Compare StocksABBV vs EL

AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) vs Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. (T (EL): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-08-03, ABBV is overvalued at $251, with a DCF intrinsic value of $178 and a margin of safety of -41%. EL is undervalued at $84, with an intrinsic value of $131122503938 and a margin of safety of 100%. Of the two, EL has the wider margin of safety.

ABBV
AbbVie Inc.
$250.94
VS
EL
Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. (T
$83.90

Rewards

ABBV
  • AbbVie Inc. has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
  • Gross margin of 72.8% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • AbbVie Inc. scores 82/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with reinvestment efficiency as the strongest competitive dimension.
EL
  • Gross margin of 74.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.

Risks

ABBV
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • Free cash flow has declined at a 9.8% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.
EL
  • ROIC has declined by 15.4 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • PEG ratio of 2.05 indicates the stock is expensive relative to its expected growth — the market may be pricing in more growth than analysts project.
  • High leverage (1.55x net debt/equity) combined with thin interest coverage (-1.0x) poses financial risk.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
ABBV
EL
Valuation
N/A
Free Cash Flow
$1.81B
N/A
FCF Yield
N/A
70.89
Trailing P/E
N/A
15.41
Forward P/E
26.38
Quality & Moat
27.60%
ROIC
13.16%
N/A
ROE
-5.95%
72.79%
Gross Margin
74.65%
0.41
PEG Ratio
2.05
Balance Sheet Safety
N/A
Net Debt / Equity
1.55
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.06
Net Debt / EBITDA
2.63
2.76%
Dividend Yield
1.67%
ABBV: 5Ties: 2EL: 0
ABBVEL

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
ABBV

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

EL

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

$1 Retained Earnings Test

Learn more →
ABBV
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-19.85B
Δ Market Cap
+$118.02B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
EL
N/A
Net losses over 3 years — test not applicable
Company had negative cumulative retained earnings
Σ Retained
$-2.23B
Δ Market Cap
$-143.39
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis

Learn more →
ABBV
40.7% Overvalued
Price is 40.7% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $250.94
Fair Value: $178.31
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
EL
100.0% Margin of Safety
Price is 100.0% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $83.90
Fair Value: $131122503937.78
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
ABBV

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

EL

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $84?

-18.4%
Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

Market roughly matching historical growth — reasonable.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
ABBV
82/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. Reinvestment Efficiency is the standout factor.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.
EL
36/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though revenue predictability shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
ABBV
-2.86
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.
EL
-2.75
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Ownership Breakdown

Learn more →
ABBV
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 76.9%Retail & Other 23.0%
No. of Institutional Holders5,146
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
EL
Insiders 0.4%Institutions 97.1%Retail & Other 2.5%
No. of Institutional Holders1,300
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

Insider Buying Activity

Learn more →
ABBV
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
EL
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
FRIBOURG PAUL J
Director
$2.96M
@ $65.00 · 2025-02-07
FRIBOURG PAUL J
Director
$5.72M
@ $65.80 · 2025-02-06
SHRIVASTAVA AKHIL
Chief Financial Officer
$46,053
@ $65.79 · 2025-02-05
FRIBOURG PAUL J
Director
$5.02M
@ $64.48 · 2024-11-19
FRIBOURG PAUL J
Director
$9.86M
@ $64.46 · 2024-11-18
FRIBOURG PAUL J
Director
$10.05M
@ $63.98 · 2024-11-14
SHRIVASTAVA AKHIL
Chief Financial Officer
$65,000
@ $65.00 · 2024-11-14
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises

Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.

Insider Selling Activity

Learn more →
ABBV
0
Sells (3M)
0
Sells (12M)
No open market insider sales found.
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
EL
0
Sells (3M)
10
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $1.02B
LA LANDE RASHIDA K
General Counsel
$151,498
@ $94.45 · 2025-11-26
LAUDER JANE A
Director and Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$1.68M
@ $94.38 · 2025-11-26
WEBSTER MERIDITH P
Officer
$476,971
@ $87.84 · 2025-11-18
STERNLICHT BARRY S
Director
$364,749
@ $91.83 · 2025-11-11
LAL 2015 ELF TRUST
Trustee
$508.60M
@ $89.70 · 2025-11-06
EVELYN H. LAUDER 2012 MARITAL TRUST TWO
Trustee
$255.22M
@ $89.70 · 2025-11-06
LEONARD A LAUDER 2013 REVOCABLE TRUST
Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$249.91M
@ $89.70 · 2025-11-06
FORESTER LYNN
Director
$339,288
@ $91.65 · 2025-08-29
LA LANDE RASHIDA K
General Counsel
$589,594
@ $91.88 · 2025-08-28
LAUDER JANE A
Director and Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
$1.39M
@ $88.23 · 2025-08-21
FREDA FABRIZIO
Chief Executive Officer
$743,259
@ $67.76 · 2024-11-01
FORESTER LYNN
Director
$364,143
@ $93.61 · 2024-08-23
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives

Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.

🎭 Mr. Market's Mood

Learn more →
ABBV
FearGreed
😏Greed(61/100)

"Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
EL
FearGreed
😐Neutral(46/100)

"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

Composite sentiment score based on market signals. Inspired by Buffett’s "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

⚖️ Buffett Signal

Learn more →
ABBV
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Greed (61)
EL
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Neutral (46)
View ABBV Full AnalysisView EL Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: ABBV vs EL

Is AbbVie Inc. or Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. (T more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, EL trades at a 100.0% margin of safety (intrinsic value $131122503938 vs. price $84), compared to ABBV's -40.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $178 vs. $251).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, AbbVie Inc. or Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. (T?

ABBV scores 82/100 (Wide moat), while EL scores 36/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. (T in financial distress?

EL's Altman Z-Score of 1.8 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. ABBV scores 2.4 (Grey zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, AbbVie Inc. or Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. (T?

ABBV earns 27.6% ROIC versus EL's 13.2%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Which dividend is safer, AbbVie Inc.'s or Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. (T's?

ABBV's dividend earns a safety score of 39/100 (Unsafe), compared to EL's 35/100 (Unsafe). ABBV has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.