Striking gold: BHP overtakes Glencore as world’s most valuable Mining, Metals & Minerals brand

• BHP emerges as the most valuable Mining, Metals & Minerals brand in latest ranking
• Chinese brands, led by Jiangxi Copper, hit pay dirt with seven new entrants to dominate the rankings 
• Raw materials prices spark surge: Alcoa leads as fastest-growing sector brand
• Sustainability matters: Mining industry is under increasing pressure to adapt amidst the global energy transition

This year, more than half of the brands in the ranking of the world’s most valuable and strongest Mining, Metals & Minerals brands witnessed an increase in brand value, according to new data from Brand Finance, the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. This year, 11 brands from the US, China, and South Korea entered the ranking. 

Based on Brand Finance’s first-ever sector-specific research this year, 28 of 39 brands from the previous year’s ranking recorded increased brand value. BHP is now the world’s most valuable Mining, Metals & Minerals brand, following a 17% increase to a brand value of USD6.1 billion. The Australian brand reclaims the crown from Swiss brand Glencore (brand value down 1% to USD5.9 billion). BHP is also the world’s strongest brand in the sector, now rated AAA, attributed to improved perceptions of its strong leadership and commitment to corporate social responsibility and sustainability.

Despite a struggling economy, Chinese Mining, Metals & Minerals brands showed resilience. Newcomers like Chinalco (valued at USD1.4 billion) and CMOC (valued at USD1.3 billion) have bolstered China’s prevalence in the ranking, accounting for 11 out of 50 brands. Jiangxi Copper leads the Chinese entrants as the most valuable Chinese and fourth most valuable brand in the sector. Behind China, the US accounts for eight of the world’s top Mining, Metals & Minerals brands.

Higher raw metal prices, such as that for iron and aluminium, saw metals mining brands Alcoa, JSW Steel, and Ternium record the largest brand value gains among brands listed in the ranking. US brand Alcoa led the charge with a 127% increase to USD1 billion. Behind Alcoa, India’s JSW Steel came in second (brand value up 77% to USD1.1 billion), followed by Mexico’s Ternium (brand value up 55% to USD714 million). 

Savio D’Souza, Valuation Director at Brand Finance, commented: 

“Amidst the global energy transition and prioritisation to secure critical mineral supplies, the mining industry plays an increasingly important role in the shift to cleaner energy sources. Mining brands are poised for a promising future as they build resilience through their commitment to sustainability and continue to meet the changing needs of stakeholders.” 

Brand Finance also utilises its Global Brand Equity Monitor (GBEM) research to compile a Sustainability Perceptions Index which determines the role of sustainability in driving brand consideration across sectors. In the mining sector, sustainability drives 8.3% of customer consideration. Brand Finance’s perceptual data also offers insight into which brands global consumers believe to be most committed to sustainability. 

The Index displays the proportion of brand value attributable to sustainability perceptions for individual brands. This Sustainability Perceptions Value (SPV) is the financial value contingent on a brand’s reputation for acting sustainably. From here, Brand Finance’s perceptual research is analysed alongside CSRHub’s ESG performance data to determine a brand’s ‘gap value’. This is the value at risk, or value to be gained, arising from the difference between sustainability perceptions and actual performance. 

As sustainability concerns continue, the mining sector faces escalating pressure to adapt to the global energy transition. The 2024 Sustainability Perceptions Index finds that in the mining sector, South Korean brand Posco has the highest SPV of USD513 million, while BHP has the second highest SPV at USD500 million. Posco’s perceptual and performance scores on sustainability were above the mining sector average across all ESG dimensions. In addressing this, Posco announced last year its new vision, “Better World with Green Steel”, that embodies its 2050 carbon neutrality goal, with plans to finalise the commercialisation of its hydrogen reduction steel technology by 2030. Similarly, BHP commands high sustainability perceptions due to its ambitious emissions reduction targets, commitment to achieving net-zero operational emissions by 2050, and substantial investments in cleaner technologies, demonstrating its dedication to addressing global climate change.

Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance for more than 25 years, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organizations of all kinds make strategic decisions.

Headquartered in London, Brand Finance has offices in over 20 countries, offering services on all continents. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 5,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.

Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on over 5,000 brands, surveying more than 150,000 respondents across 38 countries and 31 industry sectors. Combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database enables Brand Finance to arm brand leaders with the data and analytics they need to enhance brand and business value.

Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm, leading the standardization of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.

Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.

Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.

Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.

Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.

The steps in this process are as follows:

1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.

2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.

3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.

4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.

5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.

6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.

7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.

Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.

The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance’s proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.