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

The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) vs The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, EL is undervalued at $85, with a DCF intrinsic value of $362 and a margin of safety of 77%. GS is undervalued at $1097, with an intrinsic value of $2507 and a margin of safety of 56%. Of the two, EL has the wider margin of safety.

EL
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.
$84.81
VS
GS
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
$1096.56

Rewards

EL
  • ★Gross margin of 74.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
GS
  • ★Gross margin of 82.3% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
  • ★Share count has been reduced by 11% over the past 4 years through buybacks, increasing each share's claim on earnings.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $2.58 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.

Risks

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.
GS
  • ⚠Trailing P/E of 20.0x is 36% above the historical average of 14.7x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.25 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.
  • ⚠7 insider sales totaling $35.6M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
EL
GS
Valuation
$1.81B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
5.89%
FCF Yield
N/A
N/A
Trailing P/E
20.03
26.63
Forward P/E
16.71
Quality & Moat
13.16%
ROIC
1.95%
-5.95%
ROE
14.55%
74.65%
Gross Margin
82.27%
1.42
PEG Ratio
1.68
Balance Sheet Safety
1.55
Net Debt / Equity
Net cash
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.63
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
1.70%
Dividend Yield
1.65%
EL: 2Ties: 2GS: 4
ELGS

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
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.

GS

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 →
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
GS
$5.60
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$26.00B
Δ Market Cap
+$145.60B
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 →
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
GS
56.3% Margin of Safety
Price is 56.3% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $1096.56
Fair Value: $2506.96
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
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.

GS

Requires positive FCF to compute implied growth rate.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
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.
GS
65/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with reinvestment efficiency as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability 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.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
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.
GS
-2.00
Possible 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 →
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.
GS
Insiders 0.5%Institutions 74.6%Retail & Other 24.8%
No. of Institutional Holders3,780
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 →
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
GS
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
HESS JOHN B JR.
Director
$2.00M
@ $511.68 · 2025-04-15
JOHNSON KEVIN RONALD
Director
$1.49M
@ $619.02 · 2025-01-17
FLAHERTY MARK A
Director
$29,545
@ $360.30 · 2024-09-27
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 →
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
GS
7
Sells (3M)
17
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $92.56M
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$6.68M
@ $973.55 · 2026-05-14
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$13.42M
@ $939.07 · 2026-05-06
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$9.57M
@ $929.17 · 2026-05-01
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$634,927
@ $929.61 · 2026-05-01
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.23M
@ $930.70 · 2026-05-01
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.04M
@ $936.18 · 2026-04-23
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$1.02M
@ $919.19 · 2026-04-17
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$10.94M
@ $941.57 · 2026-02-09
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$255,387
@ $938.92 · 2026-01-29
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$2.64M
@ $927.17 · 2026-01-27
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$4.49M
@ $923.75 · 2026-01-23
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$8.89M
@ $927.51 · 2026-01-23
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$1.62M
@ $920.62 · 2026-01-23
WALDRON JOHN E.
President
$13.69M
@ $750.30 · 2025-08-28
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$5.41M
@ $724.40 · 2025-07-25
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.71M
@ $712.31 · 2025-07-23
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$4.31M
@ $717.39 · 2025-07-23
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.04M
@ $607.17 · 2025-05-14
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$1.50M
@ $622.15 · 2025-02-26
GOLTEN ALEXANDER SIMON
Officer
$3.31M
@ $636.25 · 2025-01-28
HALIO CAREY
Officer and Treasurer
$2.32M
@ $636.74 · 2025-01-24
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.28M
@ $627.01 · 2025-01-21
RUEMMLER KATHRYN H
General Counsel
$4.76M
@ $634.69 · 2025-01-21
HALIO CAREY
Officer
$965,120
@ $624.67 · 2025-01-21
VINIAR DAVID A
Director
$3.06M
@ $612.08 · 2024-11-29
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$4.00M
@ $610.91 · 2024-11-29
FREDMAN SHEARA J.
Officer
$1.77M
@ $594.51 · 2024-11-06
COLEMAN DENIS P.
Chief Financial Officer
$7.67M
@ $593.03 · 2024-11-06
ROGERS JOHN F W
Officer
$3.83M
@ $596.36 · 2024-11-06
SOLOMON DAVID M
Chief Executive Officer
$3.00M
@ $500.29 · 2024-08-15
VINIAR DAVID A
Director
$2.51M
@ $502.43 · 2024-07-16
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 →
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.
GS
FearGreed
😏Greed(66/100)

"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.

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 →
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)
GS
⚪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 (66)
View EL Full AnalysisView GS Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: EL vs GS

Is The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or The Goldman Sachs Group, 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 GS's 56.3% margin of safety (intrinsic $2507 vs. $1097).

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

GS scores 65/100 (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 The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. in financial distress?▼

GS's Altman Z-Score of 0.3 places it in the Distress 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 stock has higher return on invested capital, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.?▼

EL earns 13.2% ROIC versus GS's 1.9%. 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, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.'s or The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.'s?▼

GS's dividend earns a safety score of 79/100 (Safe), compared to EL's 35/100 (Unsafe). GS has raised its dividend for 3 consecutive years.