Essity, a global leader in hygiene and health, has announced a strategic review of its Consumer Tissue business area’s global operations. The decision, reached by the company’s Board of Directors, is designed to evaluate various strategic alternatives to ensure the business and the broader Group can develop to their full potential while maximizing value creation.
This strategic review comes as Essity continuously assesses its product portfolio to enhance long-term value. While the company has noted that the evaluation of different alternatives may lead to a separation of the Consumer Tissue business, no such final decisions have been made at this time. The move signals a potential shift in how one of the world’s largest hygiene companies manages its most recognizable consumer-facing assets.
The Consumer Tissue segment is a cornerstone of Essity’s global footprint. According to a company statement released on May 6, 2026, the business encompasses a wide array of essential products, including toilet paper, household towels, handkerchiefs, facial tissues, moist tissue, and paper napkins via PRNewswire. These are marketed under several well-known global brands, such as Lotus, Tempo, Zewa, Cushelle, Plenty, Regio, and Familia.
Optimizing the Global Portfolio for Value Creation
The strategic review is being led under the direction of Ulrika Kolsrud, President and CEO of Essity. Kolsrud emphasized that the Consumer Tissue business maintains a strong offering through its own brands, retailer brands, and private label partnerships, supported by an efficient supply chain and leading market positions.
“The strategic review will evaluate different options for the ownership of Consumer Tissue and is part of our efforts to optimize Essity’s product portfolio and maximize value creation,” says Ulrika Kolsrud, President and CEO, Essity.
For a company of Essity’s scale, “optimizing the product portfolio” often involves analyzing whether a specific business unit is more valuable as a standalone entity or as part of a diversified group. By reviewing ownership options, the board is essentially questioning if the current corporate structure is the most efficient way to drive growth and returns for shareholders.
Analyzing the Financial Footprint of Consumer Tissue
The scale of the Consumer Tissue business area explains why this strategic review is of such high importance to the company’s overall health. In 2025, the segment reported net sales of SEK 43,537 million, which accounted for 31% of the Group’s total net sales via PRNewswire.
Further financial metrics from 2025 highlight the profitability and efficiency of the segment. The business recorded an EBITA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, and Amortization) excluding IAC (intercompany allocations) of SEK 5,187 million. This resulted in an EBITA margin excluding IAC of 11.9% and a ROCE (Return on Capital Employed) excluding IAC of 14.7% via PRNewswire.
Market Position and Operational Scale
Essity’s dominance in the tissue market is particularly evident in its geographic reach. The company currently holds the position of market leader in Europe and is the second largest player in the Latin American market. This global reach is supported by a massive operational infrastructure, consisting of approximately 13,000 employees and 29 production facilities worldwide via PRNewswire.
The complexity of managing 29 production facilities across different continents makes the “strategic alternatives” mentioned by the board particularly significant. Whether the company chooses to maintain current ownership, seek a joint venture, or pursue a full separation, the impact will be felt across its global supply chain and workforce.
What This Means for Stakeholders
For consumers, the immediate impact is likely to be minimal, as the core brands—such as Tempo and Zewa—continue to operate under their current market strategies. However, for investors and employees, the “strategic review” introduces a period of uncertainty and potential transition.
The possibility of a separation suggests that Essity may be looking to unlock “hidden value” by allowing the Consumer Tissue business to operate with its own capital structure and strategic focus. This is a common move for large conglomerates seeking to eliminate the “conglomerate discount,” where the market values the whole company at less than the sum of its individual parts.
From a public health and hygiene perspective, the stability of these supply chains is critical. Consumer tissue products are essential hygiene components, and any major structural change in the company that leads these markets must be managed carefully to avoid disruptions in availability, particularly in the European and Latin American regions where Essity holds significant market share.
Key Business Metrics: Consumer Tissue (2025)
| Metric | Value (2025) |
|---|---|
| Net Sales | SEK 43,537m (31% of Group sales) |
| EBITA (excl. IAC) | SEK 5,187m |
| EBITA Margin (excl. IAC) | 11.9% |
| ROCE (excl. IAC) | 14.7% |
| Workforce | Approximately 13,000 employees |
| Infrastructure | 29 production facilities |
Next Steps and Outlook
The announcement of the strategic review was timed just ahead of a major corporate milestone. On May 7, 2026, Essity hosted its Capital Markets Day, an event where leadership typically provides deeper insights into long-term strategy, financial targets, and operational goals. It is expected that further context regarding the review process may emerge from the discussions held during this event.
As the Board of Directors continues to evaluate the alternatives, the primary focus remains on maximizing value creation and ensuring that the Consumer Tissue business is positioned for optimal growth. The company has not provided a specific deadline for the conclusion of the review, but the mention of potential separation indicates that the board is considering a wide spectrum of options.
The next confirmed checkpoint for stakeholders will be the company’s subsequent financial filings and official updates regarding the outcome of the strategic review of the Consumer Tissue business area.
Do you think the separation of consumer-facing hygiene brands from health-focused corporate structures increases efficiency, or does it risk losing the synergy of a diversified portfolio? Share your thoughts in the comments below.