Thank you, Jen. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us.

On the call with me today are Linda Rendle, our Chair and CEO, and Luc Bellet, our CFO. Please note that our earnings release and prepared remarks are available on our website at thecloroxcompany.com.

Linda will share a few opening comments and then we'll take your questions. During this call, we may make forward-looking statements, including about our fiscal 2026 outlook.

These statements are based on management's current expectations, but may differ from actual results or outcomes. In addition, we may refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures.

Please refer to the Forward-Looking Statements section, which identifies various factors that could affect such forward-looking statements, which has been filed with the SEC. In addition, please refer to the Non-GAAP Financial Information section of our earnings release and supplemental financial schedule in the Investor Relations section of our website for reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.

I will now turn it over to Linda.

Thank you for joining us today. As we approached fiscal year 2026, we knew it would take a disciplined, phased approach.

In the front half of the year, we intentionally focused on implementing and stabilizing our new ERP. That work was foundational to strengthening how we operate, even though we knew it would create some near-term disruption.

As we moved into the back half, our focus turned to rebuilding momentum, getting innovation to shelf, and sharpening execution. That sequencing is still the right one, and it remains central to our plan.

That said, the pace of improvement has been slower than we expected in some businesses, and as a result, our third quarter results were mixed and fell short of our expectations. We continued to make progress on market share across much of the portfolio, but more gradually than we anticipated in certain categories.

Gross margin also came in below expectations, driven by higher-than-expected supply chain costs and delayed cost savings as we deliberately prioritized stabilizing the ERP. Even with those challenges, we remain confident in the path forward.

With the ERP implementation now complete, we're better positioned to convert our innovation, investments, and distribution gains into value superiority for our brands and stronger results. Our focus is squarely on execution, delivering the fundamentals, accelerating innovation performance, and finishing the year with momentum as we set up for fiscal year 2027.

With that, Luc and I are happy to take your questions.

Great. Thank you, operator.

Good afternoon, everyone. I was hoping to start just on the top-line trajectory.

You touched on some of the macro pressures, but, as you just mentioned, the progression of your business has not been in line with your expectations. You touched on different areas in the prepared remarks, but do you just have any perspective as to why the improvement isn't taking shape the way you hoped?

I guess as you look out to '27, do you have confidence that you will see stronger performance across more pieces of the portfolio?

Thanks, Peter. I'll get started, and Luc can build if there's anything he wants to add to this.

I'll start with there's areas of continued momentum in the portfolio that are going as well as we expected or better. I'd call out our Cleaning business, which continues to be an area of strength and of course is our biggest business.

Innovation is going extraordinarily well there, and despite a very competitive promotional environment right now, we continue to win and win share. International, despite disruptions around the world, continues to perform with strength.

We're seeing Glad make significant progress. Shares quarter after quarter have sequentially approved.

We're seeing distribution pick up on that business, and some of the actions that we took investing back in price have done really well. Food, we returned to share growth this quarter.

Lots of things going well, and where momentum continues. Really, the area of the shortfall is a few businesses we expected to make more improvement that did not quite make the improvement that we expected in Q3.

We expect continued progress there in Q4, and then continuing to make improvement in fiscal year '27. I'll talk about a couple of them.

The first and most importantly would be Litter. Category tailwinds continue to be exceptionally strong, and we are committed to getting back the share that we have lost, and we're doing that through a complete reinvention.

For those of you who saw what we talked about in CAGNY, this is really a fundamental reset of our Fresh Step business. We changed all of the items, we changed their names, we changed their claims, pack size through price pack architecture, and that began to roll out at the end of Q3.

While largely that foundation is now in place, now we're doing the really difficult work of mapping consumers from what they used to buy in Fresh Step to the new items. I would say the distribution came in generally in line with what we expected, which was an increased amount of TDPs, but unfortunately some things aren't quite where they need to be, and we're working on improving those in the next few months, and that would relate to shelf placement on a couple of items in key retailers, etc., but we're addressing those fast and making changes.

I think Litter is going to be just bumpier, and it's not totally unexpected given the amount of transformation we're taking on there. I'll also remind you, Litter is going to be a multi-year process.

We talked about this was the first important step, but we've got to get innovation back on track to the place where, over time, we can begin building or growing share, not just rebuilding share. Then the other area I would just call out would be Food.

Although we did grow share in the quarter, and we saw portions of the elements of the things we put in place working, that category was weaker than we had expected. We had expected a low single-digit decline.

It was closer to a mid single-digit decline in the category. We're seeing high promotional intensity and deep discounting from competitors in that category, which is putting pressure on dollars.

We're also seeing some consumer trends that we're watching closely on GLP-1s, etc. The good news for Hidden Valley is we did some price pack architecture work.

I think you all recall we had made a transition where we flipped our bottle upside down, which was consumer preferred right before last February when kind of value superiority really accelerated from a consumer perspective. We have since reversed that decision, and put our regular 16-ounce bottle that everyone knows and loves back on the shelf.

That's playing well. In addition, we've just recently launched a number of trend-forward Hidden Valley launches, including protein-forward options, an avocado oil item, and we believe that's why we've seen that inflection in share and that should continue moving forward.

Net, Peter, lots going well, and we're making progress in a lot of the areas we expected to. I would just call out Litter making slower progress than we had expected, and Food really working to get that category going again.

Okay. Great.

Then, I guess I know we'll get '27 guidance in August, but there's just a lot of moving pieces here with the 90 cents Gojo and now this inflationary pressure. I guess, if I look at the guidance this year, it would seem the majority of the 40-cent move at the midpoint is related to cost pressures, which, if you were to annualize, would seem like a pretty substantial headwind.

Is there any way to frame how you see costs and inflation looking out to '27 at this stage?

Hi, Peter. This is Luc.

I can try to answer that. Obviously, it's a very dynamic situation and uncertainty.

I would say it's too early to share any perspective for next fiscal year. As you can imagine, we're currently working on next fiscal year, working on a wide range of scenarios, including a wide range of potential outcomes.

Having said that, what you can see in Q4 is the current impact of the higher oil price. Right now, we are assuming about $100 per barrel will be the midpoint of our estimate in Q4, which is about between $20 and $25 million of headwinds or about 130 basis point of gross margin.

That gives you a point of reference. This is obviously material.

Because it's in Q4, we didn't have time yet to deploy any of the mitigation actions. We're basically getting the full gross impact in Q4 and not yet any of the mitigations.

As we talked in the past, over time, we feel confident in our ability to cover those input increase costs. We have a solid track record over the last few years, and if anything, we've developed a really robust set of tools around integrated margin management.

We have a really strong pipeline of cost savings next year. Now, again, I'll get back to my first point, which is it's very hard to predict what might happen in the next few months, the next quarters, or even in the next year.

Great. Thank you so much.

I'll pass it on.

Hi. Good afternoon, everyone.

Linda, I was hoping you can talk about the shelf space gains that you realized so far versus expectations, especially as we think about Q4 organic sales and as heading into fiscal '27. Are they going according to plan, especially around the innovation?

Then are you seeing any of the areas of the business where you see maybe more or less shelf space than you were expecting?

Sure. Thanks, Filippo.

Shelf space gains are going according to our plan in an aggregate level, and then I'll touch on a few businesses. If you look at Q3, total distribution points for Q3 were up over 5%, and we know that our retailers are still resetting our shelves and will through the remainder of Q4.

We expect continued progress on that as we move through this quarter. That being said, what we're watching is not only that we got the gains, but the items are in the right location.

I'll call out Litter. We got the distribution gains that we expected, but there are places where it was shelved in a different place than we had expected or next to an item that we didn't expect.

We're doing that type of detailed shelf work. All of the distribution points were there.

I would say a number of the businesses, like I called out Glad that we had been working on, we feel good about where we're landing on distribution points there and that will continue to accelerate into Q4, as well as Food behind our innovation and our price pack architecture work. On track from a shelf space perspective, but now we'll do that work to ensure that items are placed on the shelf where they should be.

Great. That's helpful.

Then, Luc, maybe I can follow up on Peter's question on the cost headwinds into next year. I guess as you think about the potential mitigating factors, how are you thinking in terms of order of importance between cost savings, some pricing, and any other levers that you can pull to mitigate some of those headwinds?

Hi, Filippo. Yes, we're looking at a whole set or range and looking at essentially all elements of our integrated margin management set of tools.

Anywhere from leveraging RGM and leaning more in RGM and PPA in some business units to leaning more into productivity and cost savings, and it's a whole wide range of potential savings including potential reformulation, supply change. We're also looking to accelerate some more structural cost savings that we had planned maybe later in '28 into '27.

As you probably saw in Q4, we are recognizing a lot of one-time cost, and this is in our gross margin. That's a headwind of 50 basis point, but that's going to allow us to actually accelerate one of those more structural cost savings.

I would say it's across the range of levers. Of course, it will differ by BUs, depending on the competitive dynamic, as well as the pipeline that was already existing.

Got it. Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, and good afternoon there. I wanted to just go back to the comments of Linda you made on the exit of the quarter in the prepared remarks and things that got softer, especially for the Food or Hidden Valley.

Can you comment a little bit on how you landed as you exit the quarter, the categories? As you said, it was a mid single-digit decline for Food, but just in general, in all categories that you're in, you can give us an estimate of how much the categories have contracted.

Then as you think about the view that you embedded in there in terms of the mitigations and all of that, do you feel you can have potentially an RGM that could allow you to create or maybe pivot into RGM as you pointed out, even in the first half of the year, or that's going to be more of a long-term shift that you wouldn't be able to make in such a short period of time?

Thanks, Andrea. I got it.

I'll start with the categories, and then I'll move to your question on RGM. From a category perspective, we thought at the beginning of the year we would be in the range of flat to up 1 in aggregate for our categories, and what's played out through Q3 is exactly that.

We're about in the middle of the range. What we did see in Q3, though, was marked differences in January, February, and March.

January and February were more in line with what we expected, and March was slightly better, meaning that the categories at the end of Q3 were slightly above our expectation of 1%. What we think happened in March was that people received additional tax refunds, and some of that money they spent back in essentials categories on stock-up trips.

We're starting to see that decline a little bit as people are having to spend more money at the pump. Generally, still for the remainder of the year, we expect our categories to be in that range of 0 to 1%.

Some of them are higher as we noted. Litter is closer to mid single digits.

We're seeing Food down closer to mid single digits, although we're hoping again some of those actions that we've taken are going to help mitigate some of that, and then a range between those two. Most of our categories were positive, though, this quarter, which is good news.

I think the important part to note here is that even though the consumer is under stress, and you could argue a lot more stress now given what they're experiencing from gas prices and just the uncertainty of what's going on, they're still really resilient in our categories, and that's a good sign. We're seeing them continue to buy innovation.

Private label shares did not increase this quarter. They're still shopping for brands.

We're seeing the premium tier in many of our businesses do very well as people are looking for value in all of its forms, whether that be convenience or a little bit of joy in their lives, as well as trading up to larger sizes and trading down to smaller sizes. All of that's playing out, but I would say generally, again, the consumer is pretty resilient in our categories.

We will watch closely for '27 for what this means. I think what Luc outlined from a cost perspective is the single most important variable.

Whatever happens in the Middle East and how costs play out, that'll impact the consumer environment in '27. Again, what we're focused on is that we have resilient categories.

They respond well to innovation. They respond well to growth plans, and that's what we're focused on, is improving our superiority and being the leaders in category growth as we move to '27 and making improvement on share.

One of the important levers is the second question you had, which is RGM. This is something that we are live in action right now.

We gave an example, if you might recall at CAGNY, that we did RGM work on Glad, and we actually took the price down on one of our items that made a significant difference and grew a significant amount of share. We are doing that work across our businesses, and actually in the coming weeks, we'll have a couple more tests in market, and if those tests do well, we'll expand those.

We had that built into our Q4 plan, and we would expect additional activity as part of our fiscal year '27 plan.

That's super helpful. Then, if I could just squeeze the Gojo's acquisition, obviously, you had given the synergies.

Did that change as you point now to the impact that I think if I understood correctly, Luc mentioned 30 basis points gross margin headwind, but how does that change for Gojo's when you gave guidance at the time wasn't when we saw oil prices at these levels?

For Gojo, and then I'll have Luc walk through the financials just so we're clear, but I'll make a few comments. We closed on April 1st and have been deep at work on integration and integration planning since then, and I'll just say my confidence remains incredibly high on this acquisition.

Both from a strategic perspective and the fact that it gives us additional growth exposure in Health and Hygiene, where we have a long history of strong performance. We're able to retain the management team.

We're seeing strong results on the business. As we think about that moving forward, we knew it had a different profile given it's a pro business.

Just like our pro business has a little bit of a different profile, it has higher SG&A, lower advertising, a bit lower gross margin. Overall, this is financially attractive and will be accretive to the company in the near term, and we outlined that in the prepared remarks, and again, I'll have Luc go through it.

I would just say that my confidence continues to increase that this is a great acquisition for the company.

Yes, I can. I'll add maybe a little bit more context around how it's impacting the P&L.

Some of it was already included in our prepared remarks as we think about Q4, but I'll also just give you a sense of how it might impact next year. Maybe let's start with growth.

We're adding a business of $800 million that has a solid track record of growing mid single digits. Far, they're progressing as expected during the calendar year.

That means that we will be adding $200 million in Q4, right, which add about 10% for the quarter and about 3% for the full year, and we'll have the remainder in fiscal year '27. That's on growth.

EBITDA margin, nothing changed. As we discussed, the business EBITDA margin is in line with that of Clorox, right?

It'll be year one EBITDA neutral, and of course, as we continue to be confident in generating about at least $50 million of run-rate cost synergies, and so that'll mean accretion in EBITDA over time. Now, maybe just a comment as how do we think about integration and strategies.

We're really going to prioritize the integration during the first year, and expect to start delivering both revenue and cost synergies starting the second year and the third year. The good news here is that we have retained the management team.

We have a separate resources that are dedicated to the integration, and we also retained an integration partner to help lead through the execution, which is already off to a great start. That's on EBITDA margin over time.

Now, on the rest of the P&L, Linda mentioned it. Given that the business is about 80% B2B, the P&L looks a little bit different than the average of Clorox, right?

The gross margin is a little dilutive, and so that would be about 50 basis point of dilution in year one. Now, of course, some of the synergies will be in supply chain, and so we would expect gross margin to increase over time and get pretty much in line with over time with the average of the company.

Now, that's going forward, and that's also in the fourth quarter. In the fourth quarter, you also have the recognition of one-time associated with the transactions, which are related to an inventory value step-up, right?

Just that's one-time, that's worth about 150 basis point of headwinds in Q4, okay? That's be non-repeating.

Then you look at the other line of the P&L. If you look at SG&A, as Linda mentioned, it's a little higher than the average of the company, it will probably add less than a point to the total company average when it's fully integrated in year one.

Again, that will go down over time as we start realizing synergies. Advertising is much lower, not that different than our own pro business.

That will actually probably bring the advertising as a percentage of sales down by about a point initially, and probably ramp up as we continue growing the consumer business. That's for the different line of the P&L.

The last thing I'll mention, of course, our interest expenses will increase. Our run rate pre-acquisition was about $100 million, and so we will see about an incremental $30 million in Q4, and then next year, we expect about $110 million above and beyond the $100 million run rate.

Thank you, super helpful.

thanks for the question. You are one of many HPC companies that have talked about rising inflation from oil-related costs, and the higher costs are all pretty uniform.

Is it possible that since everyone is kind of facing the same cost at once, that makes it a little bit easier to go to retailers and argue for either some price increases or maybe some less generous price promotion?

Hey, Robert. I think what you've heard from everyone is we expect rising inflation, and what Luc talked about was our ability to handle these over time, and we feel confident about that ability given the toolbox that we've built over the last number of years.

Certainly how we handled the last round of inflation that we experienced in 2022. That being said, on the pricing front, although we're evaluating pricing and expect that we could take potential targeted pricing, we are approaching this with a high level of discipline and caution.

We know the consumer is under stress, and our absolute number one priority is to ensure that we are driving improvements in value superiority to drive our categories and to drive share. We do see there's places where we think we can take pricing.

There are places where we can do trade optimization. The point that Andrea made on RGM is going to be very important, and we can be very targeted with that activity.

I think these are conversations that certainly everyone in the industry will be facing, which always makes it more productive conversation because everyone sees what we see. At the same time, we are all focused on the same thing, and our retailers are seeing exactly what we see, a stressed consumer, and we want to make sure that we're doing the things for long-term category growth that are right.

Again, I feel like we have the right tools, I know we can handle this, we'll discuss the pacing between sales and margin as we get a better look at what '27 will bring from an inflation perspective, and our number one priority will be on driving consumer stability and ensuring we have value superiority to do that.

Got it. Thank you.

Thanks, Robert.

Hi. Good afternoon.

Thanks so much for the question.

Hi, Anna.

Hi, Anna.

Hi, Linda. Your second-half guidance here was somewhat hinging on your ability to deliver here on innovation, and I know it's still moving forward, but it's proven challenging, I think, for that to come through fully in this environment.

I was wondering if you can elaborate on the ways maybe how you're adjusting moving forward, meaning have there been any changes made on these innovation investments or marketing spend as you're thinking ahead? We've also seen some greater exposure from private label in the data coming through in certain categories.

Wondering if you can comment on this as well. Then longer term, just with Gojo, do you still see your ability here to meet your longer-term Ignite strategy, just given the margin profile of the business and then the potential advantages that come from this acquisition here longer term?

Thanks so much.

Thanks, Anna. I'll go through these, and if I miss anything, please come back to me.

On innovation, that has been largely very successful in this back half. Despite everything that's going on, our innovation execution, and I'm going to put Litter to the side for a moment, and I'll touch on that again, has been great.

Our largest innovation with Clorox Pure, which is our allergen platform, has gone very well. We got early wins on distribution.

We were online early, we're getting great reviews, retailers are very excited, and they're excited for the next round that we have coming at the beginning of fiscal year '27, we'll bring them some new benefits in this category. On that, we got preferred shelf placement, and these are new sections of the store for us, and retailers are partnering with us to ensure we can get this in front of consumers.

Feeling terrific about that big innovation platform, its execution, and the results, which are at this point, from a velocity perspective, above expectations. I'd also note that the other innovations we have in Cleaning, including the expansion of our Scentiva line, continue to do really well.

We launched a new flavor in Cherry Blossom, and that has been our number one scent. We're expanding that scent into different forms.

That's a place where, as I talked about, consumers are continuing to willing to pay for a premium experience, and joy and scent fit in that bucket, and Scentiva continues to personify that. I'd also call out our Food launches, which we believe are off to a good start, and our Glad line, where we have a new absorbent layer in our trash bag.

We continue to feel good about the distribution and the plans for that, as well as new scents. Generally, innovation, very strong execution and strong performance.

Litter, again, early days, and this was a hard conversion, I would note, it's not unexpected where we are, but we just have not proven yet that it is exactly what it needs to be, and we are making the adjustments to the plan. I feel good about the fact that we're offering a better value, the claims are better, the packaging is better, our digital execution is much stronger, and we're seeing very strong digital pick-up on Fresh Step.

We don't have yet the whole thing in market yet to see exactly where we need to make adjustments. The places we do know we need to make adjustments, we are with retailers right now doing that.

I'd call that out as the one place in innovation that is behind our expectation, with everything else at or above.

Then

I'll go to your next question, Anna, as long as I've covered innovation sufficiently for you. I'll start with private label.

I think I mentioned in one of my comments that private label shares have been flat over the majority of our categories. It's basically stabilized.

We're watching it really carefully, because we have seen ticks up in certain time periods as retailers promoted and bring in a new item. Generally, consumers continue to want brands, and they continue to want value overall, not just the lowest price.

There are places where we've seen a bit more pickup in private label. Brita would be one.

We're watching that one carefully. We've seen that trend over time, and as we continue to launch innovation, we end up getting some of that share back, but that's a place we're watching carefully.

Then I'd say we're watching carefully any other place where retailers are leaning in and making investments, but overall, private label just hasn't had the impact that many would have expected. I know many of you are asking questions about that.

We've continued to see it play the role that it normally does, which is offering a low price for those consumers who need it. Then on Gojo on the long-term algorithm, certainly Gojo is a strong step to delivering our overall algorithm, which we remain committed to.

Also what is also very important is that our categories get back to normalized levels in order for us to deliver that. Because it's accretive from a growth perspective, we see that playing a role in '27 and beyond.

Of course, most importantly, we're focused on getting our core categories back up to what they were before in low-mid single digits.

Great. Thank you so much for all the details.

Very helpful.

Thanks, Anna.

Hi, everyone. I just wanted to ask about just first and foremost as a clarification.

Was there any kind of shipment versus consumption dynamic in the quarter? I think just Health and Wellness and Household specifically came in a bit different than expectation.

I realize that you had the timing dynamic from last quarter, but I just wanted to check how results compared to underlying consumption as you see it, then I have a follow-up. Hi, Chris.

Yes, Chris, I can take that. There was certainly a lot of movement across segments and difference between shipments and consumptions.

For the total company US retail, it all netted out to about a point of negative timing related to consumption. Now, if you remember, in the second quarter, we shipped volume ahead of consumption in Health and Wellness, ahead of our last wave of manufacturing ERP implementation.

We were expecting that point of favorability in the second quarter to reverse in the third quarter, and that happened. That's on Health and Wellness.

Then you had more noise in both Household and Lifestyle, and they were related to a mix of retailer inventory adjustments, mostly in Lifestyle, as well as some early shipments mostly in Household, both in Litter and in Kingsford. Those two offset each other.

There were about a point for total company each, and the retailer inventory adjustment is just one time and non-repeating. Of course, the early shipment is something that we expect to reverse in the fourth quarter.

That'll be a little less than a point of headwind in the fourth quarter. Now, the fourth quarter has a lot of merchandising leaning up to July, August, September period, so that might bring more noise.

We'll see what happened. That's the gist of it as you think about shipments related to consumption.

Okay. Thank you.

The follow-up question is just around the portfolio. There are some areas of the portfolio which have been challenged for some time.

There's some categories where maybe they're not traditionally where you would think you have a right to win exists. When you go through moments like this where market shares are maybe progressing a bit slower, there's potentially an opportunity to be even a bit more focused, are you having those portfolio review conversations, is that activity becoming a bit sharper?

Any context on just when you're going through these kinds of cycles, how you think about them and how you react? Thanks so much for any context on that.

Sure, Chris. First, I'd start with we're always doing portfolio work, and we have a regular review process as a management team, and of course, importantly, a regular review process as a board, where we're looking at our portfolio and we're doing a number of things.

We're deciding how we allocate resources within the portfolio that we have, where we want to place bets, where we think we need to be more efficient, and we do that on a regular basis. In fact, we'll do that again coming up here for fiscal year '27.

Then we are evaluating the portfolio more strategically as well and looking at inorganic options, and that's led to many of the things that we have done, including the divestiture of Argentina, the acquisition of the majority of the ownership in the JV that we had in Saudi Arabia, as well as the sale of VMS, and of course, importantly, the acquisition of Gojo and our expansion in our Health and Hygiene portfolio. That is exactly the result of the work that we have done.

We'll continue to do that work. It's important work to ensure that we have a portfolio set up for success.

The thing I would note is some of these issues, we've got to execute better, and we have to deliver better superiority. A case in point would be Glad.

Glad trash, it can be a tough category. It's very competitive.

Consumers can be price sensitive, but innovation works in that category, and we've seen through the work that we've done in getting sharper price points, better innovation, stronger plans, that Glad has begun to progress and make progress. We saw the trash category was quite strong this quarter, up over two points, and our share is sequentially improving significantly, and we feel good about our Q4 plan.

It's a great example of where, we talked about that's been a little bit of a thorn for the last couple of years, but through putting the right measures in place, being disciplined about cost management, ensuring that we have superiority, we can make progress. We're doing just that, and I would expect that for any of our businesses.

Maybe just to sum up, Chris, yes, we're always doing the portfolio work, that leads to the type of actions like we've taken, and job number one, no matter what, is always ensuring that we have a healthy core, and that's exactly what we're focused on.

Okay. Thanks, Linda.

Thanks for the context. Appreciate it.

Thanks, Chris.

Hello, everyone. I guess mine are for Luc, I think.

Hello?

Hi, Javier. We can hear you.

Hey, Javier.

Can you hear me?

Yes, perfectly.

Okay. Sorry for that.

Okay. Perhaps for Luc, I think, because they are very mechanical, my questions.

One clarification about price mix for Household. Reported was flat, right?

Circana data shows pricing running down mid-single digits. Trying to bridge the difference, should we think of that to be some sort of an artifact, meaning that you advance shipments of Litter and grilling, and that trade and marketing spending will accrue in Q4?

Shall we expect pricing to become negative in Q4? Then I have a follow-up on Glad.

Javier, in general, the price mix for Household, I would step back, and you might have a little bit of noise by quarter, but we expect it to be about a point of headwind, meaning that volume would grow about a point ahead of sales. That's the average for the quarters.

We'll see a little bit of difference by quarter, and it depends, of course, of promo events. In Household, especially if you have different promo at club, this can actually really distort the data, and which might not be fully reflected in the same exact period from a P&L standpoint.

That's maybe what it is, but we don't expect big shift in Q4. Again, just we're currently tracking as expected on price mix for the remainder of the year.

Thank you, very helpful. On the Glad JV buyout, what category growth and pricing assumptions you guys built as you presented the capital spending model to the board when you valued the acquisition, right, and whether you compare that NPV and return of the buyout against divesting it, for instance?

Could you elaborate on that? Thank you.

Javier, we won't get into that level of specificity. What I will say, when we are talking about this with the board and why we feel really great about what we did in Glad, we saw an opportunity to move faster.

That our Glad JV offered great innovation results for a number of years, but we knew that by having full control, we would be able to move faster. We would be able to get innovation to market faster, make changes faster, and we've seen that come to life in the plan and we believe that's part of the reason we've been able to have an inflection in the Glad business.

The other thing I would just note is we look at all of the businesses, like I said with Chris, we're always looking at our portfolio, and of course, there's a multitude of things that have to be true. There has to be a buyer, there has to be interest, it has to be the right move for our company, we have to make sure that we're able to execute, anytime we take very seriously whether we've divested a business like Argentina or VMS or acquired one, the organizational capacity and resources to do that.

We're evaluating all of those things with the board. Net where we landed is ending this JV and moving forward with our Glad business was the right thing to do, and we are continue to be focused on innovation in that category, ensuring that we get prices right, and then managing through what, I don't know exactly what it's going to look like, as Luc said, but a potential difficult cost environment coming up here for an uncertain period of time.

Thank you very much, guys.

Thanks, Javier.

Thanks, Javier.

Great, thanks. Good afternoon.

I want to ask about a comment that you made in your prepared remarks on Glad and saying that you're prepared to adjust your plans as needed to balance growth and profitability. Obviously, that business is the most impacted by resin costs and if they start to materially move.

We've seen a lot of your staples peers doubling down on brand support and how that isn't going to be an area where companies are going to look to pull back despite the increased anxiety about the consumer or despite the increased inflation because of the increased anxiety about the consumer. If you could just sort of elaborate on that comment around the balance of growth and profitability, where you could potentially find areas of flexibility within the P&L, given that Glad has started to turn the corner and just understanding your ability to hold that momentum.

Thank you.

Thanks, Olivia. We really do mean a balance, and Glad is one, as you rightly note, that does have a big impact depending on energy complexes and then how it plays out into resin costs.

It's one that we have a long history of taking price and actually taking price down over time depending on where those markets are. Too early to say what we're facing in fiscal year '27, we're evaluating it closely.

I'll just make a comment that's true of Glad and it's true of the entire portfolio. Said a little bit earlier, but I'll emphasize it, our number one priority right now and in fiscal year '27 will be on driving value superiority in our brands, investing in them strongly.

That very broadly. That in advertising and sales promotion, and we're strengthening our plans and investments right now on that as we think about '27, ensuring that we have the right RGM activities in the market, as I gave you an example with Glad, and we'll be putting more tests in the market that we think will pan out well, and potentially could be more permanent moving forward.

Of course, we've invested in data and technology, we're making all of the spending we have more efficient at the same time, moving more dollars into working media and out of non-working media, using AI to take costs down. We're focused on just a holistic way that we can get more investments to our brands and drive superiority, and that will absolutely be true of Glad.

We will evaluate is pricing the right move, would we change trade, etc., but that's the order of operations for us. Number one, value superiority and driving categories and shares.

Number two, and we believe we will be able to do both of these balance over time, is recovering cost. We think we have the toolbox to do both, and Glad will be no different than the rest of the portfolio.

The other thing that I would note is it's really important that we continue to be focused, and we are on innovation. We said we were ramping up the back half.

We have. Most of it has gone very well.

We expect to continue to make progress in fiscal year '27. We feel great about our innovation pipeline over the next couple of years, and if we can get another point of innovation, that is a significant driver to our top line and to our shares.

Got it. Thanks.

Thanks, Olivia.

Great, thanks so much. Hi, everyone.

First thing I just wanted to ask about was just the ERP stabilization that you've talked about in this quarter. First, a technical aspect, sort of where does the incremental cost from that show up in the gross margin bridge that you guys share so we could just kind of try to understand the magnitude of pressures we think about into next year, the comp?

Then just sort of anything that you could add on where you stand. You said, I don't know when during the quarter you felt you reached stabilization, and kind of what that entailed, and then I do have a second question afterwards.

Thanks.

Hi, Lauren. Thanks for the question.

I'll start, and then I'll hand it over to Luc for the technical margin bridge.

Okay.

We were able to complete our ERP in Q3. If you all recall, we did the major portion of the US at the beginning of our fiscal year, but then we had a series of changes at our plant and that finalized in Q3 with very minimal impact as we had expected.

Mainly the ERP stabilization, too, is about getting our performance in service levels up. We continue to stabilize that in Q3, and that was the result of the cost.

I think I would just maybe take an opportunity to say again how important this transition is to the company. We recognize it's created some dispersed focus, but it's critical to having the foundation of the company that allows us to use all of the tools from a data and technology perspective that can help us grow our business, make our business more efficient, and so recognize the noise and certainly the dispersed focus we've had, but we feel good about where we are, and the fact that we've gotten to the place where it is all three rounds are complete, and it did have a margin impact.

I think we talked about that last quarter, where we would expect it some incremental cost that were a bit higher than we had expected, and I'll have Luc walk through those details now.

Lauren, maybe one more piece of context is we rolled out a lot of different, what we call module, as part of the ERP transition. Some of it was supporting our manufacturing operations, some of it was supporting our logistics, demand fulfillment, and order-to-cash.

If you remember, in the first quarter and second quarter, we've been slower in ramping up order-to-cash and stabilizing our service levels. We knew that we would continue that stabilization through the third quarter and the fourth quarter, right?

Now, we had expected we incurred additional cost in the front half as we stabilized the service level, and those costs are mostly in the area of logistics and fulfillment, right? Think about cost of expediting orders, additional cost moving around inventory more than you should, less than optimal transportation costs, and incremental labor cost.

Now, we expected those to linger in the third quarter, and those costs ended up being a little more than we had anticipated. Now, the good news, though, is that as we move through the third quarter, we started making more progress on stabilization, and towards the end of the quarter and then this month, we incurred very minimal costs.

We're seeing those come down, and for the fourth quarter, we would expect no incremental cost or very minimal. That was one portion of the shortfall related to our outlook.

Then we also ended up delaying some cost savings and having a little less cost savings than we planned in our outlook, which further put pressure on gross margin. That's again related to the stabilization of the order-to-cash and service level.

If you remember in Q1, Q2, as we were at the peak of the ERP disruption, we had lower cost savings than our historical level, especially in Q1, as we essentially had operational organization and resource really focused on stabilization and ramping up service levels. Since it took a little longer to ramp up in the third quarter, we had to further delay some cost savings.

Some will go in Q4 and some of Q4 will go in next year. Now, the good thing here, though, is that we already had a strong pipeline next year, and that will only strengthen the pipeline going forward.

Great. Thanks.

Then my second question was just about TDPs from earlier in the call. Linda, when you shared that TDPs were at 5%, which is great, we can definitely see that when we look at the Nielsen data.

What we have seen is that velocities have actually been pretty weak. I guess you shared that the items are in the wrong place, maybe the answer's just that simple.

I just wanted to check in if that's kind of the right way to think about it and that as you get that on-shelf execution, more in line with your plan and your thinking, that that's where we should see the indication of change. Is that right?

That's right, Lauren. We would expect that ramp up as we get things fully on shelf and we turn on advertising related to those specific items.

I'd also note on Litter, if you're specifically referring to velocities there, which you likely are given what we've seen in performance, because that was a hard conversion, and I know you all know this, but I'll take the opportunity just to explain it a click more, we took an item and then we completely changed it. Actually changed the UPCs and that requires a hard conversion at a retailer.

What happens is, in the old item, they start to discontinue it and may sell it down before they bring the new item in, and in some places, they don't want to have any overlap in that. There were places where we had some out of stocks.

It's pretty normal in a conversion, which can impact velocities, and that's what we think some of what the noise was in Litter and will continue to be until we get the shelf fully reset is. We're also noticing there's some change in velocity data, Lauren, due to the fact that people are making value choices.

Whether trading up to larger sizes and small make the velocity information a little noisy. Where it's cleaner, we see strong performance, and as we continue to ramp up spending, we would expect that to continue.

Litter will be watching very closely, and we might have to make additional adjustments so we can get those velocities back up.

Okay. Thanks so much.

Really appreciate it.

Thanks, Lauren.

Hi, Steve.

Great. I thought I was on mute.

I'm glad I'm not. Fantastic.

First question to round up the gross margin. I guess, and maybe I'm a little slower than the bunch here, but could you just, Luc, maybe bridge exactly what's changed and what the drivers are between last quarter's full year outlook for gross margin down around 100 basis points and now down 250 to 300?

I think I've got the buckets qualitatively, but I'm having a hard time assigning numbers to those various drivers.

Yeah. Steve, just confirming you're asking a bridge for the third quarter or for the fourth quarter?

For the full year. Prior guidance to current guidance.

Prior full year. Okay.

Yes, you mentioned it. There's essentially two impacts.

The third quarter, we just talked about it. It was a little over a point, and we just talked about what drove that.

Then there was Q4, and Q4, let me unpack this a little bit because there's certainly some complexity. I guess the most important thing when we look at Q4 projected margin is probably important to frame it within the context of several temporary and non-repeating items.

Maybe what I can do is let me do a quick versus a year ago and then just talk about what is different in the new outlook. Versus a year ago, we're seeing about five points of decline versus last Q4 gross margin.

150 basis point of that is coming from the fact that we're lapping strong shipment and operating leverage associated with the ERP transition. That was in our prior outlook, but it's still significant on a year-over-year basis.

Then we have about 200 basis points coming from the Gojo acquisition, right? Now, as I mentioned, we'll expect ongoing in the first year to see about 50 basis point of gross margin dilution.

In Q4, we have 150 basis point of one-time items that are associated with the inventory value step-up that we acquired. That won't be repeating, but that creates a total of 200 basis point.

Then the last item is really just recognizing about 100 to 150 basis point of elevated input cost related to the conflict in the Middle East. That's the five point versus a year ago.

Now, what is new, we already had the first item, which was the lapping of the ERP transition. Both the Gojo and the Middle East are new, and that create most of the variance.

Then there's a few points, probably the most meaningful one is what I mentioned, we have about 50 basis point of headwind associated with some one-time expenses related to a large cost-saving projects that we're accelerating into fiscal year '27. That's the bulk of the difference between our prior outlook and the current outlook.

Okay. I followed that.

That's very helpful. Okay.

My follow-up then is two parts. One is you said earlier that the fourth quarter Middle East impact at $100 oil was a pretty full impact at $20 to $25 million a quarter.

I'm assuming that annualized at $100, your impact at $100 of the oil would be $80 to $100 million, and that therefore we'd be looking at 70, roughly $75 million incremental in fiscal '27, if you follow that kind of math. My second question is on advertising.

You held the 11% of sales even as we layered on more sales with the addition of Gojo. There's implied more advertising dollars in the guide now.

I'm just curious if that incremental A&P is intended to go against the Gojo portfolio or if it goes against your legacy portfolio, and if the latter, kind of where you'd be targeting it.

Perfect, Stephen. I'll start with just maybe a framing on the Middle East and costs, and then I'll hand it over to Luc for a couple more details and he can cover the advertising in Q4 as well.

Just from a Middle East perspective, I think what's important to note and I'll just go back to what Luc said, and I think that's what everyone knows, Q4 is right in front of us, we can see the energy complex effects that are happening, and you got that right in the $20 to $25 million. As we look to the year ahead, what I would just caution us all to do is there are so many impacts potentially depending on how this conflict plays out, how long it goes, other related downstream commodity impacts that can happen that we're watching carefully, and they're just really uncertain and volatile right now.

If everything were to continue as is and it was just energy complexes, that would be a fair set of assumptions. I think based on what we know and what goes through the Strait of Hormuz and things that are happening now across infrastructure, we'll be in better position to tell you in '27 exactly what we think that looks like, depending on the assumptions that we'll have at that time.

I wouldn't take that and just multiply that. That's only one of the impacts, and again, we'll be watching the other ones carefully as we move forward.

I'll hand it over to Luc. No,

I think that's right. It's still a very helpful number, and it certainly materializes what we're currently seeing.

Maybe just switching to your advertising question. The short answer, Stephen, is it's just rounding.

You are correct. In Q4, we will see advertising as a percentage of sales going down by one point due to the integration of the Gojo business.

Because it's only one quarter, it's about -25 basis point or so for the full year, we're still rounding to 11%.

Very clear on both. Thank you.

Thanks very much. Good evening.

I guess just a couple of ones for me. Just Linda, you've talked about value superiority a lot, and we've heard you talk about this a lot.

I guess just wondering now how much the role does price take when you're considering sort of value superiority, how it's sort of calculated or perceived, just in light of what you were saying around actions you've done about Glad. Just any color on that would be interesting.

Then you talked about making some investments to address further cost savings going forward. Can you just elaborate a bit more on those?

Because obviously we've got very used to seeing very consistent cost savings coming through, and so interested to hear what you're doing there. Thank you.

Hi, Ed. I'll start on value superiority, and I'll cover investments as well, and if anything Luc wants to add.

On value superiority, that is by definition a combination of the entire experience that we provide to a consumer. It's the product, it's the package, is it where it needs to be, is the place right, and is the proposition right, does the brand stand for something, and then of course importantly, price.

Those five things work together, those 5Ps, to give an overall value to a consumer. What we aim to do is take those five and create overall superiority.

What we want to do is drive superiority through a better brand experience, through a better product, through a great package that could give consumers a new way to use a product, or an easier way, and then we want to be able to price to that superiority, which usually means we can command a premium, which is what we do in most of our categories. We just got to make sure we have that balance right.

For example, in Glad, on that RGM activity where we took price down on 80 count, we didn't have that quite right. We took the price down, and we got back to a place where we felt we had overall value superiority, but we did need to pull the price lever to get closer in line to the right price gap that we needed.

We're testing other things, as I mentioned in RGM, that we'll look at that for other brands, where we want to be targeted to ensure that we have that overall equation right, and where we think price is playing a little bit more of an important role, or because we took four price increases, as did the industry, during that significant period of inflation, and there might be some places, and we've said we knew we would have to do this, where we'd have to adjust. Again, we're testing a few of those now, and we also want to use things like price pack architecture and other RGM levers where we don't have to just take a truckload price, but we can take pricing in different ways as we trade off benefits.

I would say price plays a very important role, but it is really about connecting it to those other four levers and making sure you have overall superiority. The most important thing that we can do, though, is have those other things right.

I'll take Pure, for example. We have a superior product that we know gives consumers more benefits to remove allergies.

It's in a great package that consumers love and makes it easy for them to use. The proposition is clear, the claims are clear, we're spending against it strongly, and then we've leaned into digital and on-shelf placement to ensure they get it, and we can command a premium for that experience as results, and velocities are quite strong to start.

That's the magic, and that's where we want all of our brands to be. If we need to lean into price in a couple of places to get back in line, we will, Ed.

We've done that like you said on Glad, and we'll do that in other places. Yep, and then moving to the second point on your investment on cost savings.

I won't give specifics on the project, we'll talk about it more later, but it's a big supply chain project that we're able to accelerate and will offer significant savings moving forward. As we looked ahead into the cost environment in '27, we thought the right thing to do was to go ahead and accelerate that project, and so we made that investment in this quarter, and we'll talk more about what we're doing as we head into fiscal year '27.

Ed, maybe just as added context, we always have one-time investments associated with cost savings. It's generally planned pretty tightly by quarter.

Since we've been removing and delaying some cost savings and accelerating some, that created a little bit of a difference in the fourth quarter. Just the magnitude of the project is a bit larger than normally what we see.

Those investment can be asset write-offs, could be engineering cost if you look at a manufacturing cost-saving project as an example.

Thank you.

Thanks, Ed.

Thanks, Jen. As we close out today's call, I want to reinforce a few points.

First, while our third quarter results did not meet our expectations, we're operating from a much stronger foundation. The ERP implementation is complete, service levels have stabilized, and complexity and costs are coming down.

These are critical enablers of better execution. Second, we see clear signs of progress as we focus on driving value superiority across our portfolio.

Innovation across the portfolio is strong, on-shelf presence is improving, and teams are sharply focused on the fundamentals that matter most: availability, pricing and promotional effectiveness, and in-market execution. These actions are essential to building momentum through the fourth quarter.

Looking ahead, we're also strengthening our plans and investments in targeted areas to accelerate share gains. Finally, we remain confident in our ability to translate these efforts into improved performance over time.

While the environment remains challenging, we have the right strategy, capabilities, and teams in place to finish the year stronger and enter fiscal 2027 with greater momentum. We thank you for your time and questions, and look forward to updating you on our continued progress next quarter.