SafetyMargin.ioSafetyMargin.io
BlogWatchlistCompare
Compare Stocks › CRM vs EL

Salesforce, Inc. (CRM) vs The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, CRM is undervalued at $152, with a DCF intrinsic value of $274 and a margin of safety of 45%. EL is undervalued at $85, with an intrinsic value of $362 and a margin of safety of 77%. Of the two, EL has the wider margin of safety.

CRM
Salesforce, Inc.
$151.78
VS
EL
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.
$84.81

Rewards

CRM
  • ★Gross margin of 77.6% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Free cash flow has grown at a 31.6% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $5.53 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
EL
  • ★Gross margin of 74.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.

Risks

CRM
    EL
    • ⚠ROIC has declined by 15.4 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
    • ⚠Despite buyback spending, shares outstanding increased in 3 out of 4 years — stock-based compensation is offsetting repurchases.
    • ⚠FCF yield of 5.9% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.

    Key Valuation Metrics

    Learn more →
    CRM
    EL
    Valuation
    $16.55B
    Free Cash Flow
    $1.81B
    13.32%
    FCF Yield
    5.89%
    17.57
    Trailing P/E
    N/A
    9.77
    Forward P/E
    26.63
    Quality & Moat
    9.61%
    ROIC
    13.16%
    16.91%
    ROE
    -5.95%
    77.64%
    Gross Margin
    74.65%
    0.77
    PEG Ratio
    1.42
    Balance Sheet Safety
    0.90
    Net Debt / Equity
    1.55
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    2.38
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    2.63
    1.09%
    Dividend Yield
    1.70%
    CRM: 7Ties: 2EL: 2
    CRMEL

    Historical Fundamentals

    Learn more →
    CRM

    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 →
    CRM
    $-7.99
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Market Cap Declined
    Σ Retained
    $14.67B
    Δ Market Cap
    $-117.14B
    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
    $-50.91B
    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 →
    CRM
    44.5% Margin of Safety
    Price is 44.5% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $151.78
    Fair Value: $273.71
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued
    EL
    76.6% Margin of Safety
    Price is 76.6% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $84.81
    Fair Value: $362.42
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued

    Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

    Learn more →
    CRM

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $152?

    +3.6%
    Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
    Standard FCF implies -2.8%

    The market implies +3.6% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

    Standard FCF implies a more demanding -2.8%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

    EL

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $85?

    +8.0%
    Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

    Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

    Economic Moat Score

    Learn more →
    CRM
    58/100
    Narrow Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency would strengthen the moat.

    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 →
    CRM
    -2.73
    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 →
    CRM
    Insiders 3.0%Institutions 94.3%Retail & Other 2.8%
    No. of Institutional Holders3,722
    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 97.2%Retail & Other 2.4%
    No. of Institutional Holders1,317
    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 →
    CRM
    0
    Buys (3M)
    5
    Buys (12M)
    Total value (12M): $27.38M
    ALBER LAURA
    Director
    $500,266
    @ $194.58 · 2026-03-19
    KIRK DAVID BLAIR
    Director
    $500,178
    @ $194.62 · 2026-03-18
    KIRK DAVID BLAIR
    Director
    $500,722
    @ $258.64 · 2025-12-17
    MORFIT G MASON
    Director and Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security
    $25.02M
    @ $260.58 · 2025-12-05
    KIRK DAVID BLAIR
    Director
    $865,827
    @ $254.66 · 2025-09-09
    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 →
    CRM
    0
    Sells (3M)
    15
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $40.30M
    KROES NEELIE
    Director
    $929,276
    @ $238.70 · 2026-01-14
    HARRIS G PARKER
    Officer and Director
    $31.61M
    @ $234.70 · 2025-12-02
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $575,140
    @ $255.62 · 2025-10-23
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $590,102
    @ $262.27 · 2025-10-21
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $567,631
    @ $252.28 · 2025-10-20
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $550,430
    @ $244.64 · 2025-10-17
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $558,810
    @ $248.36 · 2025-10-16
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $536,322
    @ $238.37 · 2025-10-15
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $548,796
    @ $243.91 · 2025-10-14
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $1.10M
    @ $244.75 · 2025-10-13
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $547,344
    @ $243.26 · 2025-10-09
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $539,533
    @ $239.79 · 2025-10-08
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $555,001
    @ $246.67 · 2025-09-23
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $552,798
    @ $245.69 · 2025-09-19
    BENIOFF MARC RUSSELL
    Chief Executive Officer
    $545,384
    @ $242.39 · 2025-09-15
    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 →
    CRM
    FearGreed
    🥶Extreme Fear(18/100)

    "Mr. Market is panicking — potential buying opportunity if fundamentals are strong"

    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
    😨Fear(37/100)

    "Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

    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 →
    CRM
    ⚪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: Extreme Fear (18)
    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: Fear (37)
    View CRM Full AnalysisView EL Full Analysis

    Frequently Asked Questions: CRM vs EL

    Is Salesforce, Inc. or The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. more undervalued in 2026?▼

    Based on our discounted cash flow model, EL trades at a 76.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $362 vs. price $85), compared to CRM's 44.5% margin of safety (intrinsic $274 vs. $152).

    Which stock has a wider economic moat, Salesforce, Inc. or The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.?▼

    CRM scores 58/100 (Narrow 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 Salesforce, Inc. in financial distress?▼

    CRM's Altman Z-Score of 2.4 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. EL scores 3.2 (Safe zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.

    Which company has better free cash flow, Salesforce, Inc. or The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.?▼

    Salesforce, Inc. (CRM) generates a 13.3% free cash flow yield, compared to The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.'s 5.9%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.

    Which stock has higher return on invested capital, Salesforce, Inc. or The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.?▼

    EL earns 13.2% ROIC versus CRM's 9.6%. 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, Salesforce, Inc.'s or The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.'s?▼

    CRM's dividend earns a safety score of 88/100 (Very Safe), compared to EL's 35/100 (Unsafe). CRM has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.

    CRM vs EL: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026? | SafetyMargin.io