ELF Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Coty has a net margin of 8.49% compared to e.l.f. Beauty's net margin of -31.23%. e.l.f. Beauty's return on equity of 15.56% beat Coty's return on equity of -9.31%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a consensus price target of $105.34, signalling downside risk potential of -5.81%. On the other hand Coty has an analysts' consensus of $6.53 which suggests that it could grow by 30.89%. Given that Coty has higher upside potential than e.l.f. Beauty, analysts believe Coty is more attractive than e.l.f. Beauty.

e.l.f. Beauty has a beta of 1.306, which suggesting that the stock is 30.594% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Coty has a beta of 1.899, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 89.913%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Coty offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. e.l.f. Beauty pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Coty pays out 14.99% of its earnings as a dividend. Coty's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

e.l.f. Beauty quarterly revenues are $332.6M, which are smaller than Coty quarterly revenues of $1.3B. e.l.f. Beauty's net income of $28.3M is higher than Coty's net income of -$405.7M. Notably, e.l.f. Beauty's price-to-earnings ratio is 57.95x while Coty's PE ratio is 38.66x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for e.l.f. Beauty is 4.97x versus 0.73x for Coty. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Dollar Tree has a net margin of 8.49% compared to e.l.f. Beauty's net margin of 73.9%. e.l.f. Beauty's return on equity of 15.56% beat Dollar Tree's return on equity of -45.07%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a consensus price target of $105.34, signalling downside risk potential of -5.81%. On the other hand Dollar Tree has an analysts' consensus of $87.74 which suggests that it could fall by -3.14%. Given that e.l.f. Beauty has more downside risk than Dollar Tree, analysts believe Dollar Tree is more attractive than e.l.f. Beauty.

e.l.f. Beauty has a beta of 1.306, which suggesting that the stock is 30.594% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Dollar Tree has a beta of 0.868, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 13.155%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Dollar Tree offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. e.l.f. Beauty pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Dollar Tree pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

e.l.f. Beauty quarterly revenues are $332.6M, which are larger than Dollar Tree quarterly revenues of -$5B. e.l.f. Beauty's net income of $28.3M is higher than Dollar Tree's net income of -$3.7B. Notably, e.l.f. Beauty's price-to-earnings ratio is 57.95x while Dollar Tree's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for e.l.f. Beauty is 4.97x versus 1.11x for Dollar Tree. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Pricesmart has a net margin of 8.49% compared to e.l.f. Beauty's net margin of 3.21%. e.l.f. Beauty's return on equity of 15.56% beat Pricesmart's return on equity of 12.65%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a consensus price target of $105.34, signalling downside risk potential of -5.81%. On the other hand Pricesmart has an analysts' consensus of $105.00 which suggests that it could fall by -1.65%. Given that e.l.f. Beauty has more downside risk than Pricesmart, analysts believe Pricesmart is more attractive than e.l.f. Beauty.

e.l.f. Beauty has a beta of 1.306, which suggesting that the stock is 30.594% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Pricesmart has a beta of 0.754, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 24.614%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Pricesmart offers a yield of 1.13% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.63 per share. e.l.f. Beauty pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Pricesmart pays out 47.64% of its earnings as a dividend. Pricesmart's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

e.l.f. Beauty quarterly revenues are $332.6M, which are smaller than Pricesmart quarterly revenues of $1.4B. e.l.f. Beauty's net income of $28.3M is lower than Pricesmart's net income of $43.8M. Notably, e.l.f. Beauty's price-to-earnings ratio is 57.95x while Pricesmart's PE ratio is 22.76x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for e.l.f. Beauty is 4.97x versus 0.63x for Pricesmart. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Target has a net margin of 8.49% compared to e.l.f. Beauty's net margin of 4.35%. e.l.f. Beauty's return on equity of 15.56% beat Target's return on equity of 28.91%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a consensus price target of $105.34, signalling downside risk potential of -5.81%. On the other hand Target has an analysts' consensus of $103.23 which suggests that it could grow by 8.81%. Given that Target has higher upside potential than e.l.f. Beauty, analysts believe Target is more attractive than e.l.f. Beauty.

e.l.f. Beauty has a beta of 1.306, which suggesting that the stock is 30.594% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Target has a beta of 1.276, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 27.623%.

e.l.f. Beauty has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Target offers a yield of 4.72% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.12 per share. e.l.f. Beauty pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Target pays out 50.01% of its earnings as a dividend. Target's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

e.l.f. Beauty quarterly revenues are $332.6M, which are smaller than Target quarterly revenues of $23.8B. e.l.f. Beauty's net income of $28.3M is lower than Target's net income of $1B. Notably, e.l.f. Beauty's price-to-earnings ratio is 57.95x while Target's PE ratio is 10.43x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for e.l.f. Beauty is 4.97x versus 0.41x for Target. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.