Indian actors are increasingly moving beyond traditional endorsement deals, taking equity stakes in consumer brands or even founder roles. The trend is particularly strong in beauty, fashion, and wellness, where celebrity-backed ventures combine star power with strategic operational support to drive growth.
According to the Kroll 2024 Celebrity Brand Valuation Report, the combined brand value of India’s top 25 celebrities reached USD 2 billion, with Virat Kohli leading at USD 231.1 million, Ranveer Singh at USD 170.7 million, and Alia Bhatt at USD 116.4 million. Complementing this, TAM AdEx H1 2025, shows that Shah Rukh Khan, MS Dhoni, and Akshay Kumar are the most visible celebrity endorsers on television, collectively appearing in over 100 brand campaigns.
Recent examples, highlighted in the IMAGES BoF report, show how celebrity-backed brands are translating star power into measurable growth. Katrina Kaif’s Kay Beauty, backed by Nykaa, achieved Rs 350 crore in annual sales, while Alia Bhatt’s Ed-a-Mamma, acquired by Reliance Retail, reached a Rs 300–350 crore valuation and became a leading kidswear brand. Virat Kohli’s One8, in partnership with Agilitas Sports, demonstrates how operational alignment and celebrity influence can build sustainable brands.
As actors increasingly join brand cap tables, marketers are evaluating whether celebrity equity truly boosts consumer trust, pricing power, and loyalty, or if it simply repackages endorsements in a more strategic form. This evolving landscape sets the stage for examining the long-term impact of celebrity investment on Indian consumer brands.
Celebrity Equity and Consumer Trust
As Indian actors increasingly take equity stakes in brands, marketers are examining whether this approach genuinely shifts consumer trust or is merely a sophisticated form of endorsement. In this context, while celebrity involvement can generate initial awareness, the ultimate driver of trust is the product itself. Highlighting this nuance, Nisha Sampath, Managing Partner at Bright Angles Consulting, said, “From a consumer perspective, it can be a nuance which may not necessarily impact perceptions. Celebrity endorsement increases trial but ultimately it’s brand experience that builds trust.”
She illustrated this point using Ranveer Singh’s involvement in SuperYou, noting that while his presence gave early visibility, repeat purchases were driven by product experience. “Favourable product experience helped the brand to gain more trials. Singh’s persona will matter less in the long term,” Sampath added, showing that celebrity impact is often temporary unless coupled with a positive customer experience.
Building on this, Ramesh Narayan, founder of Canco Advertising, highlighted the importance of audience awareness of the actor’s equity. “If they are aware, the image of the actor would come into play. If he has a sound reputation, the equity investment would weigh in with the audience,” he said. However, he cautioned that celebrity fame does not automatically translate into credibility. “Behind the glitz and the glam, many actors do not enjoy a very great reputation apart from being actors,” he noted.
Narayan also pointed out the long-term uncertainty of celebrity influence. “That only time can tell. And that’s not just a line,” he said. On the financial side, he added that an actor’s equity stake signals commitment, making detailed measurement less critical. “Why would you want to measure it as long as the actor is paying the price the share in the brand demands,” he added.
Meanwhile, Harish Bijoor, founder of Harish Bijoor Consults, reinforced the benefits of celebrity equity from an investor confidence perspective. “The moment a known significant name is spotted, investors tend to believe in the brand that much more. And therefore, when it comes to establishing a brand with a deeper degree of brand trust, it is a great thing to do,” he said. Yet he cautioned that relevance to the category is crucial. “Otherwise, it risks being hollow, for example when a film actor invests in a fintech company,” he added.
Sridhar Ramanujam, founder and CEO of Integrated Brand-Comm, further noted that for actors, equity is often more about investment than branding strategy. “For the actor, it is just another avenue for investment. Obviously, the branding does happen from the brand’s perspective because there’s a rub-off with the celebrity, but for the actor, it is largely about returns,” he explained.
Aligning Celebrity Persona with Brand Identity
Experts emphasised that alignment between the celebrity and the brand is key. According to Sampath, for a celebrity to meaningfully affect perception, they must commit long-term and align with the brand’s core offering. “For brand perception to change as a result of the celebrity, they need to be committed long-term, rather than just putting money on the table. It is also helpful if the brand offering aligns with what the celebrity brings in,” she said, citing Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop as an example of credibility strengthened through alignment.
Narayan echoed this view, stressing compatibility between the celebrity’s image and the brand’s values. “Get an actor who has a distinct image that is instantly compatible with what the brand wishes to put out as its own values and you can’t go wrong,” he said. He also noted that positive involvement is essential: “As long as it’s happening in a positive way, I would be worried,” he added.
Ramanujam highlighted that visibility alone does not create lasting perception change. “Celebrity endorsement works in creating instant awareness, but not all products benefit equally. The fit between the celebrity and the brand determines whether the investment impacts perception or just generates visibility,” he explained.
Bijoor reinforced the importance of relevance and credibility. “While celebrity involvement can enhance a brand’s profile, it must be relevant to the category and credible. Otherwise, it risks being hollow,” he added.
Measuring Lasting Brand Impact
While celebrity presence can generate immediate attention, lasting trust relies on measurable outcomes. Sampath explained that metrics such as consideration, repeat purchase, and customer loyalty are far more important than fame alone. “These are the metrics that brand custodians should focus on. These outcomes are driven by brand experience more than just celebrity presence,” she said.
Ramanujam recommended a research-based approach to measure the effect of celebrity investment. “You run campaigns and test parameters like brand salience and likeability before and after. Only then can you gauge whether the celebrity has shifted perception in a lasting way,” he said. He also noted that clutter from multiple celebrity endorsements in the market can reduce recall.
Narayan again highlighted the signalling effect of equity. “Why would you want to measure it as long as the actor is paying the price the share in the brand demands,” he said, noting that financial commitment itself conveys confidence.
Managing the Risk of Celebrity Overshadowing
Experts agreed that a celebrity’s persona can sometimes overshadow the brand, posing potential risks. Sampath explained, “Celebrities have parallel on-screen and off-screen lives that can impact their brand image unfavourably. It’s better to have a boundary on the association and a contingency plan in case the celebrity’s reputation adversely affects the brand.”
Ramanujam added that personal controversies are uncontrollable, which may force brands to withdraw support. “You cannot control an actor’s image. If a celebrity gets involved in controversy, brands usually need to pull out. The challenge is selecting someone whose persona aligns with your brand,” he said.
Narayan emphasised that careful selection mitigates risk. “Choosing an actor whose image is compatible with brand values ensures the association enhances the brand rather than undermines it,” he said.
Celebrity Equity as a Strategic Investment
Equity can serve as a strategic alternative to upfront endorsement fees. Ramanujam said, “Instead of paying upfront fees, a brand can give equity. If the brand does well, the actor benefits from future gains, creating a win-win. The risk is that the brand might not perform, reducing the equity’s value.”
Sampath highlighted that long-term brand independence signals strategic use of equity. “Was the brand able to stand on its own without celebrity amplification? Did consideration, trial, and repeat rates remain steady even without the endorsement? These are the markers of a strategic decision rather than just an expensive endorsement,” she said.
Narayan noted that alignment and positive impact are indicators of success. “If the image of the brand is positively impacted and the saleability of the actor remains intact, you made the right choice,” he said.
Bijoor concluded that relevance and credibility remain essential. “While celebrity involvement can enhance a brand’s profile, it must be relevant and credible. Otherwise, it risks being just another endorsement in disguise,” he said.
Celebrity-Backed Brands and Differentiation
With more actors investing across beauty, food, and wellness, differentiation is increasingly challenging. Sampath observed, “With more celebrities investing in beauty, fashion, and wellness, it’s less of a signal of differentiation. Consumer value is still created by brand experience and execution.”
Ramanujam noted that careful portfolio management and continued association determine whether equity delivers lasting value. “The equity can be an investment for both brand and celebrity if managed well,” he said.
Bijoor echoed this, underlining that credibility remains the key to long-term success. “It is a great thing for brands when done correctly, but it must be relevant and credible. Otherwise, it risks being just another endorsement,” he said.
Celebrity equity can boost visibility and signal commitment, but lasting brand value depends on alignment, credibility, and consistent execution. Awareness alone does not guarantee trust; repeated product experience and a good brand fit are key.
Measuring impact requires careful tracking of consumer response, while risks from celebrity persona or controversies must be managed. Equity can be a strategic alternative to fees, but its success hinges on sustained engagement and proper execution. Ultimately, celebrity involvement amplifies opportunities, but only well-aligned and credibly managed brands achieve long-term differentiation.
