Company: PRMB
Filing Date: 2025-03-05
Form Type: S-1/A
Source: 0001193125-25-045972
Chunk: 43

Company: Primo Brands Corp
Filing Date: 2025-03-05
Form: S-1/A
Chunk 43
---
 group below, consisting of selected US public companies in the beverage and food consumer packaged goods or in the route-based service industries of an appropriate size, was applicable for setting target compensation.

| Companies used for Compensation Comparison |     |                                       |
| Addus HomeCare Corporation                 |     | Cintas Corporation                    |
| ADT Inc.                                   |     | Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.  |
| A.O. Smith Corporation                     |     | GDI Integrated Facility Services Inc. |
| ATN International, Inc.                    |     | Healthcare Services Group, Inc.       |
| Aveanna Healthcare Holdings Inc.           |     | Rollins, Inc.                         |
| The Brink’s Company                        |     | Stericycle Inc.                       |
| Casella Waste Systems, Inc.                |     | UniFirst Corporation                  |
| Chemed Corporation                         |     | Waste Connections, Inc.               |

In addition, the compensation committee of Primo Water reviewed size-adjustedmedian compensation data from two general industry surveys in which management annually participates: the 2022 Aon Radford Global Compensation Database (as the 2023 Aon Radford Global Compensation Executive Data was not yet available) and the Willis Towers Watson 2023 Executive Compensation Survey Report. The 2022 Aon Radford Global Compensation Database included over 3,000 organizations ranging in size from less than $10 million to $610 billion in annual revenue, and the 2023 Willis Towers Watson Executive Compensation Survey Report included approximately 1,000 organizations ranging in size from approximately $20 million to $610 billion in annual revenue. 24

Prior to the Transaction, the compensation of Mr. Austin and Ms. Kim was determined by BlueTriton. In particular, the compensation committee of the BlueTriton Board was responsible for designing and administering executive compensation programs and made compensation decisions with respect to Mr. Austin and Ms. Kim. In making executive compensation determinations, decisions were influenced by a variety of factors, including the relevant experience of the individual, competitive standards of pay, business conditions and performance. Nonetheless, the ultimate decisions regarding executive compensation prior to the Transaction were made by the compensation committee of the BlueTriton Board using its own independent judgment. BlueTriton did not engage a compensation consultant to provide executive compensation advisory services, to help evaluate BlueTriton’s compensation philosophy and objectives, to provide guidance in administering BlueTriton’s executive compensation program for the period prior to the consummation of the Transaction, or to engage in