Personal Care Products Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 22

←→Full screen

CONSUMER STAPLES › HOUSEHOLD AND PERSONAL PRODUCTS › PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS

Personal Care Products: One Sector Trading at Two Very Different Valuations

Where value sits across the fifteen companies in this peer set, and what the recorded transactions say buyers agreed to pay for whole companies.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 22 · CONSUMER STAPLES › HOUSEHOLD AND PERSONAL PRODUCTS › PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS

Next →

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

1. 01

   CONSUMER STAPLES › HOUSEHOLD AND PERSONAL PRODUCTS › PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS

   Cover slide introducing the Personal Care Products sector outlook as of September 2026.

   We open with the single finding that will run through this deck: Personal Care Products trades as one label covering three distinct valuation markets. Everything that follows builds toward that split, so it's worth holding in mind as we move through the pages.

   Everything on this page

   CONSUMER STAPLES › HOUSEHOLD AND PERSONAL PRODUCTS › PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS Personal Care Products: One Sector Trading at Two Very Different Valuations Where value sits across the fifteen companies in this peer set, and what the recorded transactions say buyers agreed to pay for whole companies. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   Contents slide lists the five numbered sections and appendix that make up the report.

   This report runs in five sections plus an appendix — the bottom line, the landscape, valuation and situations, precedent transactions, and strategic implications. We put the bottom line first on purpose: if a client only has time for one section, section one carries the whole argument. Everything after that builds the evidence behind it.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line One Label, Three Different Businesses — and Three Different Prices 02 The Landscape Five Groups Share the Shelf and Sell to Different Buyer Groups 03 Valuation & Situations Ranked on Forward Earnings, the Set Splits into Two Ratings 04 Precedent Transactions Strategics Have Been Paying Mid-Teens; A Sponsor Paid for Cash Earnings 05 Strategic Implications The Moves That Change Where a Business Sits in This Range 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Personal Care Products Trades as Three Markets: Brand Portfolios, Private-Label Self-Care and Nutrition Sellers

   This slide states the core finding: the sector splits into brand portfolios, private-label self-care and nutrition sellers, each priced differently.

   On forward EV/EBITDA for CY2027E, the top of this range is carried at 14.2x and the bottom at 4.0x, with the sector median at 9.8x — a spread wide enough that it reads as three different industries wearing one label. Mass-market brand portfolios sit at the top of that range, nutrition and meal-replacement sellers sit at the bottom, and private-label self-care suppliers price inside the middle band rather than at the floor. The deal evidence backs the same split: Olaplex closed at 16.2x on claims and distribution, while Spectrum Brands closed at 7.8x on a cost-led, cash-generative profile. So the first question for any name in this sector is which of the three markets it actually competes in — because that answer, more than sector membership, is what sets the rating.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Personal Care Products Trades as Three Markets: Brand Portfolios, Private-Label Self-Care and Nutrition Sellers The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (12 of 15 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 The Two Ends of This Sector Are Priced Like Different Industries On forward EV / EBITDA for CY2027E, the top of the range is carried at 14.2x and the bottom at 4.0x, with the middle of the range at 9.8x. 12 of the 15 companies on the page carry a forward estimate, so the spread is read on those 12 names. 2 Shelf-Facing Portfolios Hold the Top of the Range; Nutrition Sellers Hold the Bottom Mass-market personal care portfolios are 6 of the 15 companies here, and the 4 of them with a forward estimate are carried at 14.1x. The three nutrition and meal-replacement sellers — Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. (HLF), Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. (NATR) and LifeVantage Corporation (LFVN) — all sit in the bottom tier, where revenue turns on distributor recruitment and retention. 3 Supplying the Price Gap Is Priced Inside the Middle Band, Not at the Bottom The two store-brand and private-label self-care names sit inside the middle band: Haleon plc (HLN) at 11.6x with a 27% margin, alongside Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) at 7.4x with revenue flat at 0%. Where own-label supply and category breadth are the business, the market has been paying inside the middle of the range rather than at the bottom of it. 4 The Higher Announced Multiples Sit with Claims and Distribution, the Lower Ones with Cost-Led Brands Henkel US Operations Corp completed Olaplex Holdings, Inc. in March 2026 at 16.2x forward EBITDA, a claims-led brand landing inside a global distribution network. Two months later, Oaktree Capital Management L.P. announced Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. at 7.8x, a cash-generative, cost-led portfolio agreed toward the bottom of the range. 9.8x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 12 rated of 15 companies 14.2x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 4.0x at the discount end top quartile (n=3) against bottom quartile (n=3) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 25 Transactions with disclosed terms 46 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   Section divider introducing the market map of five business-model groups.

   Before we open the landscape, it helps to reset: this section maps who sits in each of the five groups sharing this shelf, and what each group's rating is argued on.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Five Groups Share the Shelf and Sell to Different Buyer Groups Who sits in each group, and what its rating is argued on. 02 of 06 Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   Five Groups Share One Label, and Buyers Price Them Separately

   This slide groups the approved companies into five business-model segments and shows each group's median EV/EBITDA multiple.

   We've grouped the companies in this universe into five segments and taken the median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) for each — the same label covers businesses that don't compete for the same dollar. That grouping is what lets us say a name's segment membership, not just its sector tag, is doing most of the work in its rating. So the map is the reference point for every valuation page that follows.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP Five Groups Share One Label, and Buyers Price Them Separately 15 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 MASS-MARKET PERSONAL CARE PORTFOLIOS 6 cos median 14.1x CL KMB EPC HNST WALD NUS The scale end of the sector: 6 of the 15 companies, holding the shelf mandate and the advertising budgets that come with it. ADJACENT: NUTRITION AND MEAL-REPLACEMENT PRODUCTS 3 cos median 4.0x HLF NATR LFVN Three direct-selling names whose revenue rests on distributor recruitment and retention rather than on retail facings. ADJACENT: PRESCRIPTION DERMATOLOGY THERAPEUTICS 2 cos 11.2x · 1 rated NAGE EVMN Two names selling on claims substantiation and prescriber trust, of which one carries a forward estimate. STORE-BRAND AND PRIVATE-LABEL SELF-CARE 2 cos median 9.5x HLN PRGO Two suppliers sitting on the other side of the price gap, earning on manufacturing scale and retailer mandates. ADJACENT MODELS 2 cos median 8.1x BLCO PBH Bausch + Lomb Corporation (BLCO) and Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH): consumables and over-the-counter remedies bought on replenishment cadence.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Brand Portfolios Carry the Scale; Nutrition Sellers Carry the Discount

   This slide contrasts brand portfolios, which carry scale, against nutrition sellers, which carry the sector's discount.

   Brand portfolios carry the scale in this universe, and nutrition sellers carry the discount — the segment view makes that gap explicit rather than letting it hide inside a single sector average. Full company-level detail sits in the appendix for any name a client wants to trace. So the practical read is: know which segment a business sits in before benchmarking it against a sector-wide number.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Brand Portfolios Carry the Scale; Nutrition Sellers Carry the Discount Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Mass-market personal care portfolios 6 40% 14.1x Colgate-Palmolive Company (CL) · Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) · +4 more Shelf mandate and scale. 6 of the 15 companies, and the 4 with forward estimates are carried at 14.1x — Colgate-Palmolive Company (CL) and Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) at one end of size, The Honest Company, Inc. (HNST) and Waldencast plc (WALD) at the other. The debate on these names runs on price/mix and advertising weight rather than on volume. Adjacent: nutrition and meal-replacement products 3 20% 4.0x Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. (HLF) · Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. (NATR) · +1 more Direct selling, distributor churn. Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. (HLF), Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. (NATR) and LifeVantage Corporation (LFVN) all carry estimates, spanning 2.9x to 6.6x on forward EBITDA. Recruitment-led revenue and compensation-plan scrutiny sit in that rating alongside the margin structure. Adjacent: prescription dermatology therapeutics 2 13% 11.2x n=1 Niagen Bioscience Inc (NAGE) · Evommune, Inc. (EVMN) Claims, prescribers, clinical burden. On the 2 names in this group, Niagen Bioscience Inc (NAGE) is the one with a forward estimate, at 11.2x on 16% revenue growth; Evommune, Inc. (EVMN) carries no rating in the set. A regulated claim raises the cost of a launch and the value of substantiation already completed. Store-brand and private-label self-care 2 13% 9.5x Haleon plc (HLN) · Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) Supplying the price gap. Haleon plc (HLN) and Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) are carried at 9.5x between them. Commodity relief and retailer own-label mandates move this group's economics faster than brand advertising does. Adjacent models 2 13% 8.1x Bausch + Lomb Corporation (BLCO) · Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH) Bought on replenishment cadence. Bausch + Lomb Corporation (BLCO) and Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH) sit at 8.1x between them, BLCO on 6% revenue growth and PBH on a 33% margin. Habitual repurchase is the revenue quality a buyer underwrites in both.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   Section divider introducing the valuation and situation analysis for the rated companies.

   Ranked on forward earnings, this set splits into two ratings — the next pages walk through where that split comes from and what it's associated with.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS Ranked on Forward Earnings, the Set Splits into Two Ratings EV / EBITDA on CY2027E for the 12 companies with a forward estimate, out of 15 shown on the page. 03 of 06 Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   The Top of the Range Keeps Its Premium Even After Forecast Growth Is Credited

   This slide ranks all rated companies by EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) against the sector median.

   Across the rated companies, the multiples run from a low of 4.0x to a high of 14.2x, with the sector median sitting at 9.8x — the top of the range keeps its premium even once forecast growth is credited into the multiple. Tier zones here are cut at the rated set's own quartiles, so the grouping reflects where this specific universe actually clusters, not an external benchmark. So the practical question for any name is which tier it sits in today, and what would have to change to move it.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Top of the Range Keeps Its Premium Even After Forecast Growth Is Credited EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 12 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 9.8x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (12 of 15 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 14.2x CORE · median 9.8x DISCOUNT · median 4.0x Sector median 9.8x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top holds 14.2x. The three names at the premium end are carried at 14.2x on CY2027E EV / EBITDA. A forward multiple already credits the growth sitting in the estimates, so a premium that survives it reads as a view on durability rather than on next year's momentum. The bottom sits at 4.0x. The three names at the discount end are carried at 4.0x. All three sell nutrition and meal-replacement products through distributor networks, where revenue quality is argued on retention rather than on retail facings. Six names hold the middle. Between the two ends sit 6 of the 12 companies with a forward estimate, including Haleon plc (HLN), Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) and Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH). The middle band is where mix, channel breadth and retailer concentration are argued.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   The Faster-Growing Half Travels with a Modest Premium

   This slide splits the rated set into faster- and slower-growth cohorts and higher- and lower-margin cohorts, showing the median multiple for each.

   The faster-growing half of this set travels with a modest premium over the slower half, and the same pattern shows up when we cut on margin instead of growth. These are cohort medians on the names with the required estimates, and the read is association, not causation — growth and margin move with rating here, but we're not claiming one causes the other. So the driver worth testing on any name is which cohort it actually falls into, not which one its sector tag suggests.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS The Faster-Growing Half Travels with a Modest Premium Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=6; slower n=6; higher-margin n=6; lower-margin n=6). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 4% · EBITDA-margin split at 16% Above the 4% Growth Line the Rating Is 10.3x; Below It, 8.9x Splitting the 12 companies with a forward estimate at 4% revenue growth puts 6 names above the line at 10.3x and 6 below at 8.9x. The gap is real but narrow, and it is an association rather than a mechanism — cohort composition and differences in estimate coverage could produce the same picture. Wide Margins Sit Across This Range, Not Only at Its Upper End Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH) reports a 33% margin and sits inside the middle band, while Waldencast plc (WALD) on a 7% margin sits at the upper end of the range. Profitability alone is not where the separation in this set shows up. Claims Substantiation Is an Asset a Buyer Can Actually Transfer Where a brand sells on a regulated claim, the clinical file, registrations and adverse-event obligations travel with the business, and diligence runs on net revenue realisation after trade deductions. Those assets sit alongside the ratings at the upper end of this range, and they are built years before anyone asks about them. The Private-Label Price Gap Sets the Test for a Pricing Record Two of the 15 companies here supply store brands and private label; most of the set sells branded against that gap. Where price/mix has held without volume forfeiture, the market has been paying inside the upper band; where promotion carried the revenue, the rating sits lower.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Where the Money Sits: Higher Ratings Pair with Faster Growth for 3 Names

    This slide cuts the rated set on valuation versus revenue growth to locate names where a higher rating pairs with faster growth.

    Cutting the set on EV/EBITDA against revenue growth, both split at their own medians, puts a small group of names in the quadrant where a higher rating pairs with faster growth. The boundaries here are the cohort's own medians, and this page characterises situations — it doesn't recommend buying or selling anything. So the value of the map is knowing which quadrant a business sits in before a client asks what's supporting its multiple.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Where the Money Sits: Higher Ratings Pair with Faster Growth for 3 Names Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (9.8x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (4%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Premium Rating, Faster Growth Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 3 names The Honest Company, Inc. (HNST) · Waldencast plc (WALD) · Niagen Bioscience Inc (NAGE) The Honest Company, Inc. (HNST), Waldencast plc (WALD) and Niagen Bioscience Inc (NAGE) sit above the 9.8x sector middle and above the covered growth line. The forward rating already credits the forecast, so the work here is holding gross margin while distribution and advertising build. Premium Rating, Slower Growth Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 3 names Colgate-Palmolive Company (CL) · Haleon plc (HLN) · Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) Colgate-Palmolive Company (CL), Haleon plc (HLN) and Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) hold an above-middle rating on low single-digit revenue growth. Price/mix, payout coverage and category leadership are what that rating is argued on, and a heavier promotional cycle is what tests it. Growth Without the Rating Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 3 names Bausch + Lomb Corporation (BLCO) · Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH) · Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. (NATR) Bausch + Lomb Corporation (BLCO), Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH) and Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. (NATR) are growing faster than the covered middle without a rating to match. Replenishment cadence, repeat purchase and retention are the evidence that would narrow that gap. Below on Both Lines Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 3 names Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) · Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. (HLF) · LifeVantage Corporation (LFVN) Perrigo Company plc (PRGO), Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. (HLF) and LifeVantage Corporation (LFVN) sit below the middle on both lines. Mix, SKU productivity and the cost of holding distribution are where the argument starts for these three.

11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    The Growth Half of the Grid Holds the Higher Ratings

    This slide plots revenue growth against EBITDA margin for the companies with both estimates and shows the median multiple per quadrant.

    Plotting growth against margin, cut at the covered set's own medians, shows the higher ratings clustering in the growth half of the grid rather than the margin half. The quadrant medians are drawn from a small number of names in each cell, so we'd treat this as directional rather than a precise read on any single company. So the takeaway is that growth has been carrying more of the valuation story in this set than margin alone.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY The Growth Half of the Grid Holds the Higher Ratings Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2026E, y-axis) · 12 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (4% growth, 16% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/EBITDA (balanced n=2; margin-only n=4; growth-only n=4; neither n=2). Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 0% 5% 10% 15% 10% 20% 30% MARGIN ONLY median 10.9x BALANCED median 8.1x NEITHER median 5.3x GROWTH ONLY median 12.6x LFVN PRGO KMB HLF CL HLN HNST NATR BLCO WALD PBH NAGE x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2026E) HOW TO READ THIS Read the grid on two lines: 4% revenue growth across, 16% margin up the side. The 4 names above the growth line and below the margin line are carried at 12.6x, and the 4 above the margin line and below the growth line at 10.9x. The 2 names clearing both bars, Bausch + Lomb Corporation (BLCO) and Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. (PBH), sit at 8.1x, and the 2 clearing neither at 5.3x — on 12 names, so treat the two-name cells as indicative. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 1 of 12 names clear it (PBH).

12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    Which Tier a Personal Care Business Trades in Is Associated with Four Decisions Owners Control

    This slide frames four decisions that are associated with which valuation tier a personal care business trades in.

    Which tier a business sits in is associated with four decisions its owners actually control — this page turns the cohort data from earlier pages into the questions worth resolving internally. It's framed as an agenda, not a scorecard: observations to work through, not a verdict on any single name. So we'd use this page as the bridge from what the data shows to what a management team does about it.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA Which Tier a Personal Care Business Trades in Is Associated with Four Decisions Owners Control NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Decide Whether Price/mix or Volume Carries the Next Plan The names at the upper end of this set are argued on realised price and mix holding up, not on units. Settle internally which one the plan depends on, and what advertising level the answer requires, before the next category review fixes the facings. What changes the answer: Price realisation holding through a heavier promotional quarter without volume forfeiture. Test Whether the Brands Under One Roof Actually Share Plants and Advertising Portfolio coherence is a capital allocation question: which brands earn advertising support, which absorb plant capacity without earning facings, and which formats justify the changeover cost. The answer shapes where the cash goes next year. What changes the answer: A brand failing to hold ACV distribution while still consuming advertising and plant time. Prove Channel Travel Before the Rating Is Asked to Credit It Brands built in direct selling, professional or direct-to-consumer channels face the same question when they move to mass: does gross margin survive trade spend and does the claim survive the new label. The 3 nutrition and meal-replacement names in this set sit at the bottom tier while that question is open. What changes the answer: Sales per point of distribution rising in mass while gross margin after trade spend holds. Choose How Much Regulated Claim Burden the Portfolio Should Carry The monograph versus cosmetic claim boundary sets the clinical, labelling and adverse-event burden attached to each SKU. Carrying more of it costs money and buys a trust asset; carrying less keeps launches cheap and leaves the price gap easier for private label to close. What changes the answer: An ingredient restriction or reformulation cycle landing in a principal market.

13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    Section divider introducing the detailed precedent transaction case studies.

    Strategics in this set have been paying mid-teens multiples; a sponsor buyer paid on cash earnings instead — the next pages walk through what each recorded transaction was actually valued on.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Strategics Have Been Paying Mid-Teens; A Sponsor Paid for Cash Earnings What the 9 recorded transactions on this page were valued at, and what each one benchmarks. 04 of 06 Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Mid-Teens for Brands with Claims and Distribution; Cash-Earnings Prices for Cost Structure

    This slide walks through select precedent transactions, contrasting a claims-led brand deal with a cost-led brand deal.

    Henkel's completed purchase of Olaplex closed at 16.2x forward EBITDA — a claims-led brand landing inside a much larger distribution network. Two months later, Oaktree's announced purchase of Spectrum Brands landed at 7.8x, a cash-generative, cost-led portfolio priced toward the bottom of the range. These multiples are struck on LTM financials at announcement, so we're not claiming a direct spread against the CY2027E public-market basis shown earlier — but the gap between them tracks the same claims-versus-cost distinction we've seen throughout this deck. So the practical read for any seller is which side of that line its business actually sits on before a process starts.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Mid-Teens for Brands with Claims and Distribution; Cash-Earnings Prices for Cost Structure 3 of 25 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 53 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 21 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 May-2026 $2.7B Oaktree Capital Management L.P. Oaktree Capital Management L.P. takes Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. at a cash-earnings price. EV / LTM revenue 0.9x EV / LTM EBITDA 7.8x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED A sponsor buying a multi-category consumables portfolio is buying cash earnings, plant absorption and a cost line it believes can be run tighter. The transaction suggests the underwriting sat on normalised EBITDA and cost structure rather than on the growth of any single brand. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Recorded at $2.7B and 7.8x EBITDA. That sits below the middle of the traded range in this peer set, which is where portfolios argued on cost rather than on price realisation have been landing. Mar-2026 $1.4B Henkel US Operations Corp Henkel US Operations Corp buys Olaplex Holdings, Inc. and pays for the claim, not the shelf space. EV / LTM revenue 3.4x EV / LTM EBITDA 16.2x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Henkel US Operations Corp is a global brand owner with mass and professional distribution; Olaplex Holdings, Inc. is a claims-led hair brand built in the salon channel. The transaction suggests the buyer was paying for a formulation story and professional endorsement it could carry onto more shelves. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Recorded at $1.4B and 3.4x revenue. A revenue multiple at that level only reads as sensible next to a gross margin structure wide enough to fund sustained advertising, which is the test buyers apply to emerging prestige brands. Jun-2025 $3.4B Suzano S.A. acquires International Family Care and Professional (IFP) Business EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED When a brand changes hands in this sector, the buyer is typically a strategic with shelf access and plants, or a sponsor assembling adjacent self-care brands. The fit question is the same either way: whether formulations, registrations, trademarks and co-manufacturer relationships transfer cleanly to the new owner. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Pricing convention in this sector is a multiple of normalised, standalone EBITDA, struck after trade deductions, returns reserves and the advertising level a buyer believes is needed to hold share. Carve-out structures then carry an explicit dis-synergy schedule for plant absorption and sales coverage.

15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    Section divider introducing the strategic implications for owners, boards and acquirers.

    The moves that change where a business sits in this range differ by seat — the next page splits what the evidence means for owners, boards and acquirers.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS The Moves That Change Where a Business Sits in This Range What the evidence means for owners, boards and acquirers in this sector. 05 of 06 Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    The Same Range Points Owners, Boards and Acquirers Toward Different Moves

    This slide sets out separate implications for owners, boards and acquirers based on the valuation evidence.

    For owners, the practical work is protecting price/mix and keeping advertising funded at the level share requires. For boards, capital allocation decides which brands keep earning that advertising support and which are absorbing capacity without earning facings. For acquirers, normalised EBITDA — after trade deductions, returns reserves and required advertising — is where the real negotiation happens, more than the headline multiple. So each seat in the room has a different next step, even though they're reading the same range.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS The Same Range Points Owners, Boards and Acquirers Toward Different Moves NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Revenue Quality Is the Line This Range Is Argued On Across the 12 companies with a forward estimate, the names at the upper end sell on claims, professional endorsement and habitual replenishment. The practical work is protecting price/mix through the next reset, holding gross margin after trade spend, and keeping advertising funded at the level share requires. FOR BOARDS Capital Allocation Decides Which Brands Keep Advertising Support Where a portfolio genuinely shares plants, sales coverage and advertising efficiency, comparable businesses in this set are carried in the upper band. Where a brand absorbs capacity without earning facings, that capital has a better use inside the same company. FOR ACQUIRERS Normalised EBITDA Is Where the Negotiation Actually Happens The transactions recorded here run on cash earnings struck after trade deductions, returns reserves and the advertising a buyer believes is needed to hold share. Work on net revenue realisation, retailer concentration and co-manufacturer dependency is what separates a mid-teens price from a cash-earnings price.

17. 17
    SECTION 06

    06

    Section divider introducing the appendix: full comparables, precedent transactions and methodology.

    Everything behind the figures in this deck lives here — the full comparables universe, every recorded transaction, and the methodology and sources that back each number.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    This appendix table lists the companies in the universe with their EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) multiples, grouped by valuation tier.

    This table carries the full universe, with the rated names shaded against the 9.8x sector median and the unrated names listed separately. Every ticker links back to its underlying disclosure, so any figure in this deck can be traced to its source. So this page is the reference point for a client who wants to check a specific name against the sector picture we've drawn.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (9.8x); amber marks below · 12 rated companies; 3 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 12 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥12.2x · median 14.2x · 3 companies The Honest Company, Inc. HNST Mass-market personal care portfolios $515M 20.0x 4% 8% 12 Colgate-Palmolive Company CL Mass-market personal care portfolios $76.2B 14.2x 3% 24% 27 Waldencast plc WALD Mass-market personal care portfolios $362M 14.1x 11% 7% 20 CORE — 6.8x–12.2x · median 9.8x · 6 companies Haleon plc HLN Store-brand and private-label self-care $50.9B 11.6x 4% 27% 32 Niagen Bioscience Inc NAGE Adjacent: prescription dermatology therapeutics $173M 11.2x 16% 8% 26 Kimberly-Clark Corporation KMB Mass-market personal care portfolios $39.5B 10.3x 3% 22% 25 Bausch + Lomb Corporation BLCO Eye and lens care consumables $10.9B 9.3x 6% 19% 26 Perrigo Company plc PRGO Store-brand and private-label self-care $5.5B 7.4x 1% 18% 19 Prestige Consumer Healthcare Inc. PBH Consumer self-care and over-the-counter remedies $3.2B 6.9x 12% 33% 46 DISCOUNT — <6.8x · median 4.0x · 3 companies LifeVantage Corporation LFVN Adjacent: nutrition and meal-replacement products $76M 6.6x 0% 6% 6 Herbalife Nutrition Ltd. HLF Adjacent: nutrition and meal-replacement products $3.0B 4.0x 3% 13% 17 Nature's Sunshine Products, Inc. NATR Adjacent: nutrition and meal-replacement products $160M 2.9x 5% 10% 15

19. 19
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This appendix page lists precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first, continued across two pages.

    This page lists the recorded transactions with disclosed terms, newest first, with deal multiples struck on LTM financials at announcement. Those multiples sit on a different basis than the CY2027E public-market figures used elsewhere in this deck, so we're not claiming a spread between the two. So we'd treat this list as the deal-market reference point, to be read alongside the public comparables rather than against them directly.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 25 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (46 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 53 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 21 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 25 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters May-2026 Oaktree Capital Management L.P. → Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. $2.7B 0.9x 7.8x Oaktree Capital Management L.P. announced Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. in May 2026 at $2.7B, recorded at 0.9x revenue. A revenue multiple below one on a multi-category consumables portfolio points at a price struck on earnings and cost absorption rather than on… Mar-2026 Henkel US Operations Corp → Olaplex Holdings, Inc. $1.4B 3.4x 16.2x Henkel US Operations Corp completed Olaplex Holdings, Inc. in March 2026 at 16.2x EBITDA. A professional-channel hair brand landing inside a global portfolio with mass and salon access is the clearest paid-up mark in this record. Nov-2025 n/a → The Clorox Company n/a n/a 12.3x The Clorox Company was recorded in November 2025 at 12.3x EBITDA. It is a reference for diversified portfolios where scale and retailer mandates carry the earnings. Nov-2025 n/a → The Procter & Gamble Company n/a n/a 14.0x The Procter & Gamble Company was recorded in November 2025 at 14.0x EBITDA. It marks where the largest diversified portfolios sit against the smaller brand platforms in this peer set. Nov-2025 n/a → Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC n/a n/a 12.6x Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC was recorded in November 2025 at 12.6x EBITDA. Health and hygiene portfolios with regulated claims cluster in this band rather than at the bottom of it. Nov-2025 n/a → Colgate-Palmolive Company n/a n/a 13.5x Colgate-Palmolive Company was recorded in November 2025 at 13.5x EBITDA. Dental and professional endorsement is part of what that band of pricing is argued on. Nov-2025 n/a → Haleon plc n/a n/a 13.6x Haleon plc was recorded in November 2025 at 13.6x EBITDA. The mark sits above where the same company trades in this peer set on forward earnings, which is worth holding in mind when benchmarking. Nov-2025 n/a → Church & Dwight Co., Inc. n/a n/a 15.5x Church & Dwight Co., Inc. was recorded in November 2025 at 15.5x EBITDA. Portfolios built on habitual replenishment and steady price realisation sit at the upper end of this record. Nov-2025 n/a → Colgate-Palmolive Company n/a n/a 13.5x A second recorded mark on Colgate-Palmolive Company from the same November 2025 window sits at the same level as the first. Repeat marks on one name tighten the benchmark rather than widen it.

20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This appendix page continues the list of precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first.

    This page continues the same transaction list, carrying the remaining recorded deals with disclosed terms through to the end of the set. Deal values link back to the underlying filing for any client who wants to verify a specific transaction. So together with the prior page, this gives the complete disclosed-terms record behind the deal commentary earlier in the deck.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 25 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (46 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 53 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 21 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 25 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Nov-2025 n/a → Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC n/a n/a 12.6x Value shown as recorded in the filing; status defaulted announced. Nov-2025 n/a → The Clorox Company n/a n/a 12.3x Value shown as recorded in the filing; status defaulted announced. Nov-2025 n/a → The Procter & Gamble Company n/a n/a 15.8x Value shown as recorded in the filing; status defaulted announced. Jul-2025 Church & Dwight Co., Inc. → Touchland n/a n/a 12.7x Jun-2025 Suzano S.A. → International Family Care and Professional (IFP) Business $3.4B n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Feb-2024 Compass Group Diversified Holdings LLC → The Honey Pot Company Holdings, LLC $380M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Aug-2023 e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. → Naturium n/a n/a 21.0x Nov-2021 Waldencast Acquisition Corp. → Obagi Global Holdings Limited and Milk Makeup LLC n/a n/a 17.2x Apr-2021 Nestlé S.A. → The Bountiful Company (core brands) n/a n/a 16.8x

21. 21
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    This slide documents the sources, valuation basis and data-quality exclusions behind the report.

    Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from, and where a link isn't available, the appendix names the source and the basis on which it was read. The valuation basis throughout is EV/EBITDA on CY2027E consensus, applied only to the names that pass the plausibility checks — multiples that don't clear that bar are excluded rather than shown. So this page is where a client should start if they want to understand exactly what stands behind any number in this deck.

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 21 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (12 of 15 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Personal Care Products and it clears the coverage gate with 12 of 15 companies (80%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 12 of the 12 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 17 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 763 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (762) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

22. 22

    In This Set, the Higher Ratings Sit with Proven Price/mix and Habitual Replenishment.

    Closing slide restates that higher ratings in this set sit with proven price/mix and habitual replenishment.

    In this set, the higher ratings sit with proven price/mix and habitual replenishment. The companion tables alongside this deck carry the full universe and source index for any figure a client wants to trace further.

    Everything on this page

    In This Set, the Higher Ratings Sit with Proven Price/mix and Habitual Replenishment. NeuraCap AI — Personal Care Products Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Personal Care Products Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 22

More coverage in Consumer Staples

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Personal Care Products Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Packaged Foods and Meats Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Non-Alcoholic Beverages Sector Outlook — September 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Packaged Foods and Meats Sector Outlook — September 2026