Compare StocksEL vs JPM

The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (EL) vs JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM): 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%. JPM is undervalued at $325, with an intrinsic value of $498 and a margin of safety of 35%. Of the two, EL has the wider margin of safety.

EL
The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.
$84.81
VS
JPM
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
$325.22

Rewards

EL
  • Gross margin of 74.7% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.
JPM
  • JPMorgan Chase & Co. scores 90/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with revenue predictability as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Each dollar of retained earnings has created $1.79 of earning power — management is creating shareholder value.

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.
JPM
  • Gross margin of 0.0% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
  • Trailing P/E of 15.6x is 25% above the historical average of 12.4x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • Altman Z-Score of 0.30 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
EL
JPM
Valuation
$1.81B
Free Cash Flow
N/A
5.89%
FCF Yield
N/A
N/A
Trailing P/E
15.57
26.63
Forward P/E
13.80
Quality & Moat
13.16%
ROIC
4.54%
-5.95%
ROE
16.47%
74.65%
Gross Margin
0.00%
1.42
PEG Ratio
1.76
Balance Sheet Safety
1.55
Net Debt / Equity
N/A
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
2.63
Net Debt / EBITDA
N/A
1.70%
Dividend Yield
1.77%
EL: 3Ties: 2JPM: 2
ELJPM

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.

JPM

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
JPM
$3.95
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Exceptional Value Creator
Σ Retained
$120.20B
Δ Market Cap
+$475.31B
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
JPM
34.7% Margin of Safety
Price is 34.7% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $325.22
Fair Value: $498.31
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.

JPM

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.
JPM
90/100
Wide Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Wide moat driven primarily by revenue predictability. Reinvestment Efficiency is the area most vulnerable to competitive pressure.

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.
JPM
-2.17
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.
JPM
Insiders 0.4%Institutions 75.6%Retail & Other 24.0%
No. of Institutional Holders6,275
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
JPM
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
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
JPM
15
Sells (3M)
29
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $95.82M
FRIEDMAN STACEY R.
General Counsel
$1.64M
@ $300.27 · 2026-05-20
ERDOES MARY E.
Officer
$1.98M
@ $298.36 · 2026-05-15
PETNO DOUGLAS B
Officer
$1.70M
@ $300.05 · 2026-05-15
BEER LORI A
Chief Technology Officer
$949,658
@ $300.05 · 2026-05-15
PIEPSZAK JENNIFER A
Chief Operating Officer
$1.52M
@ $309.42 · 2026-05-05
BARNUM JEREMY
Chief Financial Officer
$935,032
@ $309.41 · 2026-05-05
BACON ASHLEY
Officer
$1.26M
@ $309.42 · 2026-05-05
DIMON JAMES
Chief Executive Officer
$40.00M
@ $306.56 · 2026-04-15
PIEPSZAK JENNIFER A
Chief Operating Officer
$2.80M
@ $306.56 · 2026-04-15
BARNUM JEREMY
Chief Financial Officer
$1.72M
@ $306.55 · 2026-04-15
BACON ASHLEY
Officer
$2.32M
@ $306.55 · 2026-04-15
ERDOES MARY E.
Officer
$3.78M
@ $306.57 · 2026-04-15
PETNO DOUGLAS B
Officer
$1.74M
@ $306.58 · 2026-04-15
BEER LORI A
Chief Technology Officer
$970,660
@ $306.59 · 2026-04-15
LEOPOLD ROBIN
Officer
$127,761
@ $295.06 · 2026-03-23
ROHRBAUGH TROY L
Officer
$15.36M
@ $307.11 · 2026-02-19
LEOPOLD ROBIN
Officer
$132,684
@ $307.14 · 2026-02-19
BARNUM JEREMY
Chief Financial Officer
$886,157
@ $306.42 · 2026-02-17
ERDOES MARY E.
Officer
$1.76M
@ $306.41 · 2026-02-17
PETNO DOUGLAS B
Officer
$1.07M
@ $306.40 · 2026-02-17
BEER LORI A
Chief Technology Officer
$627,207
@ $306.40 · 2026-02-17
BARNUM JEREMY
Chief Financial Officer
$904,890
@ $312.79 · 2026-01-16
PIEPSZAK JENNIFER A
Chief Operating Officer
$2.68M
@ $312.79 · 2026-01-16
BACON ASHLEY
Officer
$2.30M
@ $312.79 · 2026-01-16
ERDOES MARY E.
Officer
$1.79M
@ $312.78 · 2026-01-16
PETNO DOUGLAS B
Officer
$1.09M
@ $312.80 · 2026-01-16
BEER LORI A
Chief Technology Officer
$640,295
@ $312.80 · 2026-01-16
LEOPOLD ROBIN
Officer
$301,311
@ $311.92 · 2025-11-07
BAMMANN LINDA B.
Director
$2.83M
@ $297.94 · 2025-09-02
BACON ASHLEY
Officer
$1.39M
@ $267.44 · 2025-06-12
PIEPSZAK JENNIFER A
Chief Operating Officer
$1.61M
@ $262.47 · 2025-06-05
LAKE MARIANNE
Officer
$3.28M
@ $267.08 · 2025-05-16
BEER LORI A
Chief Technology Officer
$1.57M
@ $267.09 · 2025-05-16
PETNO DOUGLAS B
Officer
$2.71M
@ $266.89 · 2025-05-15
BACON ASHLEY
Officer
$1.37M
@ $262.53 · 2025-05-13
ERDOES MARY E.
Officer
$3.69M
@ $262.54 · 2025-05-13
ROHRBAUGH TROY L
Officer
$3.29M
@ $263.08 · 2025-05-12
BAMMANN LINDA B.
Director
$2.38M
@ $250.00 · 2025-05-06
BARNUM JEREMY
Chief Financial Officer
$10.03M
@ $250.77 · 2025-05-06
PIEPSZAK JENNIFER A
Chief Operating Officer
$1.54M
@ $250.76 · 2025-05-06
DIMON JAMES
Chief Executive Officer
$31.50M
@ $235.68 · 2025-04-14
ROHRBAUGH TROY L
Officer
$6.18M
@ $247.02 · 2025-03-24
PIEPSZAK JENNIFER A
Chief Operating Officer
$1.06M
@ $247.03 · 2025-03-24
LEOPOLD ROBIN
Officer
$308,652
@ $246.92 · 2025-03-24
BEER LORI A
Chief Technology Officer
$506,698
@ $246.93 · 2025-03-24
ROHRBAUGH TROY L
Officer
$10.12M
@ $269.84 · 2025-02-20
PIEPSZAK JENNIFER A
Chief Operating Officer
$1.15M
@ $269.85 · 2025-02-20
LEOPOLD ROBIN
Officer
$337,610
@ $270.09 · 2025-02-20
BEER LORI A
Chief Technology Officer
$554,054
@ $269.88 · 2025-02-20
FRIEDMAN STACEY R.
General Counsel
$919,371
@ $278.34 · 2025-02-18
ERDOES MARY E.
Officer
$1.47M
@ $278.37 · 2025-02-18
PETNO DOUGLAS B
Officer
$971,646
@ $278.41 · 2025-02-18
BACON ASHLEY
Officer
$1.81M
@ $253.94 · 2025-01-16
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.
JPM
FearGreed
😏Greed(69/100)

"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)
JPM
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 (69)
View EL Full AnalysisView JPM Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: EL vs JPM

Is The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or JPMorgan Chase & Co. 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 JPM's 34.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $498 vs. $325).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. or JPMorgan Chase & Co.?

JPM scores 90/100 (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 JPMorgan Chase & Co. in financial distress?

JPM'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 JPMorgan Chase & Co.?

EL earns 13.2% ROIC versus JPM's 4.5%. 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 JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s?

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

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