Good morning. Joining me on the call today are Andre Schulten, Chief Financial Officer, and John Chevalier and Kerry Covins, Senior Vice Presidents of Investor Relations.

Before I hand over the call to Andre to begin the earnings portion of this call, I want to make a few comments on the second press release we issued this morning announcing Jon Moeller's upcoming retirement from the Board of Directors and The Procter & Gamble Company. I want to thank Jon for his many years of tireless and steady leadership at P&G, having served in key roles including Executive Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, and Chief Financial Officer.

In fact, some of you first interacted with Jon when he became P&G's Treasurer in 2007. Jon's strategic vision has been instrumental in shaping the company P&G is today, including his leading role in focusing P&G's portfolio and in designing our current operating structure.

We have benefited from his unwavering courage and his profound care for this institution and its people. Again, I want to thank Jon for his 38 years of dedicated service to the company and congratulate him from all of us on a very successful career.

Now I'll hand the call over to Andre to lead the earnings discussion.

Thank you, Shailesh, and good morning, everyone. I'll start with an overview of results for fiscal '26 and the fourth quarter.

Shailesh will add perspective on our strategic focus areas and capabilities, and we will close with guidance for fiscal '27 and then take your questions. For fiscal '26, we met our core objectives despite unexpected headwinds.

We managed through a very volatile environment and delivered organic sales, core EPS, and cash return to shareowners within our initial guidance ranges. We built plans to return the business to consistent growth across all categories and regions, we stabilized global market share, and we identified and are deploying the capabilities needed to create the CPG company of the future to generate long-term growth and value creation.

Progress in light of many challenges. Looking closer at fiscal '26 on a semester basis, we delivered an acceleration in top-line results: up about one point in the first half and two points in the second half.

We also saw improvement in market share in the second half despite some softening in underlying market growth as inflation increased. Positive trends we will build on in the new year.

Moving to the details, organic sales grew more than 1%, volume was up modestly, pricing added a point, and mix was neutral. This includes around 40 basis points of headwinds from product form and go-to-market portfolio choices.

Growth was broad-based across regions and categories. Nine of ten product categories held or grew organic sales for the year.

Hair Care and Skin and Personal Care each grew mid-single digits. Personal Health Care, Baby Care, Home Care, Fabric Care, Feminine Care, Grooming, and Oral Care were each in line to up low singles.

Family Care was down for the year. All seven regions held or grew organic sales.

Focus market organic sales were up 1% for the year; North America and Europe focus markets each grew modestly. Greater China organic sales were up 4% for the year.

Enterprise markets were up 4%, led by Latin America with 6% organic sales growth. E-commerce sales increased 6%, now representing 20% of total company sales.

26 of our top 50 category-country combinations held or grew share for the fiscal; five of ten product categories held or grew share globally. In aggregate, global value and volume share trends improved in the back half, exiting the year flat.

Core earnings per share were $6.89, up 1% in fiscal '26. Core gross margin declined 40 basis points, and core operating margin decreased 70 basis points.

$2.8 billion before tax of productivity improvement across cost of goods sold and SG&A enabled an increase in investment in superior products, packages, and brand communication to drive market growth. On a currency-neutral basis, core EPS was in line with prior year and core operating margin decreased 60 basis points.

Adjusted free cash flow productivity was 100%. We increased our dividend by 3% and returned over $15 billion of value to shareowners: over $10 billion in dividends and $5 billion in share repurchase, consistent with our guidance at the start of the year.

For the fourth quarter, we saw improving global share trends versus prior period, but headline results were impacted by trade dynamics in the U.S. and the spike in input costs.

Organic sales increased modestly, rounding down to in line versus prior year. Adjusting for brand, product, and go-to-market restructuring impacts, organic sales for the ongoing business were around 1% for the quarter, 2% when adjusting for one point of pull-forward into Q3.

Consistent structural growth of 2% across the second half of the year. As we mentioned before, the growth trajectory hasn't been and won't be a straight line quarter to quarter.

Volume rounded down to flat for the quarter; pricing and mix were also neutral for the quarter. Six of ten product categories held or grew organic sales.

Personal Health Care, Hair Care, and Skin and Personal Care each grew mid-singles. Baby Care, Fabric Care, and Grooming each were in line to up low singles.

Home Care, Fem Care, Family Care, and Oral Care were down for the quarter. Five of seven regions held or grew organic sales.

Focus markets were down 1% for the quarter. Organic sales in North America were down 1% versus prior year.

While consumption and market share of P&G brands improved through the quarter, there was a notable disconnect between sell-out and sell-in, with sell-out, or consumption, at plus 2% and sell-in at minus 1%. The shift of Amazon Prime Day to late June versus early July drove an increase in merchandising spending recognized in the quarter.

Retailer inventory reductions, including the pull-forward into last quarter, also contributed to the three-point gap between sell-out and sell-in. European focus markets organic sales were down 1%.

Like the U.S., P&G sales trade consumption due to inventory dynamics and value interventions. Greater China organic sales grew 4%, another quarter of positive momentum heading into fiscal '27.

Enterprise markets grew 4% for the quarter. Europe enterprise markets grew 5%, Latin America organic sales were up 4%, and the Asia Pacific, Middle East, Africa enterprise region grew 3%.

Global aggregate market share was in line with prior year. 23 of our top 50 category-country combinations held or grew share for the quarter.

On the bottom line, core earnings per share were $1.43, down 3% versus prior year. On a currency-neutral basis, core EPS decreased 5%.

These results include approximately 6 cents of higher costs driven by spike in energy, transportation, and material costs, which were mostly offset by tariff refund receipts. Core gross margin was in line versus prior year, and core operating margin decreased 130 basis points.

Very strong productivity improvement of 460 basis points with healthy reinvestment in innovation and demand creation. Currency-neutral core operating margin decreased 130 basis points.

Adjusted free cash flow productivity was 133%. We returned $3.5 billion of cash to shareowners in this quarter: $2.6 billion in dividends and roughly $900 million in share repurchase.

In summary: a year of progress and foundational work to enable accelerated future growth; momentum with consumers is improving; results within guidance in a challenging macroeconomic and geopolitical environment; progress, but more work to do. Now I'll pass it over to Shailesh.

Thanks, Andre. I'll start with a few thoughts on results before moving to our strategic focus areas.

As mentioned, we delivered the fiscal within our going-in guidance ranges across all key financial metrics despite a very challenging operating environment. It's encouraging that growth was broad-based, with all seven regions and nine of ten categories growing or holding organic sales.

We exited the year holding global share with trends improving in the second semester. This was visible in our largest market, the U.S., as we measured the percentage of top customers growing or holding share.

We had less than 10% holding or growing share in the first half of the fiscal year and improved in the second half to around 50%. We will build on the improvement to further accelerate growth in the U.S., our largest and most profitable market.

I am pleased with the progress we are making and confident the plans in place will continue to drive the momentum. The organization is focused on the right strategic choices and executional plans to deliver sequential progress we expect going forward.

We remain committed to the integrated growth strategy as the roadmap for growth and value creation. This strategy starts with a portfolio of categories where performance matters.

In performance-driven categories, we must deliver irresistible superiority across product, package, brand communication, retail execution, and value. We continue to drive productivity with multi-year visibility to fund innovation and demand creation and to mitigate cost headwinds.

Constructive disruption is key to stay ahead of and to create emerging trends and opportunities in our fast-changing industry. Finally, an organization that is fully engaged, enabled, and excited to serve consumers and to win in the marketplace.

P&G's point of difference, our competitive advantage, comes from outstanding integrated execution of these strategies across all activity systems in the company and from anticipating what capabilities are needed next to delight our consumers. We continue to believe the strategy is right, but we must continue to adapt to the world that is changing around us.

As I shared in CAGNY, there are three notable landscape changes defining the path ahead. These include media fragmentation, the changing retailer landscape, and inflation.

We are making multiple interventions to address these changes. The first is to have a deeper, more complete connection with consumers.

Nothing matters more than putting the consumer first in everything we do. The second is transforming brand building, adapting how we build awareness of our brands and benefits, drive consumer engagement, and reduce time and steps from awareness to purchase.

The next is building holistic partnerships with retailers across the entire value chain, not just in their traditional role as merchants. This is critical as we see the convergence of retail and media, including digital commerce, and how shopping agents and AI-based search will affect how consumers shop.

Finally, we need a stronger core and a bigger more. One of P&G's biggest strengths is our portfolio of leading brands, the core of our business.

We need to make sure this core is healthy and growing through impactful innovations that elevate the superiority of the brand and represent a good holistic value for consumers. These interventions are aimed at improving the vectors of superiority to win the consumer value equation.

We know we are winning the consumer value equation when we are growing users of our brands. The simplicity of linking superiority to user growth in this way increases the urgency to adjust the vectors as needed versus assessing each element individually.

When we get the equation right, we accelerate growth: growing users, leading market growth, and growing market share, sales, and profit. Here are a few examples.

Greater China Baby Care continues to lead the growth of the premium and super-premium segments behind consumer-insight-driven innovation. Chinese parents want only the best for their baby: softness, comfort, and dryness.

The China team translated that insight into a diaper using silk materials to deliver skin comfort and protection wrapped in a unique soft-feel package that conveys superiority at first touch. The result is double-digit organic sales growth in each of the past six quarters and nearly five points of value share over this period.

Latin America Cough and Cold is winning through deeper consumer connection. The team identified the insight that consumers perceive products as more effective when they deliver a sensorial experience.

Consumers need to feel the immediate sensation of relief to believe the product is working. The Vicks team brought this insight to life through upgraded packaging, brand communication, and retail execution that made fast relief more visible at every touchpoint.

The result: Vicks became the number one cough and cold brand in Latin America with mid-teen organic sales growth and over one point of share growth while growing the category this year. Germany Pantene is a great example of a brand team responding to media landscape shifts to transform brand building and accelerate growth.

The team increased investments in social media and influencer partnerships, including top German beauty opinion leaders and hair experts, and culturally relevant brand events including Oktoberfest and Berlin Fashion Week to meaningfully improve brand superiority awareness. The result was a fourfold increase in influencer content and tripling total reach.

Pantene grew new users, resulting in value sales growth of 14% with value share up 50 basis points versus year ago. To win on social media and e-commerce platforms that combine lifestyle content with online shopping, SK-II shifted the focus from a functional message to a lifestyle approach.

The team connected SK-II to the moments and routines consumer cares most about, encouraging them to live lighter, freer, and more authentically, backed by product performance that delivers on its promise. As more consumers brought SK-II on their life journey, brand buzz, ROI, and business growth naturally followed.

Over the past year, SK-II's Facial Essence Treatment led discussion volume on a top social commerce platform, improving the brand discussion ranking by five spots to third place. SK-II has grown organic sales double digits over the past six quarters with value share growth.

P&G Mexico elevated its strategic partnerships with retailers by transitioning from short-term tactical planning to longer-term joint business planning. They focused on having winning consumer propositions and aligning objectives and priorities across P&G and each of the retailers, creating shared accountability for winning with the consumer.

As a result, P&G strengthened its position as a preferred supplier to these customers, achieving record levels of in-store visibility and support behind our joint priority growth initiatives. These efforts enabled P&G to capture 60% of category growth, approximately twice fair share.

P&G Mexico grew organic sales high single digits and gained over one point of value share in fiscal '26. Mr.

Clean continues to innovate on its core proposition and solve more cleaning jobs across the home. The brand has launched new innovations on the Magic Eraser platform that improve the longevity with a denser foam and a wider micro-scrubbing structure that now lasts two times longer.

The packaging was updated to reflect room and mess-specific uses. At the same time, we launched Mr.

Clean Shower and Tub Scrubber to address consumers' number one most disliked cleaning chore. Mr.

Clean Shower and Tub Scrubber delivers a quicker, easier, and deeper clean with the power of the Magic Eraser, a sturdy grip handle, built-in squeegee, and a pivoting head for hard-to-reach areas. The result: Mr.

Clean is winning consumers and driving category growth, delivering 18 times its fair share of the bath cleaning category growth since launch. Tide is a great example of both core and more.

Tide did their biggest upgrade in over two decades on the original Tide liquid detergent, which represents more than one-fourth of all Tide detergent users, significantly improving the product for the same price. Since launch, Tide Original liquid has gone from declining to high-single-digit growth.

On this size of the business, to get that inflection is simply amazing and gives me tremendous confidence of what can happen if we activate the core much better. Tide's biggest strength is Tide, this is a very powerful example of strengthening the core.

A great example of a bigger more is Tide evo. Tide evo represents the biggest innovation in laundry, crafted by concentrating active surfactant ingredients into a mixture that is spun into individual fibers.

This sophisticated process ensures each functional fiber delivers the powerful cleaning performance of Tide while also enabling the creation of the convenient Tide evo unit dose form with no plastic packaging and no extra water. This new-to-the-world formulation and assembly process is proprietary to P&G and protected by over 50 granted patents, making it a truly unique technology.

National expansion of Tide evo is on track, with full-scale launch support planned this fiscal year. To further accelerate, scale, and fund innovations, campaign ideas, and executions like the ones we just shared, we are creating our vision of the CPG company of the future.

P&G teams are now scaling advanced capabilities in four areas that build on our unique strengths, platforms developed over many years now being fully activated across the company. First, brand building transformation.

Our teams are rapidly evolving how we connect with consumers in a more fragmented media landscape and translate those connections to real-time retail actions. We are scaling AI-enabled tools and integrating workflows from creative development to media activation to continuously improve content effectiveness and always-on consumer engagement.

By bringing together the voice of our brands, trusted experts, and consumers themselves, we can more effectively reach the right consumers in the right context at the right moment and optimize what works to drive trial, awareness, loyalty, and ultimately, growth. Second, transforming internal work processes leveraging data capabilities to free up the organization to focus on winning externally.

Teams are using integrated data platforms, AI capabilities, and programmatic shelf tools built on top of our fully stocked data lake to work faster and deliver better outcomes. Processes that once required multiple touchpoints and handoffs are now being automated, improving both speed and quality.

In many cases, time from discovery to execution is moving from weeks to hours, freeing up more time for higher-value work focused on winning with consumers. Third, taking our existing R&D advantages to a new level by leveraging our unique set of innovation capabilities: substrate technologies, formulaic chemistry, devices, and biology to deliver breakthrough solutions in every part of the business.

New technologies like AI-enabled molecular discovery will drive faster acceleration and more powerful integration of innovation capabilities leading to faster growth. Finally, supply chain capability.

Supply Chain 3.0 is driving a more complete system connection from purchase signal to our production planning and material ordering to ensure consumers find the product they want each time they shop. We know how to digitize and automate our operations, and more importantly, we have qualified a financial framework to generate strong returns on these investments.

Full activation of these advanced capabilities will enable speed and execution, smaller teams, and a stronger connection to the consumer to enable the next S-curve of growth and value creation for P&G. We are confident in the short-term progress we are making and excited about the mid to long term as we leverage our strengths and unique capabilities to set us apart from the industry.

Now I'll pass it back to Andre to cover guidance.

Thanks. As we enter fiscal '27, we continue to expect the environment around us to remain volatile and challenging: from costs to currencies, to consumer, competitor, retailer, and geopolitical dynamics.

We believe our going-in guidance for fiscal '27 prudently reflects these current market realities. On the top line, we currently expect the markets in which we compete to deliver local currency value growth in the range of 1% to 3% for the year, with the current run rate roughly in the middle of this range.

Our objective is to grow organic sales modestly ahead of the underlying growth in these markets. However, recall our guidance includes a 30 to 50 basis point headwind from brand, product form, and go-to-market restructuring.

Taken together, our guidance range is for organic sales growth of 1% to 3% versus prior year. The low end of the range protects for additional softness in underlying market growth rates; the high end would require acceleration in underlying market growth rates and market shares.

Our bottom-line outlook is broadly consistent with top line, with core EPS growth of 0% to 3% versus fiscal '26 core EPS of $6.89. This guidance equates to a range of $6.89 to $7.11 per share, $7.00 at the center of the range.

This outlook includes a cost headwind of approximately $1 billion after tax driven by higher raw materials, energy, transportation costs, and other premiums resulting from the conflict in the Middle East. This estimate assumes an effective Brent crude oil price of $90 a barrel.

This is a combination of actual prices since March '26 and future contracts through Feb '27, which approximates the average price that will flow through our P&L in fiscal '27. It's also in the ballpark of current spot prices.

You likely note that our current estimated cost impact is the same as we projected last quarter, but at a somewhat lower oil price. This is due to a larger impact from the non-commodity elements of the supply chain like ocean freight and trucking surcharges, supplier inflation, and force majeure premiums.

Most of this impact will be felt in the first half of fiscal '27 as those materials were produced when the underlying oil price was above $100 a barrel. While we don't typically provide quarterly guidance, we estimate the cost dynamic will cause Q1 EPS to be down 5% or more versus prior year.

We expect the foreign exchange headwind of approximately $50 million after tax and approximately $150 million of higher net interest expense after tax. We are also forecasting $150 million after tax of lower non-operating income.

We estimate that our core effective tax rate will be approximately 20%, in line with prior year. Combined input costs, foreign exchange rate items, and items below the operating line will be roughly a $1.4 billion after tax of earnings headwind in fiscal '27, or 56 cents per share, 8% of fiscal '26 core EPS.

We expect capital spending will be 4.5% to 5.5% of sales, and we are forecasting adjusted free cash flow productivity at 85% to 90% for the year. We expect to pay over $10 billion in dividends and to repurchase approximately $5 billion in common stock, combined a plan to return $15 billion of cash to shareowners in fiscal '27.

The guidance range reflects the continued acceleration toward our long-term algorithm. It is a balanced outlook between top line and bottom line despite significant cost pressure early in the year and reflecting current market realities for consumer demand.

We will maintain strong investment in the business balanced by a strong productivity program with an intent to improve results semester by semester and year by year. This outlook is based on current market growth rate estimates, commodity prices, and foreign exchange rates.

Significant additional currency weakness, commodity cost increases, geopolitical disruptions, tariffs, major supply chain disruptions, or store closures are not anticipated within the guidance ranges. Now I'll hand it back to Shailesh for closing thoughts.

Thanks, Andre. Fiscal year '26 was a year of foundation building.

The operating environment was even more challenging than expected, but we delivered another year of organic sales and core EPS growth, and we continued a long-term record of returning high levels of cash to shareowners. In fiscal '27, we will solidify progress and continue to build the technical, organizational, and operational capabilities to have P&G lead as the CPG company of the future.

We continue to believe the best path to sustainable balanced growth is to double down on the strategy: stronger integrated execution to delight consumers with superior products at a superior value. We're driving interventions to improve near-term results, and we're building the technical and operational capabilities to create the CPG company of the future.

Our investments for growth will be balanced and funded with a strong productivity program. We're pleased with the progress we're making.

It won't be a straight line as the past few quarters have shown, but we are building momentum with consumers, and we are excited about the long-term opportunities ahead. With that, we'll be happy to take your questions.

Hey, good morning. It's been a little more than a year since you guys announced your restructuring and you put the plans in place to reinvigorate organic sales growth and get P&G back to outperformance versus the category.

You obviously gave some examples of progress today with your interventions, although we're not at outperformance yet with flat share in the quarter. Just looking forward to fiscal '27, what are the biggest areas or initiatives left to put in place versus what's already been implemented organizationally in your restructuring?

Just as you think about fiscal '27, do you think you can consistently return to sales outperformance versus your categories at some point? Any thoughts on timing there and just the line of sight there as we move through the fiscal year from an org sales standpoint?

Thanks.

Thanks, Dara. Let me start with how we are feeling about the progress we've made so far.

It is consistent with the way we have felt over the last few months. We are happy with the recovery on the consumer front, particularly our performance relative to getting new users in.

I think it is best reflected in the fact that our global share has now stabilized and has been flat for three-month periods. I think that is a big step forward.

More recently, and one month doesn't tell you much, but the last volume share month inflected, and volume share is sometimes a good predictor of the status on user growth. From that point of view, we feel very pleased that we are getting on track to winning with consumers, which is the most important.

Now when I then break it down and we see when we started interventions and whether that progress has happened, we feel that's what gives us confidence. If I start with China where, as coming out of COVID, it was a depressed market, it was a tough competitive environment, and the results were not great.

We are now growing share in China for the first time in 15 quarters, driven by fundamental changes we made similar to what we're doing in the company. We changed our go-to-market, we changed our brand building systems and processes and capabilities, we changed the kind of innovation we were doing because we knew we were in a lower-growth market that needed us to drive market growth.

We've seen that begin to inflect in China. China closed, as at 4%; ex-exits that happened in China, even better.

Similarly, if you look at Latin America where, after our decision to change the go-to-market in Argentina and other choices, we've been really happy with the way our business has performed across every single metric. Probably most exciting: three years back, less than 10% of that business was growing users; today, over 55% of that business is growing users.

Then even if I go to some of the markets in the Asia, Middle East, Africa region, which was pretty massively hit in the earlier Middle East crisis, those have come back well. Last quarter, we closed at 3%; ex-exits, closer to 6%.

Even a market like Gulf, which has had a very tough 4-5 month period with disruptions, we're growing share across all time periods. That market had less than 5% of the business growing users last year; they're now at 60% of their business growing users.

Pretty quick bounce-back on some of these markets. Turkey is another good example of that.

Europe focus: the market has been depressed, but we've been growing share even in very difficult situation there. U.S.

is the market where we probably started the interventions closer in timeline. We're beginning to see progress there as Andre covered in some of the results, and we saw it very clearly in consumers.

Even in the U.S., we saw a blip in the volume share in the recent time period. We feel good about the progress we're making in the U.S.

as well. As I'd shared, Dara, with you and others at CAGNY, in U.S., we are doing our interventions in a way that will be category growth driven, they depend on innovation and retail partnerships.

Many of those interventions happen in the front half of the next fiscal, or in the July-December of '26. We expect that momentum in the U.S.

to pick up during the semester behind some of these interventions. Overall, long-winded answer, but I feel good about the progress we're making.

I feel confident based on the interventions we made and the timelines we have that we are on track. Which is why, even though our sell-in, sell-out was mismatched, I feel good because as long as the consumption is strong, I'm very confident that we will have strong sales.

Great. Thanks so much.

You'd called out that 23 out of 50 country-category combinations held or grew share. I think that was a step back sequentially.

I know that you guys have talked about that progress won't be linear, but I was curious within that number what percentage actually grew share within that. Then the global roll-up of flat, I understand there's a mathematical dynamic on that.

It has to be some of the bigger categories versus the smaller ones within that 50 grid. I guess notwithstanding the comments on being pleased with progress, what are maybe some of the bigger category-country combinations that still need more attention, more change, and sort of timeline on the next 6 to 8 months of getting some of those interventions in market?

Thanks.

Good morning, Lauren. Let me start, and then Shailesh can jump in.

I think the most important turn that we see is enterprise markets continuing to progress. If you look at enterprise markets growth, consistently mid-single digits.

AMA, Asia, Middle East, Africa, 3% growth; if you exclude the market restructuring, Asia, Middle East, Africa growing 6%. Latin America continuously growing share across categories over time periods.

Europe enterprise markets growing 5%. Enterprise markets strength, I think, is sustained, visible, and broad-based.

From a market dynamic, the most important share growth component we needed was China to return to share growth, because it is our number two market and we've done that very decisively. We're back to leading share on Baby Care; we're leading share we're growing share on Fem Care; we're growing share on Fabric Care.

It's broad-based, and, and honestly, the recipe that the team is executing will result in the same dynamic across categories. Already, the majority of the categories in China is on share growth; the rest will will will follow.

Europe continues to grow modest value share in a very difficult environment, up 20 basis points in value share. The the more the more impacted categories from a headwind standpoint if you want to go there, Fabric Care, for example, is one where competition has increased and we are re-establishing competitiveness in Europe.

That's a big priority for the for the European focus market team. In the U.S., I would really point to the progress we're making at the customer category level.

We quoted in the script that we had 10% of the top customer brand combinations growing in the front half; we're now up to 50%, and we expect that to continue to accelerate over the next 6 months, which will solidify the share growth that we're seeing early signs of in the U.S. as well.

The more longer-term recovery trajectory: Baby Care. For example on diapers, on taped diapers where we adjusted competitiveness from a value perspective, we saw the immediate adjustment in share, we're back to volume and value share growth on taped diapers.

We have an opportunity to drive that strength through the entire portfolio. That's where the innovation plan is focused, and you see the next wave of innovation coming here over the next couple of months.

The other big one in the U.S. is Family Care.

That's more of a category dynamic, and I feel very good about where Family Care is going. Again, we won't be talking about the future innovation and launches, but it it gives me confidence that we have a very clear view of where we lost users and, most importantly, very clear data on how to regain those users over the next 6 months.

That's kind of the the roundabout, but but what Shailesh is saying, I think, at the essence is core: we're building out that matrix of category, country, customer share growth, and and we're increasing the number of greens. Will it be linear?

No. Do we have confidence that we exit next year with strong, solidified share growth?

Yes.

I would just say, Lauren, to that question, in addition to what Andre said, is we've made big inflections on some of them, I think Fabric Care U.S. being one of those, and we are building further momentum there.

Where we have gaps, we have very clearly identified the category-customer combinations that need to inflect and have very clear time-bound plans on those being executed over the next 6 months.

Great. Thank you very much, and good morning.

As I look through the last several quarters, it strikes me that much of the volatility and surprise that we've seen has come either from the U.S. or from focus markets in Europe.

I guess my question is, how would you assess the underlying fundamentals of those markets as you think through the puts and takes, and as you've assessed the outlook for fiscal '27? Is there anything that you've experienced amidst all of that volatility and surprise that has altered the way you approach go-to-market plans, interfacing with retailers, plans with the consumer, just anything that you take away from recent experiences that informs any kind of different tactic as you think about fiscal '27?

Thank you.

Steve, let me start, and then maybe Andre has a few points to add. I would start and say fundamentally, these two markets, both North America and focus Europe, the market growth has slowed by 1 to 2 points over the past 12 to 18 months.

I think at the core where we have large shares and the category growth slows down, the impact is greater. At the same time, we actually think there is much bigger opportunity in the next 5 years for growth in these two markets.

If I just take the U.S. and we look at where is the maximum value we can add on top and bottom line, it is still the U.S.

Whether it is something like power oral care where, even if you get to somewhat reasonable penetration levels compared to our Europe benchmarks, like the equivalent of creating a new India business for us. We see a good $5 billion to $10 billion growth opportunities over the next 3 to 5 years in both U.S.

and Europe, just fundamentally by addressing some of these huge growth opportunities that still exist. A lot of this will require a higher level of innovation, and that's what I was referring to when I was talking about China.

When China slowed down, it wasn't about riding in the train anymore; we needed to drive the train. I think in U.S.

and Europe, we are modifying and adjusting our innovation plans to ensure that they are capable of lifting the category growth rates. Tide evo is an obvious example, but I would take the combination of Tide evo and Tide liquids work, because Tide evo is going to get some of the new growth and get some of that new performance and innovation driven growth.

Improving significantly the performance of our existing propositions has a lot of market growth and share growth opportunity for us. When something like Tide liquids grows, it is still a 50-plus percent premium to the market average.

When Tide liquid starts growing, the market gets lifted. Tide liquids will grow if you can really strengthen the value proposition, which is what we've done.

I think our biggest growth opportunities moving forward are still in U.S. and some of the Europe focus markets.

It does require a higher bar on innovation, and that is what we are preparing ourselves for. Andre, anything?

Nope.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for taking the question.

I wanted to just go back and you've said many times the value proposition that you are applying, particularly in the U.S., and we've seen the increasing marketing spend, in particular to reinvestments and price reinvestments, as you called out. I was curious to understand a timing situation, and I wanted to see if you can parse out that timing impact.

Then, most importantly, how have you learned in terms of those reinvestments and then the volume that you could get from those initiatives? I think you called out Tide, you called out some of the Baby Care.

If you can explain to us and then perhaps think about how you're embedding those recoveries and market share recoveries into your guide. Thank you.

Good morning, Andrea. Look, I'll level up a second here, but we are very diligent in telling the categories to remain fully invested in the business.

I think that is what is allowing with the right interventions, the turn of business that you see in many parts of the of the world and what is driving and fueling the share the volume share growth we see now in the U.S. and the increasing number of customer brand combinations that are winning.

How that investment is structured really depends on the specifics of the business. In Baby Care, we needed a short-term intervention on key price points because we were being out-promoted and out-priced.

Making that intervention, while painful, is absolutely necessary so that the innovation that is launching and the brand communication can be effective, and you see the results on taped diapers. In other categories, it is a channel price point conversation, for example, where we might have expanded our absolute cash outlay premium in club on certain categories too far.

That requires correction and is being invested in. In other categories like in Tide, the example Shailesh mentioned, it's about product performance, but not changing the price point, but improving the value that way.

All these interventions are very targeted and very carefully constructed and embedded in the guidance range that we've given you. We also will continue to invest in media.

I firmly believe we have a big opportunity to increase the effectiveness of our media spend because of what Shailesh is continue to describe: the fragmentation of the media landscape. I I don't think we're at 100% effectiveness potential, and that's the investment we're making in media capabilities.

Maybe a bit broader answer, but it it the combination of these interventions that are required to get to sustainable share growth, and therefore back to algorithm, are embedded in the guidance ranges that we've given you. If oil and the Middle East situation holds at the assumption, we feel comfortable with the midpoint of the guidance range because we're very certain that the interventions and the execution that we control will deliver.

The uncertainty in the guidance range, in our mind, entirely results from Middle East and oil. Underlying consumer strength.

Hi, good morning everybody. I wanted to pick up on this line of thinking actually around investment levels.

Andre, I'm getting to a bit of gross margin compression for the full year, which let's just say if I put it all together would imply SG&A doesn't grow a whole lot this year, if anything maybe it can be a bit lower year-on-year, implied to have good operating leverage this year. I guess I'm mindful that last year was a kind of significant investment year, ended at historically high levels for investment.

Coming into this year, you have a restructuring and overhead initiative, which is going to drive a lot of savings. Number one, is my premise somewhat logical around a bit of gross margin compression and thereby SG&A doesn't grow a whole lot?

If so, can you just give us a sense of how you would view the full investment suite over the last several years, say fiscal '26 and into '27 and kind of the underlying levels that you would foresee once you normalize for some of these overhead savings and some of the automation initiatives that you have, just to give us a sense of that indeed you will be going into fiscal '27 with full and robust investment levels behind your brands? I know you'd kind of expanded on it to Andrea's question, but I'd like to dig just a bit deeper if I could.

Thanks so much. Yeah.

No, it's good to dig a little deeper here, Chris. I think the setup for the year we just started is good.

We have the productivity savings now flowing through. Obviously half of the head count reduction has been executed, the major market restructuring has been executed, the benefits of that from a cost perspective will start to flow through into fiscal '27.

We have remained fully invested in the business, and if you look at our media spend and advertising spend over the last 3 to 5 years, the only way we've gone is up. As I said, I don't think, nor does Shailesh believe, that 100% of that spending has been effective, and we will work to increase the effectiveness.

I think you'll see a combination of effectiveness flowing through to the P&L and effectiveness increasing the efficiency of the spend, and therefore we maintain full support to the brands, but we can be more selective on the tools, the platforms, and therefore the spend levels that we will apply. The third component that is part of the playbook is very strong productivity on the cost of goods side.

We've delivered record cost of goods productivity in the fiscal we just closed, and we will do that again, if not more. That's our path to get to a reasonable EPS outcome with the cost headwinds we talked about while maintaining investment in the business and providing the value balance that consumers need to give us the share growth that we want.

I'd just add one point to that, Chris, which is that we're looking at investment depending on the brand, the country, and the category in a few different buckets. There's investment in brand building, which shows up as advertising costs; there's investment in product very often like we did on Tide to significantly improve value.

We are very, very choiceful and disciplined of where we are investing for that brand in that country to get the maximum lift. We've gotten much better in our learnings over the past 12 months on what is the right mix of spending across these different investment buckets to get the biggest lift on the business.

In some businesses, it may be just fundamentally increasing media because of their brand building plans; in some, it may be strengthening the product investment. We have built a much better understanding over the past 12 months of where that balance and mix needs to be.

Great. Thank you.

Good morning, everybody. I guess I wanted to ask just on the 1% to 3% organic sales outlook, and, Andre, you mentioned what drives the low end versus the high end, but on the high end you mentioned would assume acceleration in category growth and market share performance.

I think historically category growth alone would already put you towards the higher end of that range. Can you maybe just unpack what's embedded from a category growth standpoint in the outlook?

Then I guess just related, there's a big disconnect between consumption and shipments this quarter. Is this dynamic now in the rearview, or said another way, should organic growth and consumption be more aligned moving forward?

Thank you.

Thanks, Peter. Good morning.

If I dissect the guidance on the top-line range, the base assumption is category growth at the current levels we're seeing in the market, which is 2%. That's a global number.

So 2% value growth is the center line. To deliver 2% organic sales growth within that would require us to grow about 2.5 points, because we have about a 40-50 basis points headwind from the market restructuring on the top line that is still carrying into this year.

This would mean if the categories grow at two and we have underlying growth of 2.5, that would require share growth, but would leave us at the midpoint of the range from a organic sales growth standpoint. Our objective, as you can tell from the commentary both Shailesh and I are making, is to remain fully invested in the business and to drive share growth and drive market growth.

We're building business plans that shift us obviously more significantly above market. The construct assumes two points, which means in the middle, 2.5 points of growth for us, net of 50 basis points of headwind from restructuring, would mean share growth at a minimum.

Okay? On the shipment versus consumption, listen, the dynamic happens in Europe and the dynamic happens in the U.S., and the simple answer is we need to get to stronger growth in both regions so those dynamics don't impact us as much.

That's the macro answer that we would give our teams: we have to deliver stronger growth, and that's what they're all working on. The dynamics are slightly different.

In the U.S., it is truly pull-forward of inventory quarter to quarter, which sometimes happens very late in the quarter like in quarter three, and then shift of big events like Prime Day, which changes the way we have to recognize the trade investment. That's what happened in Q4.

I think the combination of the two was unusual, and therefore the effect was bigger than we typically see. I fully expect there's going to be always has been some level of trade inventory volatility quarter over quarter.

We just need to get back to 3-plus percent growth so it's less visible. In Europe, the effect is more linked to trade dynamics and negotiations.

There are different negotiation windows with retailers, and if you're a retailer, you apply some pressure in the negotiation period, which then shifts inventories. We generally catch up; also, that dynamic will sustain.

How do we make that go away? We have to accelerate growth in Europe.

Hi. Good morning, everyone.

I wanted to ask about the price and promotional environment in your categories. It seems that you have two opposite forces: on one hand, you talked about the price intervention and the trade to improve market share; on the other side, you have cost inflation, which typically will result in higher pricing.

Can you help us understand how you balance the two? One of your European competitors talked about second half of calendar year being a little bit more price driven.

Maybe can you help us understand within your organic guidance the contribution from volume, price, and mix in '27? Thank you.

Good morning. I don't see a fundamental change in our growth algorithm, but you're right.

We see promotion increasing back to pre-COVID levels. Europe volume on promotion has increased by about five points in the most recent read.

There's a little bit of seasonal dynamic in there, there's a little bit of FIFA-related promo activation in there, which you would have heard. We would expect both the U.S.

and Europe to, over time, return to pre-COVID promo levels. We're almost there, I don't think that's a dramatic shift, but promotion will continue to drive some level of growth.

Our plan assumes that we continue to price with innovation. We mainly use promotion to drive trial.

We use innovation to drive regimen from high-penetration categories into low-penetration categories by co-promoting. When we talk about the customer-level plans in the U.S., there's a very careful construction of the business plan that includes promotion as it comes to those objectives.

We don't believe that promotion, in any way, shape, or form, is a way to build the business or to acquire users on a sustainable basis. We'll use it where it makes sense.

It's not part of our desired business building strategies. We expect a return to pre-COVID level; we're cognizant of that, and we have built that into our assumptions.

We will continue to drive price mix in this year like we've done in 20 out of 21 previous years.

I think just to add to what Andre said, specifically, we think with innovation, we believe we will be able to have a consistent price mix and a more balanced volume, price, and mix growth composition of sales. If costs remain elevated, we typically do see promotion levels go up or down.

If costs tend to be high, we will see promotions ease off a bit. As Andre said, it's generally trending towards the pre-COVID levels.

At a fundamental level, we have an innovation plan that will allow us to price but still deliver great value to the consumer.

Thank you. Good morning, everyone.

I just had a high-level question on China. I was hoping for a little more color on your business in the market and then your expectations for category growth in the region and maybe expected improvements to your share this year.

Then I guess finally, are there any changes you're making to your innovation and or strategy in light of the consumer and macro? Thank you.

I would say given where the consumer is, we are definitely raising the bar on innovation. We are making sure that the performance is very noticeable.

That's important not just from where the consumer is today and becoming much more discerning, but also as we see the future of brand building and we see the environment there. Real difference in product performance shows up in authenticity and plays positively when you look at path to purchase through social media or e-com or other such tools.

We continue to raise the bar on what is expected out of innovation because not only is the consumer more discerning on value, and that's been a critical piece of it, but moving forward, we also think it's a multiplier to the brand building efforts.

Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking the question.

Maybe if I could actually follow up on Greater China. Andre, I think 4% organic sales for the quarter, 4% for the year, really a nice improvement, a rebound in that business and that's even with maybe some headwinds in some of the categories that you called out in the press release.

Maybe just if you could help us unpack a little bit more on the China side, Baby Care seems to be driving the bus, but presumably the interventions if you can make in some of the other categories would help that total China number tick up from where it is and just what's being done in those categories outside of maybe Baby Care to help improve going forward? Thanks very much.

Sure. China market continues to be challenged, it's not a tailwind that we're getting.

The market in aggregate is still down about 2% in the most recent reading that we have. The share breakthrough, the most encouraging part of the share breakthrough for me is the work the team has done to win across channels.

We historically, as were more centered around offline, more centered around brick and mortar. The team has been able to win in both.

We're winning in the physical store and we're winning on online, both on pure plays as well as social platforms. It's really broad-based from a channel perspective, which I think is the first encouraging sign because that means no matter where the consumer goes, we have a better position and we're winning with that consumer.

From a category lens, SK-II continues to shine: 8% growth excluding travel retail in China; we continue to lead from a share perspective, and the activation the team is is driving across the core, but also the super-premium LXP proposition, drives continued share growth, continued growth in in the SK-II business. Making progress in Hair Care on the core propositions Head & Shoulders and Pantene.

There is a lower tier, Rejoice, that we're still working through, but but the core of the proposition is growing. Great progress on Fabric Care, progress on Fem Care from a share perspective, and Baby Care, the shining star with the growth rates you see and now back to number one position in the market.

We are the number one Baby Care brand in China, which is an amazing accomplishment by the team. Broad-based.

Opportunity still in a couple of areas. I mentioned the low tier of Hair Care; work to be done.

There's still work to be done on Oral Care on the paste side. We are actively deciding what we want to do in that space.

The third component where we still have work to do is mass skin. Mass skin is a market dynamic more than a brand dynamic.

The Olay brand is is a very strong brand in China, but we have to find a way to grow that category and grow within that the Olay mass brand. That that would be the more detailed view of China.

Great. Thank you very much.

Just a couple of follow-ups. I just want to go back to the gap between the shipments and consumption.

I was just wondering, this has been going on for a while now, right? I'm just wondering if there's anything that is more distinct with Procter's business compared to your competitors, cuz it does seem to be a little bit more of an issue for you guys.

I'm wondering if that is a function of either your strategy, your brands, or just your retailer concentration. We would love to understand that a little better.

Then second, taking a look at the U.S. consumer, did you see a distinct impact from higher gasoline prices when it went up, when it went down?

How much of a driver is that? Then any comments on July would be helpful.

Thank you.

Robert, let me take the first part, and then Shailesh can jump in on the consumer side. I believe the very simple answer to your question, is there something specific about P&G and P&G strategy that creates more volatility on the inventory side?

I don't believe so. I think it's a very simple answer: we're bigger than everybody else, and we have higher velocity than everybody else.

If you need to reduce your inventory quickly, you focus on the biggest brand on the shelf that has the highest velocity, because that's how you can get your inventory dollars down. I think that's the very simple logic of unstocking P&G and restocking P&G is easier.

You can do it with a few decisions. Plus, we have the supply chain capability that we can deal with those swings.

I think that's the answer. I don't think there's anything that I can think of that would make P&G a specific element of that conversation.

I would just add to that, Andre, Robert, to your question that we see that even within P&G categories, there's a variation. It's not like every category would have had a sell-in, sell-out.

On our Grooming category, we had a reverse dynamic where actually the sell-out was less than the sell-in. That goes to Andre's point that depending on velocity, depending on other dynamics, even within our categories, we see a mixed difference.

The other point I would make is that fundamentally, over a large number of years, we are pretty sure that the consumption data in any of these is good over any rolling period of time. When we take a rolling 6-months basis or a rolling 3-months basis, the disconnect kind of goes away.

What we are focused on and when we work the teams is get focused on growing consumption, as what Andre was saying earlier, get it high enough that these variations don't make a difference, firstly, and grow it high enough because whatever you grow at, eventually, for the fiscal, it will balance out. We know that on a fiscal basis or even on 6-monthly basis, we get it fairly evened out.

On the consumer, we can't point to gas as a specific impact. I think it's a general impact where you see the consumers that are well-off continue to behave as they've behaved before: larger pack sizes to find value.

The more pressured consumer that will be more impacted by gas prices or incremental $100 of gas cost per week, they continue to look for smaller pack sizes, they continue to be very affected by promotion patterns. None of that has changed.

What I'll tell you, Robert, our consideration also in the guide is longer term, if the Middle East conflict sustains and oil goes up and gas prices stay high and inflation increases, so that impacts consumer sentiment, we believe, in the longer term. I don't think we're there yet.

There's kind of a multiplier effect here if the Middle East sustains, oil prices keep high. We expect somewhat of an impact on the top line as well as the cost impact that you see.

That's why we have the range as wide as we have it because of that connection between both elements.

I'd just add two points on the portfolio within that. One is that we do have a good vertical portfolio.

When we look at Grooming, which is beginning to, for example, show very strong results, I think a lot of those results are driven by activating vertically and horizontally the portfolio. We're seeing some of the best results we've seen in Grooming in a long time as they've activated that portfolio.

One of our best-performing Grooming items is the laser hair removal at-home device, which is one of the hottest-selling items and one of the big growth drivers. I believe that's at $300 in most places.

You see kind of the leverage of the full vertical portfolio from IPL down to the disposable blades. The second part is our portfolio is a little more skewed to the $100,000-plus than it is to the less than $50,000.

Our user base is a little skewed that way, what we see is a little more of discernment by consumers, not an inability to buy.

Great. Good morning, everyone.

I actually wanted to pick up Shailesh on the comment you just made a moment ago, but really with respect to longer-term outlook and the portfolio. Specifically, I really have two questions.

One, is there anything that you see structurally, longer-term and much more lasting in nature, particularly around the areas of consumer behavior, competition, value orientation, which you touched on? Is it possible this is more lasting than something that's more transitory, or even pricing power, as we look at the commodity cost inflation embedded in your guidance?

Is there anything that kind of leads you to believe that the company can't return sustainably to 3% to 4% organic sales growth, kind of coming off a couple years of kind of more disappointing low single-digit, 1% kind of growth? Then two, related to that, if you indulge me, sort of as part of the strategy, is there anything that gives you pause now about the current portfolio or sort of relative attractiveness of these categories that should potentially be reconsidered by you and by the board?

Thank you for all that.

It's a great question. I'll try and break it into a couple of different pieces.

We do see some demographic shifts and behavior shifts which will create certain higher-growth segments than not. We've always said we do expect probably higher growth rates in segments like beauty and health, and we expect to be accelerating that part of the portfolio even more.

We definitely do see some trends that are driving some parts of our portfolio at much higher category growth rates than others. We see much higher growth rates on e-com growth, for example.

We expect to leverage that much more in some cases where we have a share gap, we catch up on the e-com there. I think we are seeing certain segments that will grow faster, and we are adjusting and making the required choices on portfolio to address those.

There is a second piece which I think has been the key for growth for all of us, no matter what the situation is. It's what I would call growth in adjacencies where we have expandable consumption.

Probably one of the best examples we have on that is Fabric Care, where you can see growth rates over 5% over a decade. When you look at that and break it down, you will find probably laundry having a decent growth rate, but double-digit growth rate on fabric enhancers.

That is true almost in every single category we operate. I mentioned earlier the power oral care example.

Paste should have a decent growth in the years to come, driven by innovation, but there's no question in my mind in a market like U.S., the power brush, for example, will be a much higher growth rate part of the business. What we are doing on each of the categories is we're getting very disciplined on what is the adjacency with expandable consumption.

It is not something new, but we know when we do it well, we are able to get well past market growth rates that are current. In fact, they drive much more future growth from a category standpoint, because it just lifts the total number.

The final point I would make on this one is that in the base propositions we have, which are already at premiums to the market, when we get those activated like we're doing with Tide liquid and have those growing mid to high single digits, that too lifts the category growth rate. Which is why, if I pull it all together, Kevin, I think with a deliberate strategy that we have, we do see sequential improvement, and we are not expecting it to be incremental, to be clear.

There are a bunch of innovations and initiatives we are working on which completely step-change the out-year growth rates because of the interventions we make. I'll give you another example on that one is Zevo, which we launched.

Zevo has been driving a really stagnant category by addressing a totally new need. We feel there is plenty of growth opportunity.

We don't feel we're constrained by the current consumer environment. We know when we innovate well against the right growth opportunity areas, we can get back to high growth rates.

Andre, do you want to?

No. You said it.

Hi, everybody. Good morning.

I want to build on some of the earlier questions with so much focus on market share. It can be implied, maybe wrongly so, that you're a victim of whatever happens to the categories.

I think you mentioned in some of your answers to questions that market share growth will drive category growth. I want to make sure just sort of mathematically that is correct and what will it take to get to that stage?

Are we in sort of a first stage where it's share growth without category growth and category growth comes later? Or in the past we've heard so many of the initiatives that Procter & Gamble have made are things that grow the category.

It feels a little bit like with the growth rates you're providing or some of the messages that you're sending related to whether it's macro or consumer or whatever it is, is that the category's going to do what it has to do and then you're taking the appropriate intervention. Just trying to understand what we're seeing in these categories and the category growth.

Are those real run rates or do you feel like you can tick them up? What would be the path of what we would observe if that was going to be the case?

Let me start, Kaumil. I think the base assumption here is a relatively stable environment, which is what we've been seeing for the last 3, 6, 9 months.

Pending any change to that, which we don't see a driver of at the moment other than major inflation shock to the consumer base. Our job we view as we need to drive innovation in our categories, we need to drive interest in our categories, we need to drive traffic to the category.

I think the point we made earlier, when we do that successfully, that generally grows the category because we are somewhat premium versus the category average and it drives new users into the category, and with doing that, we drive share. Now is that going to happen every time in that sequence?

No. For example, on Baby Care, when we react to a value component in the market that we need to address, we grow share because we need to return to value competitiveness.

From there, we will continue to innovate, we will continue to do exactly what I just said. The playbook hasn't changed.

Our intention to grow and get back to algorithm, and that's why we take longer, because we want to take it that way, not via heavy promotion and volume and value share gains that are not sustainable or require continued fueling of promotion. We want to do it with innovation, we want to do it by driving traffic into the category.

If we do that well, we grow share.

I would just add, building off your point, Andre, that we are clear what is the shorter-term interventions and we are very clear on what the innovation interventions are. We know that when some of those innovations go in, they will lift the category.

The sequence of some of these could be different, like on Baby Care, if you have a value gap and you fix it immediately, you may not immediately see the market impact. In parallel, we're working innovations that will lift the category, and we do that across every single category: from Hair Care to Skin Care, we look at doing it.

It won't always happen in tandem, but generally, if we are growing, the category should be growing because of our portfolio. Second is we do focus on innovations that can step-change category growth.

I think if you take evo and beads, both are excellent examples of that. Evo is completely incremental to the category.

The message to our organization is very consistent with that. Grow the market that will allow you to grow share sustainably, that will allow you to get to a balanced top-line and bottom-line construct.

It's all four components at the same time.

thank you for the question. I kind of wanted to drill down on one category in the U.S., and that's Home Care, paper towels, paper tissues.

Doesn't get a lot of talk on these calls, but it's a big percentage of your sales. That strikes me that it's kind of the best example of a category where you really do need that premiumization to justify a price gap to private label.

Private label has been a problem in this category. Is it possible to delve a little bit in light of your talk about premiumizing to justify pricing, is this a category where you can do this successfully, and is it a priority even for fiscal '27?

Let me start on that one, Robert. I presume you're asking fundamentally Family Care.

On Family Care, I would rate it as the category where we have probably the biggest technological advantage of all the categories we play in, we have true ability to deliver superiority on that category. We have innovations like when we did Soft Tear, that lifts the category, that lifts us.

We have a program for this fiscal focused on doing the same. The one area through COVID that we probably did not have as strong on Family Care, all because of the high demand had to deprioritize a bit, was the vertical portfolio.

I think that was the reason we had a vertical portfolio on Family Care was to be able to leverage the full scale and also defend against private label. One of the things that we are doing is reactivating the vertical portfolio on both Charmin and Bounty, while we continue to innovate on the base Charmin and Bounty.

What you will see is a better activation of the vertical portfolio there and strong innovation on both Bounty and Charmin to continue to have that pricing premium.

The only thing I would add is this is a category where price points matter a lot versus private label. With the commodity-based pricing, we have gotten too far away from a price point perspective in some channels, so that correction is happening.

One encouraging sign to leave you with is we have grown users for the first time in Family Care in the most recent period, and that's before some of the interventions that Shailesh was talking about have even been activated. I look at that category and say we probably have a very clear path forward, but as you rightfully point out, that needs to be done the right way because this category only grows if Charmin and Bounty grow.

Great. Thanks.

Good morning. Shailesh and Andre, we've talked a lot in this call and in the past about how important is for P&G to control its own destiny and create your own tailwinds and as the lines between retail and demand generation continue to blur, can you talk about some of the actions you are taking and investments you're making to specifically improve that?

Because your size likely still benefits you, but perhaps not to the same extent as it does in other areas like promotion and category growth. Can you talk about what's been done, and looking back at this year, where do you need to enact further change going forward and what do you expect to achieve in fiscal '27 by year-end?

Thank you.

Thanks. I think the biggest one we are trying to do is really change the way we work with our retail partners.

Fundamentally driven by the fact that the landscape has changed both in terms of a sharper differentiation in performance amongst the retail set, but secondly, amongst what it offers beyond the classical merchant partnership. We have tremendous synergies on media and tremendous mutual gains to be made on demand creation and category growth by leveraging that.

There's tremendous benefits on supply chain collaboration. Generally, where we have been focused on is getting a much better demand signal generation to marketing content to closing the loop and having a short path to purchase with each of these big retail partners.

I feel very, very happy with the progress we are making in the partnerships we are building. That is probably the biggest area, and it is one where actually size does help.

It kind of helps to be the largest media spender in this environment because for a lot of them, their big market growth opportunity is becoming a media platform, and so naturally, we become a good customer for that. We see a lot of opportunity and we see a lot of progress in partnership on brand building and demand creation with retail partners leveraging our joint assets, and that will continue to be the case moving forward.

I actually think that is a trend that will continue to favor us longer term.

Yes. Good afternoon.

Thanks very much. Just wanted to return to Tide.

Clearly, Shailesh, it's a brand you know very well from your long association with it. Obviously, a lot of interest in evo, but clearly early days.

I just wanted though to return to the Tide liquids and the relaunch there. I think you've referenced high-single-digit growth.

Now is that in line or better than you would have expected? How much is what I would think is the apparent success of that move, how much will that make you consider such an approach in other areas?

Would it be then logical to assume within the algorithm that we're going to get more volume than price going forwards and that would be a marked success of the changes you're making?

Let me go back to the Tide as the basis and then build from there. It beat our expectations is the simple answer.

When you put such a massive investment in product performance on such a large part of the business, it's very difficult to estimate a number like high-single-digit growth. What did we do?

We set price the same, give a much better performance. Intuitively, you know it's going to work, but you can't really say is it going to grow 3%, 5%, 7%?

I really commend the team there for having the courage of their conviction to say, "No, if I really step-change the performance of Tide, the users will reward us." What we have seen is a reward higher than what we had anticipated.

It is absolutely the basis on which we will continue to drive more of this across the company. When we refer to it as stronger core, that's what we mean.

You can take any of our brands: take Head & Shoulders, 85% of our user base is on the base Head & Shoulders. On each of these areas, we're looking to see are we absolutely delighting the consumers on our base while, of course, innovating and doing new things.

It gives us clear proof of concept that improving our base proposition while having the right value by balancing price and product performance is what we need to do. When we say we're really focused on user growth, user growth is about value, and value is about do we have the right product for the price and the marketing inputs we give it.

I think Tide was a great example for us, and it's always good when you get a success on the largest part of your business, they become more believers in that. Andre?

In a broader sense, we've had the post-COVID period 100% of growth driven by price. We will return, and you see that in the construct, to a more balanced model where we see both price and volume being drivers of our top-line growth.

That needs to be the model to return to algorithm. As Shailesh said, innovation on the core, if we're catching up on value, might not come with pricing, but innovation in a broader sense will come with pricing to continue to drive trade-up and price mix as part of the growth model.

Thank you. Good morning.

Obviously a lot's been covered already. Wanted to come back just to some timing considerations, and I think you were really clear about the cost pressure skewing to the first half and on some of the interventions, at least ones you've already identified, those should seem like they're in place by the end of the first half.

For some things like the scaling the four key capability areas and some of the other kind of transformation elements, is it right to think that the fiscal second half starts to be when, at least where you sit now, you should be hitting your stride or is some of that a longer process? I guess maybe how do we think about how different the first and second halves could look, and just in one sense, kind of what inning we're in for some of the plans that are identified already?

Let me answer part of it, and then Andre, feel free to add. I would say for sure, you will see greater momentum in the back half on these capabilities being scaled up, and we will be much more in the implementation and application stage of many of these capabilities.

Now there's no big bang date on this, some of it is already beginning to play out, and that actually continues to give us confidence to move faster on many of these. Some still need some capabilities in place, but it is for sure we are looking at this as something that progressively gets applied, and by the back half, we'll definitely be much further along the journey of the application of that.

That's one part of it. Second, a lot of our interventions do on the business itself, along some of the points we've talked about, go in in the front half.

We do expect to have the cost anniversaried as we go into the back half as well as have continued sequential improvements in our top line as we move forward. Okay.

With that, I would just close it out by saying, listen, we are pleased with the fact that we are growing consumption. We are stabilizing our value share, which puts us on a good foundation to get back to better growth.

We continue to drive a robust productivity plan so that we can continue to invest in the business and continue to make sequential improvement as we have said. As Michael to your last question as well, we believe that we will continue to see improvement semester to semester.

That's something that Andre mentioned in his comments. We generally feel good about the state of where we are and how it puts us for achieving our future growth and getting back to long-term algorithm.

Just one last piece before we sign off, I want to remind you that our Investor Day will be on Thursday, November 19th here in Cincinnati. We'll be sending out invitations tomorrow morning.

We're excited to have you all here. Thanks for joining the call today, and have a wonderful day.