For Consumer Goods procurement executives, 2027 planning involves category priorities, supplier strategy, commercial terms and the allocation of procurement resources. Peer benchmarks provide context for those decisions across production inputs, packaging and business services. Sievo’s State of Spend 2027: Consumer Goods reports:
The research draws on USD 41.3 billion of analyzed spend, with KPI benchmarks covering Q3 2025–Q2 2026. The findings describe the participating companies during that period. The planning questions below are editorial interpretations, not research findings or forecasts.
The report provides cohort medians against which companies can compare consistently calculated KPIs. A difference from the median does not, by itself, indicate better or worse performance.
|
KPI |
Consumer Goods median |
|---|---|
|
PO coverage |
72.3% |
|
Payment terms |
53 days |
|
Due-to-pay |
2.6 days |
|
Company-level average spend per invoice |
USD 6,400 |
|
Company-level average spend per supplier |
USD 187,100 |
Source: State of Spend 2027: Consumer Goods, p. 8. Period: Q3 2025–Q2 2026.
Spend per invoice and supplier are arithmetic averages calculated within each company. The figures above are medians of those company-level averages, not averages across companies.
Compared with Q3 2024–Q2 2025:
The figures describe changes in reported medians. They do not establish the causes or show that every participating company experienced the same movement.
PO coverage provides one indicator of how category spend flows through formal processes. It does not measure procurement’s involvement in sourcing decisions, contract quality or the effectiveness of category governance.
Sievo reports the following Consumer Goods medians:
Source: p. 25; Q3 2025–Q2 2026.
The difference identifies distinct use of purchase orders across service categories. For procurement leaders, its significance depends on sourcing mandates, contract coverage and business ownership, alongside controls in the procure-to-pay process. The data does not establish whether procurement was involved before commercial commitments were made.
Payment-term benchmarks provide a basis for assessing commercial terms within supplier negotiations. Sievo’s model estimates the working-capital difference associated with specified term changes; it does not identify which agreements can feasibly be renegotiated.
Sievo’s Indirect working-capital model contains:
Source: p. 26; Q3 2025–Q2 2026.
The model applies to the analyzed category spend base. It does not measure cash already released by bottom-quartile companies or establish the feasibility of extending their terms.
The relationship between payment terms and working capital also depends on the wider commercial agreement. Contractual terms measure invoice receipt to due date; due-to-pay measures actual payment relative to that date.
The report records Marketing expenditure growth but does not isolate its drivers. Higher spending can reflect rates, volumes, service scope or spend mix; it does not establish the return on that expenditure.
A category management review can examine those drivers alongside business requirements. The reported growth rates alone do not support a conclusion that budgets should increase or decrease.
The selected packaging price indexes provide material-specific context for sourcing and negotiation plans. They describe historical transaction-price changes rather than terms available to every procurement organization.
Between July 2024 and July 2026, Sievo’s price indexes changed by:
Source: p. 20; July 2024 = 100.
A company’s price movement may differ because of specifications, geography, contracted volumes or contractual conditions. The indexes alone do not establish whether a particular supplier’s price is competitive.
Supplier concentration describes how spend is distributed. It does not establish whether consolidation or diversification would improve commercial or operational outcomes.
Sievo reports these median shares of subcategory spend allocated to the top 10 suppliers:
Source: p. 19; Q3 2025–Q2 2026.
These subcategory figures do not describe total Packaging concentration. Concentration alone cannot establish either efficiency or resilience.
Cross-industry figures provide a broader reference, but their relevance depends on category scope and company characteristics. Industry-level differences do not establish which practices produced the results.
For example, the Consumer Goods Professional Services median PO coverage is 15.2%, 25.5 percentage points below the cross-industry median in Sievo's report (p. 25).
This is a cross-sectional difference between medians, not a change over time. It does not establish that the cross-industry median is an appropriate target for every Consumer Goods company.
Comparisons also depend on a consistent spend taxonomy. Categories with similar names may contain different sourcing requirements across sectors.
Company-level evidence is needed to translate a peer comparison into a target. A percentile position alone does not establish an achievable improvement, its cost or its timing.
Sievo describes Community Data as providing comparisons by category, country and supplier. Such comparisons still require assessment against company-specific agreements and operational constraints.
No. Quartile positions describe the observed peer cohort. Their suitability as targets depends on operating model, supplier relationships, and implementation capacity. The report’s ranking of later due-to-pay as “Top” is not a recommendation to pay late.
No. Spending can change because of volumes, service scope, spend mix, or prices. Comparable rates and specifications are needed to isolate supplier price movements.
No. It is a theoretical model based on category-level payment-term gaps. Company-specific spend, existing agreements and commercial trade-offs determine whether a practical opportunity exists.
Cross-industry benchmarks provide additional context rather than an inherently better reference. The most relevant comparison depends on category scope and operating model.
The Consumer Goods industry report is available to download from this page. It includes:
The State of Spend 2027 page also provides downloadable reports for nine additional industries, allowing readers to examine other industry cohorts alongside Consumer Goods.