Estee Lauder Companies vs Edgewell Personal Care
EL and EPC 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 EL and EPC compare
Estee Lauder Companies is the larger company, worth 30 times as much as Edgewell Personal Care ($40.0B against $1.3B).
Edgewell Personal Care grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (11.6% versus 5.8% for Estee Lauder Companies).
Both pay dividends: Estee Lauder Companies yields 1.3% and Edgewell Personal Care 2.1%.
Estee Lauder Companies scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 7 for Edgewell Personal Care), 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 | EL | EPC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $40.0B | $1.3B |
| Share price | $110.51 | $28.74 |
| Change, 1 year | 21.7% | 54.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −68.7% | −34.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.17 | 0.68 |
| Employees | 57K | 6,700 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 111× | – |
| P/S | 2.6× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 9.9× | 0.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 24.1× | 21.7× (better) |
| P/FCF | 26.4× | 25.3× (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.8% | 4.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $64.32 | – |
| Margin of safety | −71.8% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.8% | 11.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −1.5% | 2.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −244% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −247% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −42.3% | −15.6% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 76.0% (better) | 39.5% |
| Operating margin | 6.7% (better) | 0.80% |
| Net margin | – | −4.2% |
| FCF margin | 9.9% (better) | 2.3% |
| Return on equity | – | −6.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 6.1% (better) | 0.56% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.67 | 0.85 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.97 (better) | 8.47 |
| Interest coverage | 3.1× (better) | 0.3× |
| Current ratio | 1.25 | 1.84 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.34 (better) | 1.60 |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.3% | 2.1% (better) |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −7.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.16% | 1.2% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.4% | 3.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 63.5% | 117% |
| Held by insiders | 54.0% | 1.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$24.7M | $0 (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.1% | 10.9% |
Go deeper
- EL stock overview
- EL income statement
- EL valuation and score
- EPC stock overview
- EPC income statement
- EPC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.