Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) vs The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) vs Unilever PLC (UL) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | UL | 1.9% revenue growth vs EL's -8.5% |
| Value | UL | Lower P/E (19.6x vs 49.1x) |
| Quality / Margins | PG | 19.3% net margin vs EL's -1.2% |
| Stability / Safety | UL | Beta 0.03 vs EL's 1.51, lower leverage |
| Dividends | PG | 2.4% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs EL's 1.6% |
| Momentum (1Y) | EL | +54.7% vs PG's -1.4% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | UL | 16.0% ROA vs EL's -0.9%, ROIC 15.3% vs 6.5% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Valuation efficiency (growth/$)
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Estée Lauder Companies is a global prestige beauty conglomerate that develops, manufactures, and markets luxury skincare, makeup, fragrance, and hair care products. It generates revenue primarily through product sales across its portfolio of over 25 prestige brands—with skincare representing its largest segment at roughly 60% of sales—through department stores, specialty retailers, e-commerce, and freestanding stores. The company's competitive advantage lies in its powerful portfolio of iconic prestige brands, global distribution reach in high-end retail channels, and deep expertise in luxury beauty marketing.
Procter & Gamble is a global consumer goods giant that sells everyday household products across beauty, grooming, health, fabric care, and baby care categories. It generates revenue primarily through product sales across its five main segments — Fabric & Home Care (~35% of sales), Baby & Family Care (~25%), Health Care (~15%), Beauty (~15%), and Grooming (~10%). Its competitive moat lies in its massive portfolio of iconic, trusted brands — like Tide, Pampers, and Gillette — that enjoy deep consumer loyalty and dominate retail shelf space worldwide.
Unilever is a global consumer goods giant selling everyday household and personal care products through a vast portfolio of trusted brands. It generates revenue primarily from three segments: Beauty & Personal Care (~40% of sales), Foods & Refreshment (~35%), and Home Care (~25%), with strong emerging markets exposure. Its competitive moat lies in its massive scale, extensive distribution network, and portfolio of iconic brands that command consumer loyalty across price points.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 3 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
UL leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). PG leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
UL is the larger business by revenue, generating $120.1B annually — 8.2x EL's $14.7B. PG is the more profitable business, keeping 19.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to EL's -1.2%. On growth, EL holds the edge at +5.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ELThe Estée Lauder … | PGThe Procter & Gam… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $14.7B | $85.3B | $120.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.9B | $22.5B | $21.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$178M | $16.5B | $12.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.1B | $14.8B | $14.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +74.4% | +50.7% | +71.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +7.3% | +23.6% | +15.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -1.2% | +19.3% | +10.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.7% | +17.4% | +12.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.8% | +1.5% | -3.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +126.8% | -5.3% | -3.4% |
Valuation Metrics
At 25.7x trailing earnings, PG trades at a 6% valuation discount to UL's 27.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), PG offers better value at 4.59x vs UL's 20.02x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ELThe Estée Lauder … | PGThe Procter & Gam… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12.5B | $388.5B | $161.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $19.1B | $414.4B | $190.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -34.75x | 25.68x | 27.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 49.10x | 24.01x | 19.61x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.59x | 20.02x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.66x | 17.79x | 14.44x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.88x | 4.61x | 2.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 10.20x | 7.85x | 6.95x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 18.71x | 27.66x | 17.56x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UL delivers a 61.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $61 in annual profit, vs $-4 for EL. PG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.68x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EL's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PG scores 5/9 vs EL's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ELThe Estée Lauder … | PGThe Procter & Gam… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -4.4% | +30.9% | +61.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.9% | +12.9% | +16.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.5% | +20.1% | +15.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.3% | +23.0% | +17.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.44x | 0.68x | 1.36x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6.5B | $25.9B | $24.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.9B | $9.6B | $6.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $9.4B | $35.5B | $30.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.96x | 52.82x | 20.96x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in UL five years ago would be worth $16,056 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,093 for EL. Over the past 12 months, EL leads with a +54.7% total return vs PG's -1.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors UL at 17.1% vs EL's -22.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ELThe Estée Lauder … | PGThe Procter & Gam… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.9% | +18.6% | +14.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +54.7% | -1.4% | +35.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -52.5% | +30.3% | +60.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.1% | +49.9% | +60.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +40.2% | +150.1% | +120.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -22.0% | +9.2% | +17.1% |
Risk & Volatility
UL is the less volatile stock with a 0.03 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than EL's 1.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UL currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs EL's 90.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ELThe Estée Lauder … | PGThe Procter & Gam… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.51x | 0.12x | 0.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $121.64 | $179.99 | $74.98 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $48.37 | $137.62 | $56.20 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.0% | +92.9% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.8 | 66.3 | 61.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.3M | 9.4M | 2.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EL as "Hold", PG as "Buy", UL as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 1.4% upside for EL (target: $111) vs -11.1% for UL (target: $66). For income investors, UL offers the higher dividend yield at 2.76% vs EL's 1.57%.
| Metric | ELThe Estée Lauder … | PGThe Procter & Gam… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $111.00 | $167.67 | $65.55 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 46 | 51 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.6% | +2.4% | +2.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 36 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.72 | $4.02 | $1.72 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | +1.7% | +1.1% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Estée Lauder Co… (EL) | 100 | 61.43 | -38.6% |
| The Procter & Gambl… (PG) | 100 | 128.13 | +28.1% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 100 | 123.18 | +23.2% |
Unilever PLC (UL) returned +61% over 5 years vs The Estée Lauder Co… (EL)'s -59%. A $10,000 investment in UL 5 years ago would be worth $16,056 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Estée Lauder Co… (EL) | $11.3B | $14.3B | +26.9% |
| The Procter & Gambl… (PG) | $65.3B | $84.3B | +29.1% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | $52.7B | $60.8B | +15.3% |
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.'s revenue grew from $11.3B (2016) to $14.3B (2025) — a 2.7% CAGR. The Procter & Gamble Company's revenue grew from $65.3B (2016) to $84.3B (2025) — a 2.9% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Estée Lauder Co… (EL) | 9.9% | -7.9% | -180.1% |
| The Procter & Gambl… (PG) | 16.1% | 19.0% | +17.8% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 9.8% | 9.5% | -3.9% |
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.'s net margin went from 10% (2016) to -8% (2025). The Procter & Gamble Company's net margin went from 16% (2016) to 19% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 9 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Estée Lauder Co… (EL) | 38 | 69.4 | +82.6% |
| The Procter & Gambl… (PG) | 16.4 | 22 | +34.1% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 25.9 | 24.8 | -4.2% |
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. has traded in a 38x–143x P/E range over 8 years; current trailing P/E is ~-35x. The Procter & Gamble Company has traded in a 16x–87x P/E range over 9 years; current trailing P/E is ~26x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Estée Lauder Co… (EL) | 2.96 | -3.15 | -206.4% |
| The Procter & Gambl… (PG) | 3.69 | 6.51 | +76.4% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 1.82 | 2.29 | +25.8% |
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.'s EPS grew from $2.96 (2016) to $-3.15 (2025) — a NaN% CAGR. The Procter & Gamble Company's EPS grew from $3.69 (2016) to $6.51 (2025) — a 7% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. generated $670M FCF in 2025 (-78% vs 2021). The Procter & Gamble Company generated $14B FCF in 2025 (-10% vs 2021).
EL vs PG vs UL: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EL or PG or UL a better buy right now?
The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) offers the better valuation at 25.7x trailing P/E (24.0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) a "Buy" — based on 51 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — EL or PG or UL?
On trailing P/E, The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) is the cheapest at 25.7x versus Unilever PLC at 27.3x. On forward P/E, Unilever PLC is actually cheaper at 19.6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: The Procter & Gamble Company wins at 4.30x versus Unilever PLC's 14.37x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EL or PG or UL?
Over the past 5 years, Unilever PLC (UL) delivered a total return of +60.6%, compared to -59.1% for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL). A $10,000 investment in UL five years ago would be worth approximately $16K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PG returned +150.1% versus EL's +40.2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — EL or PG or UL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Unilever PLC (UL) is the lower-risk stock at 0.03β versus The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.'s 1.51β — meaning EL is approximately 4850% more volatile than UL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 68% versus 2% for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which has better profit margins — EL or PG or UL?
The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) is the more profitable company, earning 19.0% net margin versus -7.9% for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. — meaning it keeps 19.0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PG leads at 24.3% versus 6.7% for EL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UL leads at 100.0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Is EL or PG or UL more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential. By this metric, The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 4.30x versus Unilever PLC's 14.37x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Unilever PLC (UL) trades at 19.6x forward P/E versus 49.1x for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. — 29.5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EL: 1.4% to $111.00.
07Which pays a better dividend — EL or PG or UL?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends. Unilever PLC (UL) offers the highest yield at 2.8%, versus 1.6% for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL).
08Is EL or PG or UL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Unilever PLC (UL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.03), 2.8% yield, +120.1% 10Y return). The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) carries a higher beta of 1.51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (UL: +120.1%, EL: +40.2%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
09What are the main differences between EL and PG and UL?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Defensive sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that beat both.