maintained your outlook for the $200 million after-tax headwind, but we've seen some volatility across some of your key raw materials over the past few months.
So Andre, can you maybe just give us or unpack what you're seeing or expecting across your key cost buckets? And then just kind of looking at the first half impact on the full year guidance, you kind of alluded to this in Steve's question. Are you anticipating input cost deflation in the back half of the year when we think about our gross margin bridge?
Input costs for us, obviously, you can appreciate is a wide variety of different materials and commodities. What I'll tell you, which I think is most relevant for what you're after is any variation that we see now versus what we already incurred in half 1, which is the majority of the $200 million impact that we are talking about, will likely not hit the current year P&L. Because of variance holding and because of our contract structures, any major deviation in terms of oil prices outside of maybe transportation will impact half 1 of next fiscal year.
Most of our materials and commodities will impact the first half of next fiscal year. So we feel relatively good about that end of the equation because it provides stability for the second half where more of the volatility is, is again in foreign exchange rates.
That doesn't mean we don't look at our input costs carefully because as we said, we need to get ready to deal with it in the first half of next fiscal year, which then comes to Jon's point on appropriately developing pricing plans with innovation, productivity programs, et cetera. But the variability in the current year, we believe, is going to be limited.
Our next question will come from Andrea Teixeira of JPMorgan.
If we step back from the tone on the first quarter and then now the second quarter fiscal, in regards to the range of guidance, both organic and EPS growth, is it fair to say you're feeling a bit better about getting to the midpoint on the top line, but EPS more pressured given the increased headwinds in FX? I mean I just want to understand how it changed. And then if so, if any changes, it seems like your productivity is coming in or even your operating leverage is coming in better than anticipated or better than [indiscernible], if you will?
And related to that, just a clarification about the disruptions you called out in December in one of your suppliers. I've been getting questions regarding there is anything in terms of sell-in, sell-out. I understand there wasn't anything material in the quarter, either like catching up to that or anything that we should be aware of into the fiscal third quarter?
So related to guidance, what I'd tell you is what I mentioned in the prepared remarks, right? At the moment, when we -- when you look at foreign exchange rate, you look at what we delivered in the front half of the year, we would say we have good visibility and confidence to the lower end of the guidance range, both on organic sales growth and on core EPS.
That doesn't mean that we don't have a shot at delivering the middle of the range. And as I said, if we continue to make good progress in China, if we continue to see some easing of the tensions in the Middle East and therefore, business picks up, if Europe and North America continue to deliver, we have a good shot at the top line around the midpoint of the range and corresponding EPS. But at the moment, I would point you to the lower end.
On transportation management system interruption, look, we wanted to give you guys visibility to what we were seeing. We -- when we experienced the disruption, we saw a backlog of orders building up that would have been worth about 60 to 70 basis points of the quarter. And we had assumed at that point that we would get rid of half of that backlog through intense work by the team to operate a backup solution and get us back on the main operating system.
The team did way better. They were able to not only work through the full backlog and get us back on the operating system faster. They were also able to then process strong orders in late December. There is no impact quarter-over-quarter driven by the transportation management system outage. So no unusual effect to consider there, just great work by the team to get us through this without any impact on the quarter.
Question will come from Robert Ottenstein of Evercore ISI.
Just first, a clarification on China, and apologies if I missed it, but I know that you're doing better, your brands are doing better, SK-II's doing better, but just wanted to get any commentary on the Chinese consumer, the health of the Chinese consumer as the quarter developed and then into January. So just a follow-up on that.
And then my main question is on innovation this year. You sound more upbeat, positive on this and excited in terms of what you're bringing out in calendar 2025. Is there any way to quantify that versus prior years? Any way to think whether it's incremental shelf space or the expected impact of the business on the top and bottom line so that we can kind of try to model that?
Thanks, Robert. From a Chinese consumer standpoint, as Andre intimated in some of his commentary, it's still a challenge. So that really hasn't changed significantly.
There are signs, though, of some improvement. What am I talking about? So for example, if we just look at the number of Chinese travelers to Korea and Japan, it's up pretty significantly quarter-on-quarter. We actually see that reflected in our SK-II business in those countries. So that would indicate more confidence and a willingness to spend.
The growth of SK-II itself, and actually consumption growth in that business is a little bit ahead of even our shipment growth, is an indication of confidence. That's, as you know, a very premium price product. But the broad swath of society is not confident and is still struggling. And that's why Andre says we're not out of the woods. I agree with that statement and that it will take some time still to get to dependable growth in China.
And the best data we have, Robert, to confirm what Jon was describing, past 3 months market in our categories in dollar terms is down 5%. Past 12 months was down 5%. So macroconsumer environment pretty much stable but not positive.
Relative to innovation, I don't have a numerical ability to describe the strength of our -- the innovation that's coming to market over the next 6 months vis-a-vis year ago. But we are relatively -- we have gained confidence in that program in part because of what we're seeing in the marketplace and what we're seeing in terms of consumer response to, for example, the Tide evo test market in Colorado. Again, we've delivered -- what we expected to deliver in the first year, we've delivered in 12 weeks.
We're looking at the continued growth of some of our innovations in terms of household penetration and market share. I went through a litany of those examples earlier. And then, of course, there are some things that I'm not at liberty to talk about. But in general, your observation in terms of, as you describe, excitement or confidence in our innovation program is strong.
Our next question will come from Bonnie Herzog of Goldman Sachs.
I guess thinking about your guidance this year, if your organic sales come in at the lower end, as you kind of touched on, if trends decelerate further and thinking about gross margin tailwinds likely moderating this year, curious how much flexibility you have to deliver on your EPS guidance range?
And then in the context of that, do you see a potential that you might need to lower your reinvestment levels to deliver on your bottom line guidance? Any color on just how to think about your ability to continue to reinvest in your business.
Bonnie, when we went through the years with really significant headwinds in terms of currency, commodities and FX, I'm talking there about a 50%, 5-0 percent reduction in our profit over a 2-year period because of those items. We increased our spending on innovation. We increased our spending on commercialization of that innovation, and we grew earnings modestly. So that's our mindset.
And I just described a strong innovation pipeline. We will fully support that pipeline. And frankly, I don't think it will, but if that means that we come in a little bit lower then that's what we need to accept. And we'll be very transparent and clear about that if that were to be the case. Currently, it's not. But we're going to continue to invest in both innovation and commercialization of that innovation.
Next question will come from Filippo Falorni of Citi.
I wanted to ask a little more color on the Enterprise Market business. You talked about Europe Enterprise Market still growing solidly. Maybe can you give a little more color on Latin America? How is the consumer general health there in key countries like Brazil and Mexico?
And then on the Middle East, you're starting to cycle easier comps. Is your expectation of a return to growth in the second half of '25?
In aggregate, delivered 3% growth in this quarter on a base of 17%. So quite impressive base period and continued growth across the markets. If you look at the consumers, I would describe Mexico as more difficult right now, but we are making good progress. And I have great confidence in the half 2 plans that we are executing. And the same is true for Brazil.
So my expectation would be an acceleration in Latin America, partially driven by the base becoming a little bit easier but also given strong plans across those core markets. Europe Enterprise Markets were up 1 point in the quarter on a base of 8% growth. Encouragingly, we are growing volume share in Enterprise Markets in Europe by 60 basis points. Market growth, still very strong. So we feel good about the market context, but also about our own ability to execute.
I was just there with our COO last week. The innovation plans are very strong. The go-to-market plans are very strong. The stores look phenomenal, and the opportunity is huge. And the profitability we have in both Latin America and in Europe Enterprise Markets allows us to remain fully invested in that innovation and the support thereof.
AMA, Asia, Middle East, Africa, look, the main driver here will be stabilization in the Middle East. We hope that, that progress is sustaining, and we can go from there. But I think it will remain a more difficult environment for us through the second half.
Your next question will come from Chris Carey of Wells Fargo Securities.
I'd like to ask a few category specific questions. I'll count this as one single category question, if you'll allow.
In the Family Care business, the double-digit growth you saw, would you attribute most of that to timing with some sort of reversal expected in the next quarter? In the Oral Care business, it's the second quarter consecutive of low single digit, which is a bit below trend than what we've seen over the prior 1-year period.
And then just in the Baby business, you did highlight that you'll be making some merchandising investments. Jon spent some time on the resilience and longer-term history of pricing at P&G as a contributor to organic sales. Clearly, this is one of those categories that has been a bit more challenged over time, and you're leaning in a bit more on investments.
Can you expand on that a bit more? What drives those sorts of decisions, and why now? So just the 3 kind of category questions and any kind of timing dynamics specifically with Family Care that we should be thinking about going into next quarter?
Let me take them one by one. So Family Care, we saw very strong shipments and very strong consumption, most importantly. And as I mentioned, we had the port strike in October, and we had a hurricane in October. Both of those led to pantry loading from a consumer standpoint.
So there was some pantry up-stocking clearly in October. We also saw strong shipments in late December in anticipation of a January [indiscernible] event. That's typical. We've had the same thing happened last year. But there is some increased pantry inventory.
History would tell us that, that consumers tend to hold on to that pantry loading for quite a while. We've seen this during COVID, and we always expected it would come out, it never did. So hard to say what the going impact is for the year.
I think we've appropriately reacted for that in the guidance, but it's pantry inventory loading. We expect the majority of that will sustain through the next quarter.
Oral Care, I would point you to 2 things. Number one, we'll roll out the full lineup of iO innovation, both iO 10, so up the value chain and iO 2 down to lower price points. And as we do that, I think the full opportunity across the Power Oral Care business will become more accessible to us.
Even in high penetration markets like in Europe, lowering the price point with iO 2 will give us access to more consumers. We have a very strong marketing campaign building on the -- inside that Power Oral Care removes 100% of plaque while manual brushing only removes 50% of plaque. That seems to resonate well with consumers.
We also have the strongest taste innovation program, including heavy focus on whitening where we had an opportunity to strengthen. So all of that gives me confidence that in the second half, we'll see acceleration.
Last point on Baby. The reason why we want to make investments on Baby, both in communication and potentially in promo, is due to innovation. We have talked for a while about the opportunity to continue to innovate across the entire lineup.
We've seen the Luvs innovation in the market in September. We see sequential share growth on Luvs. So we want to give consumers the incentive and the opportunity to try those propositions while continuing to drive the premium end of the portfolio, Swaddlers and Cruisers.
So it's really about a combination of combining innovation with strong in-store visibility and incentive to try and strong communication to ensure consumers understand the benefit. All of those, the foundation to create growth in Baby, which is one of the top categories to do so.
Next question will come from Olivia Tong of Raymond James.
Sorry, 2-parter here. First on China, you mentioned you expect continued normalization. So how much of this is category growth versus your market share improvements as you cycle estimating comps? And I ask that because comps aren't particularly demanding in second half, of course, but they do get a little less easy than the minus 15 that you're comping this quarter.
And then just if you could talk briefly about the level of investment necessary to achieve your broader goals, not specific to China, but more broadly, does it have to go higher? Or can you leverage many of the brand support investments that you talk about in answer to a different question that you've already made?
So Olivia, on China, what I'd tell you is it's a bit of both, right? We would expect some improvement as the market cycles to more forgiving comps. And we, for sure, would expect some improvement in our business. We talked about all the interventions we've made on innovation, on brand building, on go to market, including the distributor model that Jon elaborated on. So it's going to be a bit of both.
Unfortunately, a bit of both means we have 2 hard-to-predict elements here. So we hope this is going to result in a more neutral organic sales growth contribution of China in the back half, but we also are fully aware that this could go either way.
From an investment standpoint, my take on this would be, you see us adjusting based on the opportunity. We have 30 basis points of incremental investment in the front half. That was more moderate than what you would have seen in the base period or even a couple of years before.
And some of the experimentation that we talked about and how far can we push frequency and reach, I think we concluded where it makes sense and where it doesn't make sense. So we're now more clear on where that playbook goes. And we're focusing mostly now on optimizing within that playbook and improving content quality as we go into the half 2 innovation. So we will continue to invest where it makes sense albeit probably at a slower pace than what we've seen in the last years.
Yes, I would just add a couple of things in response to your question, Olivia. Just one nit for clarity, the minus 15 isn't what we're comping from an index standpoint. That's a sequential number last quarter, so just for clarity on that.
The -- in terms of investments and commercialization and advertising and other forms of marketing, I agree with what Andre said. At the same time, he talked about optimizing within that context. We're making significant strides to be more profitable in the fastest-growing categories -- or fastest-growing channels in the country.
So while we will be opportunistic in investing, I expect as well we'll be saving. For example, bringing the support of key opinion leaders in-house and utilizing some of our R&D of resources for that activity. That saves a bunch of money, and our testing shows that it's as or more effective.
So it's not as simple as the level of reach and frequency, which are important. But it's also the cost of delivering that, which we're working to bring down.
The next question will come from Kevin Grundy of BNP Paribas.
I'd like to pivot to capital allocation, Two-part question. One, just updated thoughts on appropriateness of M&A as a potential avenue to drive shareholder value and what looks like it's going to be a slower growth environment here?
And then two, with respect to buyback, consumer staples stocks, including Procter's, have underperformed the market. Valuations are below historical averages versus the S&P 500. In that sort of context, has there been any school of thought internally to accelerate the pace of share repurchases as an avenue to drive shareholder value?
I'll take the -- thanks, Kevin. I'll take the M&A question. Andre can add to it and then move to your share repurchase question.
The answer is the same as it's been for some period of time here, which is that it starts with -- in most of our categories, we wouldn't contemplate acquisition part of the growth model in kind of any economic environment simply because our market positions is typically the #1 and sometimes both the #1 and #2 brands would preclude any acquisition of any size.
There are 2 categories that we compete in that are attractive, that we like, that are much more fragmented in their current constitution. And we've talked about those before. One is Personal Health Care, another is Skin and other parts of the specialty beauty.
We don't -- we're going to be -- continue to be extraordinarily responsible in regards to pursuit of any potential acquisitions. We don't engage in hostile attempts. So basically, assets have to be available, and then we have to be able to make sense of the purchase of that asset in a way that leaves us highly confident that we can create value. So that's kind of it from an M&A standpoint.
Before I turn it over to Andre, just one comment on share repurchase. As Andre said in his prepared remarks, we're going to be returning between dividend and share repurchase of $16 billion to $17 billion to shareholders this year. And as a general element of our capital allocation approach, I would expect significant cash return to shareholders to continue to play prominently. But with that, I'll turn it over to Andre.
Agree with everything you said on M&A, Jon. It's nice not to have to do it. So we can do it if it makes sense.
On the capital allocation, Kevin, nothing new here. We will continue to aggressively fund the growth in the business. We will continue to pay the dividend, likely increase the dividend. We will do M&A if we find a target that makes sense and is willing to play. And the rest goes to shareholders in share repurchase. That's really the simple logic that we apply. So it's an outcome rather than a target.
And we don't -- there isn't a lot of, if you will, publicity about a special share repurchase program or a newly approved share repurchase program. And why is that? Because we do it every year. And we do it at the highest levels we can. And as Andre said, we'll continue to pursue that approach.
Your next question will come from Mark Astrachan of Stifel.
Two quick ones. Just remind us on the approach to offset FX pressures were pronounced in places like LatAm, where the dollar has strengthened via pricing?
And then just returning to SK-II. It seems a little bit like the performance was a little bit better than anticipated at Investor Day where I think Alex has highlighted Mainland China improvement would suggest, obviously, China a little bit weaker at the time, but your commentary would suggest otherwise. I guess is it part of the improvement that the Chinese consumer perception of the brand, the geopolitics angle, has that improved? Is it category improvement? Is it both? Just any color there would be helpful.
Approach on foreign exchange is not different. So I just want to confirm, we will in Enterprise Markets mainly, there's a relatively good market discipline to price for foreign exchange rate. We want to be part of that. And we will combine pricing with innovation wherever that's possible and reasonable. That approach has worked well in Europe Enterprise Markets, in LatAm and across AMA. And we'll continue to follow that playbook.
On SK-II, you're right. I think it's actually good to see the brand strengthening with the China consumer. Number one, the whole dynamic of Japanese brand sentiment, I think, is easing. We, most importantly I think, have made significant investments in brand building.
As soon as we were able to get back into broad media coverage, we've done so with very strong amplification of the benefit and the efficacy of the product, which has worked well. We've upgraded our department store presence, both from a counter standpoint and from a personnel standpoint to ensure that consumers can see us, find us at high-quality locations.
And we've innovated. We've launched a super premium proposition called LXP, which is doing very well in the market and again, is contributing to the brand equity that we want to build and reestablish. So all of that is contributing.
And the last element, I would say -- I would tell you is consumption is actually stronger than organic sales. Specifically in travel retail, the sales number is still negative, but the consumption continues to return in line with Jon's earlier comments that we also see increased Chinese travel to different locations. So generally, I think, more positive outlook on SK-II. You're right then what we would have given at Investor Day.
And just to build a little bit on that, the SK-II, I mean, you never know how -- you've got this cross current of geopolitical sentiment and brand sentiment as you rightly point out in your question. The geopolitical dynamic, one of the ways we track that in terms of how it affects consumer behavior is through social media references. And those are down significantly in terms of -- so in other words, the number of positive comments is much higher than the number of negative comments, and that's continued to improve.
So yes, as Andre confirmed, that is an improvement. There is part of what's going on. The -- but the branding part is -- that he also mentioned is an equally significant component, which he suggested.
If you look at the premium Skin Care segment right now, SK-II is the fastest-growing brand within that segment. Now growth on SK-II is going to be strange to follow simply because of the base period dynamics. But -- so the important thing to look at is what's happening to consumption trends quarter-on-quarter. And as Andre indicated, that's given us some confidence.
Next question will come from Kaumil Gajrawala of Jefferies.
To Chris' question you answered for a few different categories. But if we can maybe dig in a little bit more on consumer health or Health Care. It's -- the comp was a bit easier. It slowed down a little bit, if just anything in there that we should be aware about, be interesting to know.
The trends there year-to-year, quarter-to-quarter are most impacted by the cough/cold season, which really hasn't existed significantly at least through the month of December, which is the period of time that we're reporting results for currently.
We continue to be very happy about the growth delivery and the growth prospects for the broader [indiscernible] business and have brands outside of the cough/cold space that are growing very well. By the way, within the cough/cold space, we continue to build share. So that's kind of what's going on. And I don't want to wish for illness, but that's -- less illness, we'll have slower growth. More illness, we'll have higher growth.
And our next question will come from Edward Lewis of Redburn Atlantic.
Yes, I just wanted to, I guess, look at the components of the focus on superiority plan, particularly on the consumer value side. So I look at this quarter, it's another quarter of -- it's flat pricing. But if I look back over, say, the last 3 years, on average, pricing is still up around 4%, and you're clearly getting positive volumes.
So I wonder if you could just talk to sort of what the consumer value side of the focus on superiority is telling you and whether we should then -- whether you share confidence about possibly being able to take more pricing sort of in subsequent quarters or years with the evidence you're seeing from the data you're getting from the focus on superiority plan.
I think we will be taking more pricing as we move forward as we bring more -- as we bring innovation that produces a more efficacious product and a better experience to consumers. The data that you referenced do indicate to us that we have the ability with that combination to continue contributing to the top line through a modest amount of pricing.
The next question will come from Linda Bolton-Weiser of D.A. Davidson.
You've talked quite a bit about Beauty in China, and certainly, the SK-II improvement is contributing to that Beauty improvement we saw in the quarter. But I was curious about the U.S. side of it. And whether what you're doing in Olay in the U.S., like focusing more on Regenerist as a core grower if that's paying any benefits in terms of market share changes?
And also just on Beauty overall. It was a little curious why volume was actually down 1% for the whole segment for you, where volume had been sort of flat to up in the previous quarters.
Look, let me start with North America, and it's similar. Beauty is -- it's a story of pockets of real strength and some pockets of opportunity. And that's true for North America and the globe.
If you look at our antiperspirant and deodorant business in the U.S., it's growing 11%. And we are the #1 whole body segment brand or have the #1 position across our brands in that whole body segment.
Personal Care North America is growing 16%. So again, real source of strength. Hair Care North America is up 3% on a base of 15, so real strength. Now you point out Skin Care is an opportunity. Skin Care is down in North America double digits. And we are working to increase the innovation specifically on the jar business.
The new innovation that we've launched so Olay melts and super serum, those are doing very well. But they are just not big enough yet to offset the decline in the core business of jars, where we saw some distribution changes in the club channel, but also, I think, a shift in consumer benefit space that we need to address.
Similarly, at the globe, same logic, strength on APDO, strength on Personal Care, strength on Hair Care with an opportunity on Skin Care. And again, same dynamic there.
The only point I'll call out in China, for example, the Olay brand has been historically focused on tone benefit. The market is shifting more towards anti-aging or multi-benefit product. And so we've launched innovation there, which is going in that direction. So work to do on Skin Care, real strength across the other categories within Beauty.
Relative to your question on volume, Linda, China -- Beauty broadly has a higher presence in China than any of our other categories. And we're still not out of the woods, we'll use that expression again, on volume in China.
So while sales were 3, I believe, volume is minus 6, I feel comfortable that's going to continue to improve. When you look at Beauty volumes, you have to realize that China weighting, which in many periods has been a very positive thing, but now presents a challenge.
Next question will come from Robert Moskow of TD Cowen.
Sorry about that. Can you hear me now?
We can hear you.
Yes. My apologies. I wanted to ask about pricing in a different way. This is the first quarter where pricing has been flat in many quarters. And is there any scenario you could imagine where pricing turns negative? Or is there just the line in the sand here where that just won't happen?
And then secondly, on mix, mix is positive, and I want to know what's driving that. Is it geographic? Can we assume that if Europe and U.S. continue to outperform, will that be positive to your mix? Or is there something within the categories that's driving it?
I can start, and Jon, jump in, please. So price is an outcome that consistently helps our organic sales growth number. I think Jon mentioned this, 54 out of 57 quarters positive contribution of price mix to our organic sales growth.
And the timing of pricing outside of foreign exchange rate pricing or heavy commodity cycles, which has driven a lot of the pricing in the base period, is mostly driven by our innovation cycle because we like and we tend to take pricing with innovation. And that just falls in different quarters.
But generally, that effect of modest pricing with inflation or foreign exchange rate in Enterprise Markets and pricing for innovation is driving that consistent contribution of pricing to our organic sales growth numbers and will continue to do so.
What is driving mix here? I would focus less on geographic mix. I think what we're seeing is trade up within our categories. And you see that impacting the top line positively and impacting the gross margin line negatively.
So as consumers from liquid laundry detergent into unit dose or even within unit dose to the highest performing variants, they pay more per unit, and we make more profit per unit, but mathematically, the gross margin is lower. That's really the effect you see on the top line, positive effect of mix on the gross margin line, the slightly negative effect of mix, which is exactly what we want. So healthy dynamics on both. We expect both of those, the pricing dynamic with innovation and the mix dynamic to continue.
And we're going to -- there is no straight line or red line on pricing. We're going to do what maximizes -- we make the choices that maximize value, and we'll be responsive to consumer needs in that context.
But I don't think in all the time that I've been working on this business I've ever thought about the question of would we have negative pricing. It's just not part of our thought process. We're focused on value creation. And as Andre said, pricing is kind of an outcome of that series of decisions.
Your final question today will come from the line of Korinne Wolfmeyer of Piper Sandler.
I just want to touch a little bit on how you're feeling about -- or how your conversations with some of your retail partners have been going really across the globe. What are the confidence levels you're feeling with them? Are they still being cautious of inventory orders? Is that more normalized? And then how are you thinking about that heading into the back half of the fiscal year?
So I just had time with 2 of my counterparts, who are CEOs of large European retailers. I had a top-to-top meeting with the largest customer outside of the U.S. just yesterday.
The entirety of those conversations is focused on market growth and how as we pursue market growth we can do that most efficiently. So working together, we call it one supply chain to figure out how -- and there's a lot of power in that because it's -- we used to optimize parts of our respective supply chains, but bringing that view all together has produced significant results, both for ourselves and our retail partners.
So right now, the conversation is very positive generally and focuses on the opportunities that we have in front of us. In the U.S., so those -- that's kind of Europe.
In the U.S., in the retail environment currently, you have some retailers who are doing extraordinarily well, and some retailers and channels of trade that have more challenges. And you can imagine that the conversations are slightly different across that universe of customers. But in general, it follows the same pattern that I just described for Europe.
All right. I think that concludes our call. Again, in summary, a good quarter, good progress across multiple geographies, cautiously optimistic with a lot of moving pieces throughout the second half. Thanks for your time today. We're available for any follow-up questions, so please don't hesitate to reach out, and have a great rest of the day. Thank you.
That concludes today's conference. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect. Have a great day.