Friday check-in: What the P&G tariff reset teaches every financial modeler

Happy Friday, all —
This week’s update from P&G caught my attention — not because it was flashy, but because it ticks all the right boxes for what we teach about modeling at Ascendant.
• ICYMI: P&G beat Q1 expectations (core EPS $1.99; organic sales ~2%) in a challenging consumer environment.
https://lnkd.in/eChytrwT

📉 But here’s the kicker: they cut their projected tariff cost for FY 2026 from ~$800 M to ~$400 M after-tax. That’s a big swing.

That gives us some modeling take-aways:
1️⃣ Build in revenue breakdowns where appropriate. Price x volume, by geography, by product category, you pick. More detail isn't always better (if you don't have the right data), but it can make the model realistic when you need to model changes (macro or micro).
2️⃣ Input cost shock matters. Breaking down unit volume allows you to look at cost/unit, which allows you to capture tariff changes. If you assume constant margin, you miss downside. What if tariffs reverse? What if they worsen?
3️⃣ Regional weakness. Growth in mature markets can be slow — North America +1%, for example. So building by geography 🌎 allows you to flex different growth rates per region, different pricing/mix impacts on margin, cost savings, etc.

⭐ Key takeaway: Make your model realistic and dynamic. Don't be afraid to go back and revise your assumptions. P&G changed its cost projection- that means your base case should be changing too. Change your upside/downsides, test what happens if costs go back up, volumes shrink further, margins compress.

At Ascendant Training we say: “Models should be accurate, realistic and dynamic.” Always ask - how can I make this more realistic or make it more dynamic? 🚀🌕

Don't be satisfied with 'Good Enough'. Never stop updating.