Unilever’s bottom line profit has been growing on a steady pace, while Reckitt’s

one was affected by the one-off loss from the sale of IFCN China in 2021

Dynamics Comments
Competition from other premium brands and private labels as well
as Covid-19 crisis have dented both companies’ revenue growth in
the last few years.

The major challenge of 2021 for Unilever was the significant

52.0 52.4 rise of input costs as demonstrated by its increased COGS.
50.7
15.2 15.7 15.7 The company responded with pricing actions, delivering underlying
29.1 28.7 30.3
6.2 6.6 price growth of 2.9%.
6.0
6.0 6.1 6.6 (0.0)
1.3
2019 2020 2021 2019 2020 2021 Reckitt’s profitability metrics in 2021 were affected by the one-
(4.3)
off loss of EUR 3.8bn from the sale of IFCN China. However,
Turnover, EUR bn COGS, EUR bn Net Profit, EUR bn Turnover, EUR bn COGS, EUR bn Net Profit, EUR bn excluding IFCN China loss, Reckitt would have reported a Net
Profit of EUR 3.2bn. Unilever’s bottom line profit has been growing
on a steady pace.
EBITDA Margin SG&A Margin Reckitt’s performance issues in 2019 was mainly related to
low revenue growth (operating margins have remained stable)
and was caused by increased competition and under-investment in
capabilities across supply, product innovation and sales.

In terms of EBITDA Margin, Reckitt has been on track of

26.2% 28.5% 28.6% outperforming Unilever (excluding IFCN China effect, its EBITDA
21.0% 21.0% 20.7% Margin would have been 32.8%), demonstrating high operational
13.6% 24.9% 25.0%
efficiency.
24.0% 23.9%
3.6%
SG&A Margins for Unilever has been improving, thanks to the recent
2019 2020 2021
2019 2020 2021 investments in innovation and efficiency, while Reckitt’s ratio has
Unilever Reckitt Unilever Reckitt increased in 2020-2021 mainly due to increase in employee expenses.