YSG vs ELF

For growth investors, e.

l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) is the stronger pick with 28. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 8% for Yatsen Holding Limited (YSG). e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) offers the better valuation at 32. 2x trailing P/E (19. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) a "Buy" — based on 27 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.

On forward P/E, Yatsen Holding Limited is actually cheaper at 5.

1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, e.

l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) delivered a total return of +105. 0%, compared to -93. 8% for Yatsen Holding Limited (YSG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ELF returned +133. 1% versus YSG's -96. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Yatsen Holding Limited (YSG) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

38β versus e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. 's 2. 36β — meaning ELF is approximately 71% more volatile than YSG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Yatsen Holding Limited (YSG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 41% for e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), e.

l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) is pulling ahead at 28. 3% versus 0. 8% for Yatsen Holding Limited (YSG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Yatsen Holding Limited grew EPS -2. 9% year-over-year, compared to -13. 1% for e. l. f. Beauty, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ELF leads at 49. 6% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

e.

l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 5% net margin versus -20. 9% for Yatsen Holding Limited — meaning it keeps 8. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ELF leads at 12. 0% versus -12. 4% for YSG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — YSG leads at 77. 1%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Yatsen Holding Limited (YSG) trades at 5.

1x forward P/E versus 19. 9x for e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. — 14. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Yatsen Holding Limited (YSG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding.

e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) carries a higher beta of 2. 36 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (YSG: -96. 8%, ELF: +133. 1%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (YSG (Consumer Cyclical) and ELF (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: YSG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ELF is a small-cap high-growth stock. 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.