CHD vs EL vs PG vs COTY

For growth investors, Church & Dwight Co.

, Inc. (CHD) is the stronger pick with 1. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 5% for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL). The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) offers the better valuation at 22. 4x trailing P/E (21. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Church & Dwight Co. , Inc. (CHD) a "Buy" — based on 34 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 trailing P/E, The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) is the cheapest at 22.

4x versus Church & Dwight Co. , Inc. at 31. 1x. On forward P/E, Coty Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) delivered a total return of +22.

4%, compared to -75. 8% for Coty Inc. (COTY). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PG returned +119. 3% versus COTY's -83. 0%. 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), The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

10β versus The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. 's 1. 73β — meaning EL is approximately 1571% more volatile than PG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Church & Dwight Co. , Inc. (CHD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 55% versus 2% for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Church & Dwight Co.

, Inc. (CHD) is pulling ahead at 1. 6% versus -8. 5% for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Church & Dwight Co. , Inc. grew EPS 27. 4% year-over-year, compared to -609. 8% for Coty Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CHD leads at 4. 9% 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.

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 4. 1% for COTY. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EL leads at 73. 9%, 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, Coty Inc.

(COTY) trades at 9. 2x forward P/E versus 38. 4x for The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. — 29. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for COTY: 60. 4% to $4. 01.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) offers the highest yield at 2. 8%, versus 0. 6% for Coty Inc. (COTY).

For long-horizon retirement investors, The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

10), 2. 8% yield, +119. 3% 10Y return). The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) carries a higher beta of 1. 73 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PG: +119. 3%, EL: +10. 8%), 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.

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.