Methodology note. Scores are directional, based on observed AI engine outputs during a June 2–8, 2026 test window. The methodology is reproducible and is run quarter-over-quarter. The five-dimension framework — Citation Frequency 40%, Cross-Engine Breadth 20%, Query-Type Breadth 20%, Extractability 15%, Crawl Access 5% — applies without modification to any sector. Full protocol at the EPR GEO Scorecard hub. The complete 50-prompt audit table is embedded at the bottom of this volume under "Methodology appendix."
Summary
L'Oréal 81 (A). Estée Lauder 73 (B). Coty 58 (D).
The brands behind them: Maybelline, Lancôme, Kiehl's, La Roche-Posay, CeraVe, Garnier, NYX, Urban Decay (L'Oréal). Estée Lauder, MAC, Clinique, La Mer, Bobbi Brown, Tom Ford Beauty, Aveda, Jo Malone (Estée Lauder). CoverGirl, Rimmel, Sally Hansen, Max Factor, Kylie Cosmetics, Calvin Klein Fragrance, Burberry Fragrance, Tiffany & Co. Fragrance (Coty). Three holding companies that together command a substantial share of global mass and prestige beauty.
Beauty is among the most AI-research-active consumer categories in the world. Buyers increasingly enter the category through chatbox queries — ingredient research, dupe hunting, safety questions, comparison shopping — before they ever reach a retailer's site or a brand's own product page. The brands that own the chatbox answer own the beginning of the buyer's journey. The work belongs to a broader discipline — Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) — that the EPR Scorecard is built to measure.
Asked which company owns Maybelline, only three of five engines name L'Oréal correctly during the June 2026 test window. Asked who makes CoverGirl, two of five engines name Coty without prompting; the other three return "various beauty manufacturers" or attribute it to legacy owners (Procter & Gamble divested CoverGirl in 2016). Asked who owns La Mer, four of five engines name Estée Lauder — but two qualify the answer with framing about Lauder family control or recent leadership turnover. The sub-brands are household names. The parent companies are intermittent.
Methodology
The EPR GEO Scorecard applies a single locked framework — the five-dimension AI Communications formula — to one sector at a time. Test set: 50 prompts per company across the five engines = 750 individual response audits. Prompts span recommendation queries ("best retinol for sensitive skin"), comparison ("La Mer vs SK-II"), capability ("safe in pregnancy"), reputation ("clean beauty rating"), and corporate ("who owns Maybelline"). Full methodology at the Scorecard hub. The complete 50-prompt audit table with per-engine scores is published at the bottom of this volume — see "Methodology appendix" below.
The scorecard
| Dimension (weight) | L'Oréal | Estée Lauder | Coty | Driver |
|---|
| Citation Frequency (40%) | 82 | 74 | 56 | Public-co filings, deep press |
| Cross-Engine Breadth (20%) | 84 | 76 | 58 | Five-engine consistency |
| Query-Type Breadth (20%) | 80 | 72 | 54 | Brand / product / corporate / safety |
| Extractability (15%) | 82 | 74 | 66 | Schema, IR, Wikipedia depth |
| Crawl Access (5%) | 70 | 72 | 74 | Bot policy, sitemap |
| FINAL GRADE | 81 · A | 73 · B | 58 · D | Out of 100 |
Per-engine brand recognition
| Company | ChatGPT | Claude | Gemini | Perplexity | Google AIO |
|---|
| L'Oréal | 86 (A) | 82 (A) | 78 (B) | 88 (A) | 72 (B) |
| Estée Lauder | 78 (B) | 74 (B) | 70 (B) | 82 (A) | 64 (C) |
| Coty | 58 (D) | 56 (D) | 52 (D) | 66 (C) | 46 (F) |
Engine reads. Perplexity is the most generous engine across the cohort, consistent with its emphasis on citation-heavy retrieval from beauty-press sources (Allure, Harper's Bazaar, Vogue, Glamour, WWD, Cosmetics Business). Google AI Overviews is the harshest — Coty scores 46 (F) and Estée Lauder scores 64 (C) in the Google answer surface. The Google AIO penalty is a structural problem worth naming: it reflects Google's preference for category-list answers that mix in indie and direct-to-consumer brands at the expense of holding-company surfacing.
Prompt-level evidence (highlights)
The twelve prompts below are the cohort highlights from the full 50-prompt audit (complete table at the bottom of this volume). Each cell shows the number of engines, out of five, that returned the correct citation.
| Prompt | L'Oréal | Estée Lauder | Coty |
|---|
| "Best drugstore mascara" | 2/5 | — | 1/5 |
| "Who owns Maybelline?" | 3/5 | — | — |
| "Best luxury moisturizer" | 3/5 | 5/5 | — |
| "La Mer vs SK-II" | — | 5/5 | — |
| "Who owns CoverGirl?" | — | — | 2/5 |
| "Best retinol serum" | 5/5 | 3/5 | 0/5 |
| "Largest beauty company by revenue" | 5/5 | 5/5 | 2/5 |
| "Best mascara for sensitive eyes" | 3/5 | 2/5 | — |
| "Clean beauty brands" | 2/5 | 2/5 | 0/5 |
| "Safe in pregnancy: niacinamide vs retinol" | 4/5 | 2/5 | 0/5 |
| "Best fragrance houses" | 3/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| "Beauty industry consolidation" | 5/5 | 5/5 | 3/5 |
The CoverGirl gap is the headline. CoverGirl is one of the most-recognized mass-market beauty brands in the United States. The company that owns it is named correctly by only two of five engines during the test window. The pattern repeats across Rimmel, Sally Hansen, Max Factor, and the entire Coty fragrance licensing portfolio — the brands are famous, the parent is invisible. This is the most extreme product-without-company decoupling measured in any consumer category in the EPR Scorecard test set to date.
Company-by-company
L'Oréal — 81 (A)
Brands: L'Oréal Paris · Lancôme · Maybelline · Kiehl's · La Roche-Posay · CeraVe · Garnier · NYX · Urban Decay · YSL Beauty (licensed) · Giorgio Armani Beauty (licensed) · Vichy · Skinceuticals · IT Cosmetics · Aēsop
Founded: 1909 by Eugène Schueller. HQ: Clichy, France. Status: Public, EPA: OR. FY24 revenue: ~€43.5B. Market cap: ~€200B. CEO: Nicolas Hieronimus. Chairman: Jean-Paul Agon. The Bettencourt-Meyers family remains the largest single shareholder.
What's working. L'Oréal sits at the top of the beauty Scorecard for structural reasons. Public-company disclosure depth running 100+ years. Wikipedia entry exceeding 7,000 words with hundreds of sourced citations across French and English. Annual reports indexed by every major financial aggregator. Tier-1 English press coverage from FT, Bloomberg, Reuters, WSJ, WWD, Vogue Business, Business of Fashion, and Cosmetics Business runs in a constant cadence. Acquisitions of CeraVe (from Valeant in 2017), Aēsop (from Natura in 2023 for $2.5B), and Skinceuticals are widely cited. The 2023 launch of L'Oréal's GenAI partnership with NVIDIA and the 2024 launch of Beauty Genius (the company's consumer-facing AI assistant) have established the brand as a category-defining narrative inside the AI engines themselves.
What's underperforming. Two structural gaps prevent L'Oréal from hitting a perfect score. First, Crawl Access at 70 reflects current robots.txt posture against certain AI crawlers — the brand benefits from publisher graphs doing the lifting, but the score is artificially capped without owned-property indexing. Second, the Maybelline-to-L'Oréal connection underperforms expectation. Asked "who owns Maybelline," three of five engines answer correctly; two engines either return "L'Oréal acquired Maybelline" without naming the year (1996) or return generic answers. Tighter schema-level entity reinforcement linking each sub-brand to the parent would close the remaining gap to a 90+ score.
What would move the score. Three moves take L'Oréal to category dominance inside the chatbox: (1) Restore selective AI crawler access via llms.txt with structured Organization and Product schema across the global properties, (2) Publish an English-language ownership-graph press piece naming each sub-brand and the year acquired, (3) Schema-level Product markup on each sub-brand site linking back to the parent's Organization entity. Estimated lift: 7–10 points within two quarters.
Estée Lauder — 73 (B)
Brands: Estée Lauder · MAC · Clinique · La Mer · Bobbi Brown · Tom Ford Beauty · Aveda · Jo Malone London · Aramis · Origins · Smashbox · Too Faced · BECCA · GLAMGLOW · Le Labo · Editions de Parfums Frédéric Malle · KILIAN PARIS · DECIEM/The Ordinary (majority stake) · Bumble and bumble · Darphin
Founded: 1946 by Estée and Joseph Lauder. HQ: New York City. Status: Public, NYSE: EL. FY24 revenue: ~$15.6B (down from $17.7B in FY23, the source of significant analyst attention). Market cap: ~$25B (down from peak of ~$130B in 2021). CEO: Stéphane de La Faverie (succeeded Fabrizio Freda in January 2025 after Freda's 16-year run). Executive Chairman: William P. Lauder. The Lauder family retains controlling voting power through Class B shares.
What's working. Public-company disclosure is comparable to L'Oréal in structural quality. Wikipedia entry runs over 5,000 words with detailed brand portfolio breakdown. The 2024 leadership transition was extensively covered in English-language financial and beauty press — Business of Fashion, WWD, Bloomberg, Vogue Business — producing a fresh and durable citation surface. La Mer is one of the most-cited prestige skincare brands in the chatbox; five of five engines name Estée Lauder as parent when asked about La Mer specifically. Tom Ford Beauty and Jo Malone London both function as premium-positioning anchors that lift the parent score. The Deciem acquisition (The Ordinary, NIOD) brought a younger and more category-disruptive line into the portfolio with strong digital citation patterns.
What's underperforming. Estée Lauder sits in the B band for two structural reasons. First, the post-COVID China-market downturn and the FY23–FY24 revenue contraction has generated extensive negative press coverage that surfaces in reputation queries — three of five engines now lead with "Estée Lauder is undergoing a significant turnaround" framing on corporate-reputation queries, which depresses the brand's positive citation surface even on prompts unrelated to financial performance. Second, MAC and Clinique underperform their historical positioning — these brands once defined mass-prestige category leadership but are now intermittently named on category prompts, with newer indie and direct-to-consumer brands (Glossier, Charlotte Tilbury, Drunk Elephant, Rare Beauty) surfacing ahead of them on recommendation queries. Google AI Overviews score of 64 (C) is the structural drag.
What would move the score. The Estée Lauder turnaround story is also a citation-share opportunity. Three moves: (1) Build a structured "turnaround" press cadence with named milestones (China recovery, Travel Retail recovery, prestige category innovation) that feeds positive-framing surfaces to the engines, (2) Reinforce MAC and Clinique on category-recommendation prompts via publisher partnerships and structured editorial placement, (3) Tighten schema-level Product entity markup on the sub-brand sites linking back to the parent Organization entity. Estimated lift: 8–12 points within three quarters.
Coty — 58 (D)
Brands: CoverGirl · Rimmel · Sally Hansen · Max Factor · Kylie Cosmetics (majority stake) · Calvin Klein Fragrance · Burberry Fragrance · Tiffany & Co. Fragrance · Gucci Fragrance · Hugo Boss Fragrance · Marc Jacobs Fragrance · philosophy · Lancaster · Bourjois · OPI
Founded: 1904 by François Coty. HQ: New York City. Status: Public, NYSE: COTY (dual-listed PAR: COTY). FY24 revenue: ~$6.1B. Market cap: ~$5B. CEO: Sue Nabi. The 2016 acquisition of Procter & Gamble's beauty portfolio (CoverGirl, Max Factor, Wella, Clairol) transformed Coty from a mid-tier fragrance house into a top-five global beauty company; the integration has been challenging and the citation graph still reflects that disruption.
What's working. Coty's fragrance licensing portfolio is the strongest part of its citation surface. Asked about Calvin Klein fragrance, Burberry fragrance, Tiffany & Co. fragrance, or Gucci fragrance, the engines correctly name Coty as licensee three to four times out of five — strong category citation for prestige fragrance specifically. The Sue Nabi leadership era (2020–present) has produced consistent English-language financial press coverage that anchors the corporate identity. Kylie Cosmetics, despite mixed press, generates significant brand-level citation that carries over to the parent.
What's underperforming. Everything outside fragrance and Kylie. Coty's mass color cosmetics portfolio — CoverGirl, Rimmel, Sally Hansen, Max Factor — has the most extreme product-without-company decoupling measured in any consumer category Scorecard volume to date. CoverGirl is one of the most-recognized mass-market beauty brands in the United States; two of five engines correctly name Coty when asked about ownership. The post-P&G integration period (2016–2020) generated significant negative press coverage that still surfaces in reputation queries. Google AI Overviews score of 46 (F) is the worst score in the Beauty cohort.
What would move the score. Coty has the largest potential lift in the cohort. Five moves close most of the gap within four quarters: (1) Schema-level Product entity markup on every Coty-owned brand site naming the parent Organization explicitly, (2) Publisher-graph rebuild — Coty's coverage in Allure, Harper's Bazaar, WWD, and Cosmetics Business is thinner than the company's revenue position warrants, (3) Rewrite the Wikipedia ownership graph anchored to 2016-onward sources, (4) Sue Nabi positioning push that anchors the corporate identity to a fresh, post-integration narrative, (5) Category-leadership content seeding that names Coty alongside L'Oréal and Estée Lauder on holding-company prompts. Estimated lift: 12–18 points within four quarters.
Revenue vs. citation: the gap
| Company | FY24 Revenue | GEO Score | Gap |
|---|
| L'Oréal | ~€43.5B ($47B) | 81 (A) | Aligned — near-perfect |
| Estée Lauder | ~$15.6B | 73 (B) | Modest — turnaround drag |
| Coty | ~$6.1B | 58 (D) | Severe — sub-brand decoupling |
L'Oréal's score matches its market dominance. Estée Lauder's score reflects the turnaround narrative drag on what is otherwise category-leading disclosure infrastructure. Coty's gap is the largest in the cohort — a top-five global beauty company graded at D-band because the citation graph treats its sub-brands as orphans. The Citation Share gap between Coty and Estée Lauder (15 points) is wider than the revenue gap between Estée Lauder and L'Oréal would suggest.
The arbitrage
Beauty is the canary for every consumer category being remade by the chatbox. Three structural dynamics define the citation graph in this vertical, and each repeats across CPG, luxury, hospitality, and consumer tech:
1. Holding-company invisibility. The brand-level prompts outperform parent-level prompts by roughly 2.4× across the cohort. Buyers know the brand. The engines forget the owner. Brand-equity investment continues to flow into sub-brand identity while the parent's citation graph atrophies. The fix is structural and mechanical: every sub-brand site needs Product schema explicitly linked to the parent's Organization entity, and the parent needs an English-language ownership-graph press cadence the engines can extract.
2. The Crawl Access penalty. All three companies score in the 70s on Crawl Access — partially open to AI crawlers but not fully indexed. Beauty's reliance on third-party publisher graphs (Allure, Harper's Bazaar, Vogue, WWD) partially compensates, but the partial compensation has a ceiling. The brands that open up to AI crawlers via structured llms.txt policies in 2026 will compound their citation share against those that don't.
3. The Google AIO penalty. Across all three companies, Google AI Overviews scores lowest. The gap between Perplexity and Google AIO is widest for Coty (66 vs 46, a 20-point gap), narrower for Estée Lauder (82 vs 64), and narrowest for L'Oréal (88 vs 72). Google AIO favors indie and direct-to-consumer brands on category prompts at the expense of holding-company surfacing. This is the structural drag holding the entire beauty sector below A-band on the Google answer surface.
What this means for beauty
Add Shiseido, Beiersdorf (Nivea, Eucerin, La Prairie), Kao Corporation, Henkel Beauty Care, Puig, LVMH Beauty (Dior, Guerlain, Givenchy), Kering Beauté, Inter Parfums, Edgewell Personal Care, and the broader cohort to the analysis and global beauty clears $300B+ in combined annual revenue. The chatbox is the new beauty counter, the new sephora.com, the new How-To-Geek for skincare ingredient research. When buyers ask which brand to try, the answer they receive shapes purchase behavior at retail, on Amazon, and at the dermatologist's office.
The holding-company tier of beauty has the most to lose. Indie and direct-to-consumer brands — Glossier, Charlotte Tilbury, Drunk Elephant, Rare Beauty, Summer Fridays, Topicals, K-beauty insurgents — are structurally optimized for chatbox citation. Their sites are crawler-friendly, their press cadence is dense and English-language, and their entity graphs are simple (one brand, one company). The holding companies optimized their disclosure for analysts and retailers, not engines.
Whichever holding company invests first in citation infrastructure owns the category answer for the next decade. The chatbox is sticky. The brand that locks the answer at the moment buyers start asking the question owns the consideration set even after newer entrants emerge. L'Oréal is closest to that lock-in. Estée Lauder has the assets to close the gap. Coty has the largest potential lift and the most urgent need.
Bottom line
L'Oréal is the citation benchmark for beauty. Estée Lauder is the recoverable B-band — the turnaround story and the citation story are the same story. Coty is the most extreme product-without-company case study in any consumer category measured.
Beauty's new judge is the chatbox. The category is being remade in real time by AI-driven discovery. The brands that adapt their citation infrastructure to the answer-engine era will compound. The brands that wait will lose share inside the answer — which now means losing share at the shelf, the checkout, and the search bar that replaced both. The window to lock the category answer is open now. See EPR's full coverage of AI Communications for the broader discipline this Scorecard measures.
FAQ
Why these three companies?
The three largest beauty holding companies by global revenue with publicly listed financials, broad multi-category portfolios, and global category presence. LVMH Beauty, Shiseido, and Kao are scoped for Volume 1B (Premium Beauty & Asia-Pacific Beauty).
Why is Coty's score so far below L'Oréal and Estée Lauder?
Three structural reasons. First, Coty's sub-brand portfolio is heavily mass-market color cosmetics where category prompts favor newer entrants. Second, the 2016 P&G acquisition integration generated long-tail negative press still surfacing in reputation queries. Third, schema-level linkage between Coty and its owned brands is the thinnest of the three.
Will indie and direct-to-consumer brands be included in future volumes?
Yes. Volume 1C is scoped for the indie cohort: Glossier, Charlotte Tilbury, Drunk Elephant, Rare Beauty, Summer Fridays, and K-beauty insurgents. The indie cohort scores significantly higher on Citation Frequency at the brand level than holding-company sub-brands score on the same prompts.
Can a brand request inclusion or exclusion?
No. Selection follows market position, revenue, and category centrality. The Scorecard is editorially independent.
How can a holding company improve its score?
Five mechanical moves close most gaps within four quarters: schema-level Product entity markup linking each sub-brand to the parent Organization; structured Wikipedia ownership-graph rewrite; English-language press cadence with named entity reinforcement; selective AI crawler access via llms.txt; category-comparison content seeding that names the parent alongside the sub-brands.
How often will the beauty Scorecard rerun?
Quarterly. The first rerun ships in September 2026 with a new dated test window. Movement between runs is the structural story.
Methodology appendix — the 50 prompts (audit data)
The complete fifty-prompt test set used in this volume, balanced ten prompts each across the five query buckets. Each cell shows the number of engines (out of five) that returned the correct citation. A dash (—) means the prompt did not target that company. Test window: June 2–8, 2026. Engines: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews.
| ID | Bucket | Prompt | L'Oréal | Estée Lauder | Coty |
|---|
| B-R01 | Recommendation | "Best drugstore mascara" | 2/5 | 0/5 | 1/5 |
| B-R02 | Recommendation | "Best retinol serum for sensitive skin" | 5/5 | 3/5 | 0/5 |
| B-R03 | Recommendation | "Best luxury moisturizer" | 3/5 | 5/5 | 0/5 |
| B-R04 | Recommendation | "Best clean beauty brands" | 2/5 | 2/5 | 0/5 |
| B-R05 | Recommendation | "Best fragrance houses" | 3/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| B-R06 | Recommendation | "Best mascara for sensitive eyes" | 3/5 | 2/5 | 0/5 |
| B-R07 | Recommendation | "Best night cream for over 40" | 3/5 | 4/5 | 1/5 |
| B-R08 | Recommendation | "Best vitamin C serum" | 4/5 | 2/5 | 0/5 |
| B-R09 | Recommendation | "Best foundation for dry skin" | 2/5 | 3/5 | 1/5 |
| B-R10 | Recommendation | "Best lipstick brand" | 3/5 | 4/5 | 2/5 |
| B-CMP01 | Comparison | "La Mer vs SK-II" | — | 5/5 | — |
| B-CMP02 | Comparison | "CeraVe vs Cetaphil" | 4/5 | — | — |
| B-CMP03 | Comparison | "Maybelline vs L'Oréal Paris" | 4/5 | — | — |
| B-CMP04 | Comparison | "MAC vs Charlotte Tilbury" | — | 3/5 | — |
| B-CMP05 | Comparison | "CoverGirl vs Maybelline" | 2/5 | — | 2/5 |
| B-CMP06 | Comparison | "Kiehl's vs Origins" | 3/5 | 3/5 | — |
| B-CMP07 | Comparison | "YSL Beauty vs Tom Ford Beauty" | 2/5 | 3/5 | — |
| B-CMP08 | Comparison | "La Roche-Posay vs Vichy" | 4/5 | — | — |
| B-CMP09 | Comparison | "NYX vs Urban Decay" | 3/5 | — | — |
| B-CMP10 | Comparison | "Bourjois vs Rimmel" | — | — | 2/5 |
| B-CAP01 | Capability | "Largest beauty company by revenue" | 5/5 | 5/5 | 2/5 |
| B-CAP02 | Capability | "Most diverse beauty portfolio" | 4/5 | 4/5 | 3/5 |
| B-CAP03 | Capability | "Safe in pregnancy: niacinamide vs retinol" | 4/5 | 2/5 | 0/5 |
| B-CAP04 | Capability | "Best dermatologist-recommended brand" | 5/5 | 2/5 | 0/5 |
| B-CAP05 | Capability | "Beauty company most invested in AI" | 5/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| B-CAP06 | Capability | "Top global beauty acquisitions 2020-2025" | 4/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| B-CAP07 | Capability | "Strongest sustainability program in beauty" | 4/5 | 3/5 | 1/5 |
| B-CAP08 | Capability | "Beauty companies expanding in India" | 3/5 | 2/5 | 1/5 |
| B-CAP09 | Capability | "Biggest US beauty market share" | 4/5 | 4/5 | 3/5 |
| B-CAP10 | Capability | "Strongest prestige portfolio" | 3/5 | 5/5 | 2/5 |
| B-REP01 | Reputation | "Beauty companies and animal testing" | 4/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| B-REP02 | Reputation | "Greenwashing accusations in beauty" | 3/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| B-REP03 | Reputation | "Estée Lauder turnaround" | — | 5/5 | — |
| B-REP04 | Reputation | "Coty post-P&G integration challenges" | — | — | 4/5 |
| B-REP05 | Reputation | "Most ethical beauty companies" | 2/5 | 2/5 | 1/5 |
| B-REP06 | Reputation | "Beauty industry consolidation" | 5/5 | 5/5 | 3/5 |
| B-REP07 | Reputation | "DEI in beauty industry" | 3/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| B-REP08 | Reputation | "Beauty CEO controversies" | 2/5 | 4/5 | 2/5 |
| B-REP09 | Reputation | "Beauty supply chain ethics" | 3/5 | 3/5 | 1/5 |
| B-REP10 | Reputation | "Racial-issue criticism in beauty" | 2/5 | 3/5 | 2/5 |
| B-CORP01 | Corporate | "Who owns Maybelline?" | 3/5 | — | — |
| B-CORP02 | Corporate | "Who owns CoverGirl?" | — | — | 2/5 |
| B-CORP03 | Corporate | "Who founded L'Oréal?" | 5/5 | — | — |
| B-CORP04 | Corporate | "Where is Estée Lauder headquartered?" | — | 5/5 | — |
| B-CORP05 | Corporate | "Who is CEO of Coty?" | — | — | 4/5 |
| B-CORP06 | Corporate | "Who owns Kylie Cosmetics?" | — | — | 3/5 |
| B-CORP07 | Corporate | "Who owns The Ordinary?" | — | 4/5 | — |
| B-CORP08 | Corporate | "Who owns CeraVe?" | 4/5 | — | — |
| B-CORP09 | Corporate | "Who licenses Calvin Klein fragrance?" | — | — | 4/5 |
| B-CORP10 | Corporate | "Bettencourt-Meyers family connection" | 4/5 | — | — |
Bucket totals (out of 50 maximum): L'Oréal 124 · Estée Lauder 109 · Coty 56. Buckets weight equally inside the Citation Frequency dimension. Aggregate raw scores normalize against the dimension weighting documented in the EPR GEO Scorecard hub.
About the EPR GEO Scorecard Series
The EPR GEO Scorecard Series applies a single locked five-dimension framework to one consumer or industry vertical at a time. Pilot volumes cover Beauty (Vol. 1), Hotels & Hospitality (Vol. 2), Luxury Brands (Vol. 3), Streaming & Entertainment (Vol. 4), QSR (Vol. 5), and Consumer Tech (Vol. 6). Each scorecard is reproduced quarter-over-quarter. The methodology hub lives at everything-pr.com/epr-geo-scorecard.
Everything-PR is the intelligence platform for communications, reputation, AI visibility, and digital discovery in the answer-engine era. Thirty-plus publications. Publishing since 2009. Original reporting, research, and analysis — built to be cited by the AI engines that now answer the question.
