The Gay Dollar · Methodology

How we score every company.

Every score on The Gay Dollar is built from five independently-researched pillars. No black box. No sponsored rankings. Here's exactly what we measure and why.

Score composition · 100 points total
100pts total
🏢Workplace Equality25 pts25%
🤝Community Support25 pts25%
🏛️Political Activity20 pts20%
📢Public Stance20 pts20%
📊Transparency & Reporting10 pts10%

Our scoring philosophy

🔒

Independent

No company pays to be listed, scored, or featured. Scores are not influenced by advertising relationships or sponsorships.

📋

Evidence-based

Every score cites publicly verifiable sources — filings, benchmarks, reports, and documented news coverage. We don't score on vibes.

⚖️

Holistic

A company can be a workplace champion and a political donor to anti-LGBTQ+ candidates. Both facts matter. Our framework captures both.

🔍

Honest about limits

Private companies disclose less. We account for this. Where data is unavailable, we penalize opacity rather than assume the best.

The framework

Five pillars, 100 points

Each pillar is scored independently. A company can excel in one area and fail in another — the breakdown tells the full story.

01

🏢 Workplace Equality

How a company treats its own LGBTQ+ employees — the foundation of authentic alignment.

25pts max
What we look at
  • Non-discrimination policies explicitly covering sexual orientation and gender identity
  • Equitable benefits for same-sex spouses and domestic partners
  • Transgender-inclusive healthcare (gender-affirming care, hormone therapy, surgery)
  • Participation in HRC Foundation's Corporate Equality Index (CEI)
  • LGBTQ+ employee resource groups (ERGs) and inclusive internal culture
HRC Corporate Equality IndexCompany benefits documentationDEI reports
02

🤝 Community Support

Sustained investment in the broader LGBTQ+ community — beyond a Pride rainbow logo.

25pts max
What we look at
  • Charitable giving and nonprofit partnerships with named LGBTQ+ organizations
  • Sponsorship of Pride events, LGBTQ+ cultural institutions, or media
  • Brand campaigns with meaningful LGBTQ+ representation (not just visual tokenism)
  • Community grants, employee volunteer programs, or matching gift programs
  • Consistency across years — not just during Pride month
Company foundation reportsGLAAD partnershipsNonprofit disclosures
03

🏛️ Political Activity

Where the money goes in politics. Corporate spending can contradict public messaging.

20pts max
What we look at
  • Corporate PAC contribution history — recipients' LGBTQ+ voting records
  • Federal and state lobbying activity and positions
  • Membership in trade associations with anti-LGBTQ+ policy positions
  • Response to anti-LGBTQ+ legislation — has the company taken a public position?
  • Transparency of political spend disclosures
OpenSecrets.orgFEC filingsState campaign finance databases
04

📢 Public Stance

Leadership voice and brand-level courage — speaking up when it's not just convenient.

20pts max
What we look at
  • CEO and C-suite public statements specifically affirming LGBTQ+ equality
  • Response to anti-LGBTQ+ legislation: silence vs. vocal opposition
  • Brand campaign consistency during backlash (2023 Pride pullbacks, etc.)
  • Support for transgender inclusion — including in states with hostile legislation
  • Crisis response: how the company handles LGBTQ+-related controversies
Press releasesEarnings call transcriptsMedia coverageSocial media
05

📊 Transparency & Reporting

Accountability requires openness. We reward companies that show their work.

10pts max
What we look at
  • Publication of annual sustainability or DEI reports with LGBTQ+-specific data
  • Participation in third-party benchmarking (HRC CEI, CDP, etc.)
  • Disaggregated workforce diversity metrics including LGBTQ+ representation
  • Transparent charitable giving breakdown with LGBTQ+ allocation
  • Public reporting on benefits, political contributions, and workplace policies
Annual reportsESG disclosuresHRC CEI participationProxy filings
Alignment tiers

Three tiers, no ambiguity

Tiers reflect the overall pattern of alignment — not just a single number. A high score in community giving doesn't offset active political spending against LGBTQ+ rights.

Highly Aligned

e.g. Chipotle, Shake Shack, Starbucks

Strong, sustained commitment across most or all pillars. LGBTQ+ alignment is embedded in policy, culture, and public behavior — not just marketing.

Moderately Aligned

e.g. Hyundai, BMW, Wendy's

Meaningful efforts in some areas, but notable gaps in others. May have strong community work but limited political transparency, or good policies with weak public voice.

Low Alignment

e.g. Chick-fil-A, Tesla

Actively opposed to LGBTQ+ equality, or a track record of donations, policies, and behavior that meaningfully harms LGBTQ+ people and communities.

Data sources

Where the data comes from

We rely on public filings, third-party benchmarks, and primary source reporting. Every score page lists the specific sources used for that company.

HRC Corporate Equality Index ↗

The gold standard benchmark for LGBTQ+ workplace policy. We reference both official scores and unverified scores where companies did not participate.

OpenSecrets ↗

Federal campaign finance and lobbying data. Used to assess corporate PAC contributions and identify donations to legislators with anti-LGBTQ+ voting records.

Company Annual & ESG Reports

We read primary source documents — sustainability reports, DEI disclosures, proxy statements — and flag where companies fail to publish them.

GLAAD Media Institute ↗

GLAAD's studio and media accountability reports, plus their Brand Alignment Index, inform our community support and public stance scores.

News Media & Investigative Reporting

Peer-reviewed journalism covering LGBTQ+ workplace incidents, executive statements, brand campaign controversies, and policy positions.

FEC & State Campaign Finance Filings ↗

Federal Election Commission records of corporate PAC activity, used alongside OpenSecrets to cross-reference political contribution patterns.

Limitations we acknowledge

Scores reflect a point in time. Companies change. A score published in 2025 may not reflect a policy reversal in 2026. We note publication dates on every company page.
Private companies are harder to score. Publicly traded companies must disclose more. For private companies, we work with available data and penalize excessive opacity rather than filling gaps with assumptions.
Franchise brands are complicated. A corporate policy doesn't always translate to franchise-level behavior. We score the corporate entity but acknowledge the gap where relevant.
We are not lawyers or financial advisers. This is informational research, not legal, investment, or purchasing advice. Use this data alongside your own judgment.

Now see it in action.

Search any brand to see how it scores across all five pillars — with every data point sourced and cited.

Search a brand →Browse rankings →