Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ELF scored 49.7, MO scored 51.8 — MO leads.
Compare another set
ELF
e.l.f. Beauty, Inc.
Household & Personal Products · Quality-Growth
49.7
$109.23 · $6.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.1
MO leads
MO
Altria Group, Inc.
Tobacco · Quality-Growth
51.8
$71.68 · $119.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestMO15.0x
Fastest growthELF+24.6%
Highest qualityMO94 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueMO-2%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ELF
stronger →← stronger
MO
48
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
94
87
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
27
30
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
55
MO is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ELF
MO
$280mC
FCF
$9.1bB+
+24.6%A-
Rev
-0.6%D+
0.80B
D/E
Negative equity
108.1xD
P/E
15.0xB+
1.37B
PEG
2.74C
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ELF
MO
49% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
2% below
~26%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~1%/yr
-48%
1-yr DCF upside
+8%
-33%
5-yr DCF upside
+2%
-5%
10-yr DCF upside
-6%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ELF
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
MO
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
ELFe.l.f. Beauty, Inc.
Household & Personal Products · $109.23 · beta 1.60
Why now
Household & Personal Products · market cap $6.4b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $141.50 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +25%, comfortably above the S&P median. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $105.00 (implying -4% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
Risk
Trailing P/E 108.1x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Beta 1.60 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Net margin 3.4% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
MOAltria Group, Inc.
Tobacco · $71.68 · beta 0.46
Why now
Tobacco · market cap $119.7b. 7% off the 52-week high of $77.06. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $70.00 (implying -2% upside).
Moat
Net margin 34% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. FCF converts 114% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $119.7b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Dividend payout 89% of earnings on a 6.2% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ELF and MO diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.1 points in favor of MO. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthELF 87.1 · MO 27.2ELF +59.9
QualityELF 47.7 · MO 93.8MO +46.1
ValueELF 29.6 · MO 54.7MO +25.1
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is MO or ELF the better stock?
MO scores higher: MO 51.8, ELF 49.7 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do MO and ELF differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where ELF leads by 60 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are MO and ELF scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.