Philips generates 27.9% of total revenue — approximately €5 billion annually — from circular products and services as of 2025.[1] In 2015, that number was 7%. The difference between 7% and 27.9% over a decade is not a product innovation story. It is a governance infrastructure story.
Philips built circular design requirements into procurement governance, embedded take-back and refurbishment obligations into channel partner agreements, linked executive compensation to circular KPIs, and had KPMG externally audit the circular revenue methodology. Governance was the enabling architecture. Circular revenue was the outcome.
Philips is the only major electronics company in the world publicly quantifying and externally auditing circular revenue as a distinct business metric. Samsung, Dell, Apple, Schneider — none disclose this figure. That transparency is itself a governance signal. And it has a valuation premium attached to it.
For Indian mid-caps building European supply-chain relationships, this is not a distant benchmark. The ESPR framework entered into force in July 2024, while product-specific obligations will phase in over time through delegated acts; at the same time, India’s expanding EPR architecture is making circularity more operational and data-intensive. Governance capability should therefore be built ahead of customer and regulatory pressure, not after it.