Procter & Gamble vs Smithkline Beecham
In India's Healthcare category, Procter & Gamble ads appeared 3,40,507 times and Smithkline Beecham ads 1,40,455 times, counted across TV, radio, print, online and outdoor.
The numbers, side by side.
The arrow marks the leader on each metric. These are counts of ads run, not money spent, and they cover Healthcare advertising only, so they are smaller than each brand's national total.
Where each one advertises.
Media mix for Procter & Gamble and Smithkline Beecham, side by side. Each pair of bars shows what share of each brand's ads ran on that medium.
Each row compares the two brands on one medium; a wide gap means one leans on it far more than the other.
What the gap means.
The signals that separate Procter & Gamble and Smithkline Beecham in Healthcare, each drawn from our ad-monitoring sources.
more Healthcare ads from Procter & Gamble than from Smithkline Beecham, about 2.4× as many. The media Smithkline Beecham leaves empty is where the contest is really won.
The short answers.
Optimised for the questions people, and AI engines, ask about Procter & Gamble vs Smithkline Beecham.
How many Healthcare ads did Procter & Gamble and Smithkline Beecham run?
Procter & Gamble 3,40,507, Smithkline Beecham 1,40,455. Both are counts of ads recorded, not rupees.
Built from 18 industry-standard ad-monitoring and research sources. Every figure is a count of ads recorded, not rupees, because ad cost is not comparable between TV, radio, print and online. Counts here cover Healthcare advertising only, so they can be smaller than a brand's national total. Updated monthly. Full methodology →
Coverage: these figures reflect the advertising we were able to track across our data sources, a large sample but not every ad placed in India. Treat them as a directional, relative picture, not an absolute or complete record.
Updated March 2026.