Why Cheap Toilet Paper Sets Off Alarm Bells Among Some Investors

Sellers of everyday consumer goods are experiencing a growing divide in their customer base between the more and less affluent. How they respond depends in part on where their products sit in the pecking order.

Both packaged-food companies and makers of household goods such as cleansers and paper towels are describing a bifurcation whereby higher-income consumers are spending freely, but those with lower incomes are feeling increasingly pinched by the cumulative impact of years of inflation.

“I think there’s certainly been much more bifurcation of the market, and it’s been creeping up over time. I wouldn’t say it’s been a sudden change,” Bank of America analyst Anna Lizzul said in an interview. Companies that are more exposed to low-income consumers “have mentioned the word bifurcation many times over the last 12 months,” she added.

Yet things appear to have come to a head recently. For food companies in particular, discounts and promotions are now back on the table after years of price increases—a significant concern for their investors. General Mills , during its latest quarterly earnings conference call, said it would step up coupon offerings in the current fiscal year and described the intensity of promotions in the industry as back to pre-Covid levels. The company’s stock fell 4.8% in response.

But for those targeting better-off households, the imperative is to keep investing and innovating to continuously improve their products, justifying still-higher prices in a process referred to as premiumisation.

This has long been the strategy of Procter & Gamble , which tends to occupy the premium tier of the categories in which it operates, from Gillette razors to Bounty paper towels. “The consumer within our categories, the consumer that represents our consumption base is actually holding up very well,” P&G Chief Financial Officer Andre Schulten said at an investor conference in June.

Most consumer-staples companies, however, have products targeting various income levels. General Mills, for instance, boasts organic Annie’s mac and cheese and high-end Blue Buffalo pet food among its brands. Kimberly-Clark competes with P&G at the high end in many categories, while also offering value-tier brands such as Scott toilet paper and paper towels.

The premium tier of products “continues to grow very, very robustly,” Kimberly-Clark Chief Executive Michael Hsu said on the company’s first-quarter conference call in April. “That all said, clearly, I would say, middle- to lower-income households look like they are becoming more stretched.”

“I think the growth driver for us over the long term is by making products better, premiumising, elevating our categories. But we want to serve the value-oriented consumer as well, too,” Hsu said.

Compared with P&G and Kimberly-Clark, Clorox stands out as more exposed to low-income consumers thanks to the categories it plays in, such as cleansers that face more competition from private-label goods, said Bank of America’s Lizzul. This is the case even though Clorox too often occupies the higher end of those categories, such as with its Glad-brand trash bags.

The company “is returning to pre-COVID levels of promotion to support a return to volume growth,” she wrote in a recent note. While much of that promotion spending will go to things such as displays as well as discounts, she still sees it having an impact on pricing and sales mix in the near term. Many other companies in the household-goods space are preferring for now to spend on stepped-up marketing and other investments in their brands instead of discounts, she said.

To be sure, lower-income American households are in aggregate still better off than they were before the pandemic, even accounting for inflation. Goldman Sachs forecasts that real, inflation-adjusted incomes for the bottom 20% will rise 1.8% this year. They also expect the top 20% to earn 2.7% more. At the same time, cash cushions built up during the pandemic have declined. The percentage of Americans who say they have enough cash to cover an unexpected $400 expense fell to 63% in 2023, equivalent to 2019 but down from 68% in 2021, according to Federal Reserve surveys.

Among those living paycheck to paycheck, there have been other shocks as well. Notably, the expiration of higher pandemic-related Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits in March 2023 hit the food budgets of certain households by hundreds of dollars a month. Speaking on an earnings conference call in April, Nestlé CFO Anna Manz said that benefit change plus years of cumulative inflation had together reduced the purchasing power of lower-income American households by about 50% as of the first quarter.

“Now those are the consumers that predominantly buy in the frozen-food category, which is why we see a continued ongoing impact there,” Manz said. The Swiss food company owns frozen brands such as DiGiorno, Stouffer’s and Lean Cuisine. In its first-quarter earnings report , it said real internal growth, its measure of underlying sales volume, fell 5.8% year-to-year in North America, “primarily driven by a decline in frozen food.”

Yet even here, the company expects product innovation to be part of the solution. “There’s a lot to come, particularly on frozen actually, which is a high-innovation category. Consumers like seeing new stuff coming through; they want new meals,” Manz said.

Over time, premiumisation is a fundamental growth driver for all consumer-staples companies. The unit volume growth of diapers, for instance, is essentially just a function of birth rates. Only by making them better over time and charging more for that improvement can companies really drive revenue growth.

When lower-income consumers are feeling pressured, however, that long-term imperative might conflict to a degree with near-term necessities. So while it is understandable that companies often say they prefer to invest in marketing and innovation, many will also capitulate on price.

Investors could punish them for that.

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.