e.l.f. Beauty vs Interparfums
ELF and IPAR side by side, both in soap, detergents, and cleaning preparations; perfumes, cosmetics, and other toilet preparations. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ELF and IPAR compare
e.l.f. Beauty is the larger company, worth 1.6 times as much as Interparfums ($7.0B against $4.3B).
On earnings, Interparfums is cheaper: it trades at 25.1× trailing earnings, against 81.7× for e.l.f. Beauty.
e.l.f. Beauty grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (39.9% versus 2.6% for Interparfums).
Interparfums keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.3% compared with 4.5% at e.l.f. Beauty.
Interparfums pays a dividend yielding 2.4%; e.l.f. Beauty does not pay one.
Interparfums scores higher on the StockData Score (20 against 11 for e.l.f. Beauty), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | ELF | IPAR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $7.0B | $4.3B |
| Share price | $118.46 | $133.19 |
| Change, 1 year | 48.4% | 53.0% |
| Change, 5 years | 265% | 43.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.44 | 0.85 |
| Employees | 849 | 662 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 11 | 20 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 81.7× | 25.1× (better) |
| P/S | 3.6× | 2.8× (better) |
| P/B | 5.7× | 4.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 27.6× | 15.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 25.4× | 17.5× (better) |
| PEG | – | 2.18 |
| FCF yield | 3.9% | 5.7% (better) |
| Fair value | $93.52 | $138.78 |
| Margin of safety | −26.7% | 4.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 39.9% (better) | 2.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 38.8% (better) | 22.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 5.9% (better) | 3.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2.1% | 3.7% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 29.7% | 34.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 74.4% (better) | 64.8% |
| Operating margin | 8.9% | 17.9% (better) |
| Net margin | 4.5% | 11.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 14.2% | 16.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | 7.3% | 19.5% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.5% | 20.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.67 | 0.22 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.75 | 0.29 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 44.3× |
| Current ratio | 2.57 | 3.33 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.35 | 8.26 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.4% |
| Payout ratio | – | 60.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 5 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 57.5% |
| Buyback yield | 1.3% (better) | 0.24% |
| Shareholder yield | 1.3% | 2.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 87.8% | 67.1% |
| Held by insiders | 3.1% | 22.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$35.7M | −$4.0M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.3% | 7.8% |
Go deeper
- ELF stock overview
- ELF income statement
- ELF valuation and score
- IPAR stock overview
- IPAR income statement
- IPAR valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.