Category: 3. Business

Story Continues

For consumer brands like Estée Lauder Companies, revenue-based metrics are often more useful than earnings because sales are less affected by one-off costs and margin swings. The Price to Sales ratio shows how much investors are willing to pay for each dollar of revenue, which makes it a reasonable yardstick for a profitable, established beauty business.

In general, faster, more resilient growth and lower perceived risk justify a higher multiple, while slower or more volatile growth supports a discount. Estée Lauder Companies currently trades on a Price to Sales multiple of 2.62x, which is above both the wider Personal Products industry average of 0.96x and the peer group average of 1.95x. On the surface, that suggests a premium valuation.

Simply Wall St’s Fair Ratio framework goes a step further by estimating what a “normal” Price to Sales multiple should be after accounting for factors like earnings growth, profit margins, industry, market cap and company-specific risks. For Estée Lauder Companies, that Fair Ratio is 2.26x, modestly below the current 2.62x. This indicates the shares are trading richer than what those fundamentals would typically support.

Result: OVERVALUED

PS ratios tell one story, but what if the real opportunity lies elsewhere? Discover 1452 companies where insiders are betting big on explosive growth.

Earlier we mentioned that there is an even better way to understand valuation, so let us introduce you to Narratives, which are simple, story driven forecasts where you spell out how you think a business like Estée Lauder Companies will grow, translate that view into revenue, earnings and margin estimates, and then see what fair value those assumptions imply. On Simply Wall St’s Community page, millions of investors use Narratives to connect a company’s story to a set of numbers, turning their expectations about things like digital expansion, luxury fragrance growth, or ongoing restructuring risks into a concrete valuation they can compare with today’s share price to help inform a decision. Because Narratives update dynamically when fresh information arrives, such as new earnings, product launches or macro news, your fair value view evolves automatically instead of going stale. For Estée Lauder Companies, one investor might build a Narrative closer to $120 per share based on stronger travel retail and emerging market recovery, while another might lean toward a more cautious Narrative nearer $61, assuming slower demand and margin pressure, and the platform makes those differing perspectives transparent and easy to explore.

Do you think there’s more to the story for Estée Lauder Companies? Head over to our Community to see what others are saying!

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.

Companies discussed in this article include EL.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com

Story Continues

Please chooseI’m not a medical professional.Allergy and ImmunologyAnatomyAnesthesiologyBiostatisticsCardiac/Thoracic/Vascular SurgeryCardiologyCritical CareDentistryDermatologyDiabetes and EndocrinologyEmergency MedicineEpidemiology and Public HealthFamily MedicineForensic MedicineGastroenterologyGeneral PracticeGeneticsGeriatricsHealth PolicyHematologyHIV/AIDSHospital-based MedicineI’m not a medical professional.Infectious DiseaseIntegrative/Complementary MedicineInternal MedicineInternal Medicine-PediatricsMedical Education and SimulationMedical PhysicsMedical StudentNephrologyNeurological SurgeryNeurologyNuclear MedicineNutritionObstetrics and GynecologyOccupational HealthOncologyOphthalmologyOptometryOral MedicineOrthopaedicsOsteopathic MedicineOtolaryngologyPain ManagementPalliative CarePathologyPediatricsPediatric SurgeryPharmacologyPhysical Medicine and RehabilitationPlastic SurgeryPodiatryPreventive MedicinePsychiatryPsychologyPulmonologyRadiation OncologyRadiologyRheumatologySubstance Use and AddictionSurgeryTherapeuticsTraumaUrologyMiscellaneous

Story Continues

What counts as a reasonable PE depends on how fast investors expect earnings to grow and how risky they perceive those earnings to be. Higher growth and more predictable cash flows usually justify a higher PE, while volatile or uncertain earnings deserve a discount. Right now, American Bitcoin trades on a PE of about 12.4x, which is far below the broader Software industry average of roughly 31.5x and well under a peer group that averages around 98.3x. This suggests the market is heavily discounting its earnings.

Simply Wall St goes a step further with its Fair Ratio, a proprietary view of what PE multiple a stock should trade on after accounting for its earnings growth outlook, risk profile, profit margins, industry characteristics and market capitalization. This is more informative than a simple peer or sector comparison, because it adjusts for whether American Bitcoin truly deserves a premium or discount. On that basis, the shares appear to be trading below their Fair Ratio. This points to a market price that does not fully reflect the company’s fundamentals.

Result: UNDERVALUED

PE ratios tell one story, but what if the real opportunity lies elsewhere? Discover 1452 companies where insiders are betting big on explosive growth.

Earlier we mentioned that there is an even better way to understand valuation, so let us introduce you to Narratives, a simple way to connect the story you believe about a company with the numbers that sit behind its fair value. A Narrative is your own perspective on American Bitcoin, captured as assumptions about its future revenue, earnings and profit margins, which then flow into a financial forecast and finally into an estimated fair value per share. On Simply Wall St, millions of investors build and share Narratives on the Community page, making it easy and accessible to see how different stories translate into different valuations and buy or sell decisions by comparing each Narrative’s Fair Value to today’s Price. Narratives are also dynamic, so when new information like earnings releases or major news arrives, the numbers and fair value estimates can update to reflect the latest outlook. For example, one American Bitcoin Narrative on the platform might see aggressive growth and a high fair value while another assumes muted growth and a much lower fair value, giving you a clear sense of the range of reasonable outcomes.

Do you think there’s more to the story for American Bitcoin? Head over to our Community to see what others are saying!

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.

Companies discussed in this article include ABTC.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com

Before meeting for this interview, Tom Pickett opened Headspace, the app best known for mindfulness, and did a “breathing exercise” to “reset [his] brain”.

Usually he uses it at night. “My mind latches on to something before I go to bed, then I just can’t get it out of my head and I end up having poor sleep,” he says.

Since taking over as chief executive of Headspace in August last year, moving from US food delivery company, DoorDash, the 57-year-old, who has no formal experience in mental healthcare, has had a lot to get his head around. Over Zoom from his home office in San Francisco, Pickett has the look of a tech executive, with neat hair and a three-quarter zip fleece. In the background is a small sign: “Get Sh*t Done”.

“The healthcare industry is definitely complex. Every time you think you understand everything, you find that there’s a lot of nuances. It’s a constant learning process.”

Describing US-based Headspace as healthcare is a departure from its origins as a meditation app created by former Buddhist monk Andy Puddicombe and marketing executive Richard Pierson in 2010. It served up short digital programmes to busy professionals, with large employers, including Google, among the first to offer it to staff.

Four years ago, Headspace merged with Ginger, a mental health app focused more on coaching therapy and psychiatry, in a deal that valued the combined companies at $3bn. This broadened the product range to include access to virtual therapists, advice and workshops on topics such as mood management and insomnia. Headspace’s founders left in 2022, although Puddicombe’s voice continues to guide many of its meditations.

Since then, the company has intensified its push from consumers to employers and private health plans. More than 5.8mn people have access to Headspace through staff benefits provided by more than 4,500 organisations worldwide. In the new year, a deal with health insurer Cigna, will make the app accessible to an additional 7mn members in the US, through 18,000 employers’ health plans.

Overstretched public services and worsening mental health have created a gap for businesses to step in. But cynics see the type of digital service offered by Headspace as a cheap way to burnish the wellness credentials of organisations with long-hour cultures.

“This is one of the biggest challenges of our time,” says Pickett. “You can’t listen to the news without somebody talking about mental health, and increasingly so for the younger generations.”

The old model of “sending people to a therapist, a one-on-one human interaction” seemed inefficient to Pickett, who previously worked at Google, primarily for YouTube, for a decade.

“It was quite surprising to me . . . that there really isn’t a technology play in this space . . . We need to embrace technology. And if the primary modality of mental health is talking, then conversational AI has to have a big [part] in terms of how we solve this.”

Getting this right is among Pickett’s most important responsibilities. There have already been allegations of a chatbot encouraging one teenager to take his own life, and others urging users to self-harm. Mustafa Suleyma, Microsoft’s head of AI, has warned of “AI psychosis”, describing those who believe the technology is a God or lover.

“People are using AI tools that weren’t built for mental health,” warns Pickett. “General-use chatbots [are] built to do a lot of things. And they’re amazing. But they were not designed to take somebody who maybe has an acute mental illness and support them through a difficult time.”

Last year Pickett scaled back Headspace’s full-time therapists, moving them to part-time and contractor roles, to cut costs. At about the same time he launched the chatbot Ebb, which on Monday is upgrading from text-only to voice. Pickett insists this service is not designed for serious mental health issues and the company still offers remote therapists. Chatbots help “everyday emotional regulation” with bouts of anxiety or sleeplessness. “That’s frankly what a large part of the population really needs . . . Something to talk to, to reflect, to help process their emotions.”

Pickett says the company has developed a safety system to identify high-risk language and escalate serious concerns for human clinician review. All messages are monitored for potential risks, including suicidal and homicidal ideation, self-harm, domestic violence, substance use, eating disorders and abuse of vulnerable populations. When the conversation takes a turn into this territory, Ebb directs the user to crisis care, and ends the conversation.

Research finds well-designed chatbots can help with mental health issues, and some users find it easier to open up to them. “There’s some really interesting things that are evolving around people’s openness to put things on the table with a conversational AI in a way that they might not have done with a human therapist,” says Pickett.

He is “bullish” on AI’s potential. But “we have to make sure we protect against the downside”. At stake is the company’s reputation. “We’ve got 15 years of a brand that we’ve built up, building user trust, and we really do not want to lose that.”

The wellbeing sector is fiercely competitive. Headspace has lower downloads and monthly average users than its larger rival, Calm, according to Sensor Tower, the market intelligence company. But new downloads for both have fallen. In the third quarter of this year, Sensor Tower says Headspace’s monthly average users were 12 per cent lower than a year earlier.

Headspace says the fall reflects a shift from direct subscriptions to employer and health plans. Pickett says that, despite economic uncertainty, employers are not pulling back from wellbeing benefits. “Mental health continues to be a top two or three issue for companies . . . I think most of them want a solution that’s more than . . . the ‘call up a phone number’ kind of model.”

He hopes more insurers will follow Cigna by adding Headspace to employer schemes. “Historically, the only thing health plans covered was clinical . . . With employers, you go 10,000, 50,000 100,000 at a time, but with health plans, you go millions at a time. Ultimately, that could become the biggest part of our business.”

As a private company, Headspace does not disclose detailed financial information. Pickett says last year it made “north of $200mn in revenue” and operates “ebitda profitable”.

Pickett gained an insight into mental health struggles at the start of his career, when he spent nine years in the navy as an F-18 pilot, including two deployments to the Gulf. Behind him is a model and a large photo of F-18 aircraft. “We were put in stressful situations — a bunch of 18-year-olds to largely 30-somethings, away from their families. Stress, anxiety, [and] later forms of depression were out there, and people were trying to figure out how to deal with that.” Then, the attitude was “suck it up”. 

His time in the navy provided a “great learning opportunity for management”, he says.

That might have helped when he took over at Headspace, and oversaw job cuts. “There were still elements of the merger that we were cleaning up. Systems integration, two products that you’re pushing into one. There [were] some cultural differences.”

Employees, he realised, were drawn by “the mission” of improving mental health; it “really matters deeply to people who work there”.

That has led to some criticism on Glassdoor, the anonymous employer review site, that Headspace’s culture is more focused on numbers than on wellbeing. One former employee wrote: “It’s quite ironic that so much of their content centres around taking care of your mental health at work.”

Pickett says the company is now in “a much better place”. “I’m happy with the size . . . today [about 400 staff]. People are definitely pushed. We have a lot to do.”

An IPO might be a long-term goal but for now his focus is on building a “sustainable, healthy business”. “You want the flexibility to move and evolve and invest.”

Stay informed with free updates

Simply sign up to the Chinese trade myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.

Chinese exports to south-east Asia are growing at almost twice the rate of the past four years, as Donald Trump’s trade war pushes Beijing to tighten trade links with its neighbours.

Chinese exports to the six largest economies in south-east Asia — Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, Vietnam and Malaysia — rose 23.5 per cent from $330bn to $407bn in the first nine months of the year compared with the same period last year, according to official import data from those countries collated for the Financial Times by ISI Markets.

Chinese exports to those countries have doubled over the past five years, while China’s trade surplus with the region hit an all-time high this year. The 2025 increase is nearly twice as high as the 13 per cent compound annual growth rate in the previous four years.

China has long been criticised for “dumping” cheap goods in markets such as south-east Asia, threatening local producers with unfairly low prices but “the general China shock that has been going on for a few years has been amplified through US tariff deflection this year”, said Roland Rajah, lead economist at the Lowy Institute think-tank. 

Economists say the latest wave of exports could be tied to attempts to circumvent US tariffs on Chinese-made products, which have been hit by levies of around 47 per cent. This compares with levies of about 19 per cent across many countries in south-east Asia.

The US has warned against companies trying to mask the origin of Chinese-made products by rerouting them through other countries to avoid higher tariffs, saying such goods could be hit by “transshipment” levies of as much as 40 per cent. It is unclear how this has worked in practice.

In an upcoming paper, Rajah calculates Chinese exports to south-east Asia rose by as much as 30 per cent in September compared with a year earlier, noting that the most recent wave is different from earlier surges.

“While they are crowding out other exporters to the region, much of what they are exporting is actually pro-growth,” he said, adding that his research suggests as much as 60 per cent of Chinese exports this year were components for products manufactured in the region that were exported to other markets.

For consumer goods, China has increasingly become the dominant supplier to south-east Asia, taking market share from other countries.

“China’s supply glut, especially in cheap consumer goods, demands new outlets, and south-east Asia is the most natural spillover market given its proximity, logistics and scale,” said Doris Liew, an economist who formerly worked at Malaysia’s Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs.

One area this has been most evident is in autos, with south-east Asian drivers switching in droves from Japanese models including the likes of Toyota, Honda and Nissan, to affordable electric cars made by China’s BYD.

The market share of Japan’s producers fell to 62 per cent of car sales in south-east Asia’s six biggest markets in the first half of 2025, down from an average of 77 per cent in the 2010s, according to PwC. China has increased its share from negligible volumes to more than 5 per cent of 3.3mn annual car sales in those markets.

In attempts to protect domestic manufacturers from being undercut by cheaper Chinese imports, some south-east Asian countries have tightened import rules and considered tariffs on certain goods. 

But Liew said such actions were “piecemeal” and “stop-gap measures”. “The fundamental lesson is unavoidable: south-east Asian manufacturers must upgrade or be squeezed out,” she said. “China’s industrial ecosystem is far more innovative.”

Data visualisation by Haohsiang Ko in Hong Kong

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

Ben & Jerry’s co-founder Ben Cohen has clashed with the boss of Unilever’s ice cream spin-off after being told to “hand over to a new generation”, escalating a feud over the direction of the activist brand.

The row threatens to overshadow the demerger of the Magnum Ice Cream Company from its FTSE 100 parent as its shares start trading in Amsterdam on Monday.

Peter ter Kulve, Magnum’s chief executive, said that Cohen and Jerry Greenfield were in their seventies and “at a certain moment they need to hand over to a new generation”.

Their “commitment to the brand, to the causes, has been immense, but at a certain moment you need to hand it over . . . we need to move on”, he told the Financial Times in comments that also pertained to trustees of Ben & Jerry’s charitable arm, Jeff Furman and Liz Bankowski.

Cohen and Greenfield have become increasingly vocal about their dissatisfaction with the direction of the brand they launched almost 50 years ago and sold to Unilever for $326mn in 2000.

That deal put in place an independent board to protect the brand’s social mission and integrity. It also allowed Unilever to choose the chief executive, but only a minority of directors.

The co-founders have accused Unilever, and now Magnum — the ice cream business being spun off by the consumer goods giant — of impeding its activism. Greenfield quit Unilever in protest in September.

Cohen said: “Unlike Magnum, I don’t think there is an age limit on campaigning for social justice and peace. This is another attempt to silence the social mission that we are all too familiar with, as Unilever attempts to wash their hands of Ben & Jerry’s through this IPO. But Ben & Jerry’s social mission has always been inseparable from the brand itself, and it is legally protected.”

Greenfield, Furman and Bankowski did not respond to requests for comment.

Shares in the maker of Magnum, Carte D’Or, Cornetto and Solero will start trading on Monday in Amsterdam following the demerger from Unilever. Secondary listings in New York and London will take place later in the week.

Magnum will be the world’s largest ice cream company, with more than a fifth of the global market and annual revenues of €8bn. It is expected to perform better as a standalone company than as part of Unilever, which will retain a 19.9 per cent stake.

Magnum will inherit the campaigning Cohen, its most vocal employee, who has called on the parent to “free” the Chunky Monkey and Cookie Dough maker, and tried to raise funds to buy back Ben & Jerry’s.

Magnum also inherits a long-running legal spat with the Ben & Jerry’s board over its powers to define the company’s direction.

The board has accused Unilever of blocking its call for a ceasefire in Gaza, preventing it from supporting Palestinian refugees, and ousting David Stever as chief executive of Ben & Jerry’s earlier this year for failing to comply with Unilever’s attempts to silence the brand.

As the disputes drag on, Ter Kulve is cracking down on governance at the board and the brand’s charitable arm, the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, which was funded by Unilever, and now Magnum.

Magnum said last month following an external investigation that Anuradha Mittal, chair of the brand’s independent board, “no longer meets the criteria” to serve but did not say why. People familiar with the matter said the investigation had uncovered conflicts of interest, again without disclosing what they were.

Counsel for the Ben & Jerry’s board said that Unilever’s “phantom allegations” were part of a campaign against Mittal due to her “efforts to protect the independence of Ben & Jerry’s under the merger agreement”.

The audit of the charity, meanwhile, uncovered “material deficiencies” in financial controls, governance and compliance, including conflicts of interest.

Ter Kulve said: “A significant amount of money, €5mn to €6mn a year goes to the foundation. I can’t continue to fund [the foundation] unless we basically have complied with the conclusions of the audit, and we’re working on that.”

Underlining his ambition for Ben & Jerry’s to break from the past, ter Kulve said he planned to expand the brand beyond its traditional tubs into sticks and ice cream sandwiches next year to capitalise on growing health awareness and consumer preference for smaller portion sizes.

“That was the big opportunity when you take a brand like Ben and Jerry’s . . . they were stuck in the pint [tub] for a very long time.”

Unilever announced it would spin off its ice cream division last year as part of a plan to slim down the sprawling multinational through lay-offs and divestments. Ter Kulve has set a medium-term organic sales growth target of 3 per cent, which is considered ambitious by analysts.

Barclays forecast a potential share price range of €20.78 to €21.46, based on an estimated equity value of €10.2bn to €10.5bn.

While the US Federal Reserve’s final interest rate meeting this year could see an unusual amount of division, financial markets view a third straight interest rate cut as nearly certain.

When the Fed last met in October, Chair Jerome Powell asserted that another rate cut in December was “not a foregone conclusion,” pointing to “strongly differing views” within the central bank.

Minutes from the Fed’s most recent meeting showed many officials expect a further uptick in underlying goods inflation as President Donald Trump’s tariffs bite.

But recent comments from leading Fed officials also reflected support for cutting again because of a weakening labor market, even though inflation is still above the Fed’s two percent target.

Next week’s outcome in the “deeply divided” Fed was “too close to call,” UniCredit said, also acknowledging that favorable comments from New York Fed bank chief John Williams towards a cut were a notable “intervention.”

“As one of the most senior members of the (Fed committee), it seems unlikely Williams would have said this without Powell’s prior approval,” UniCredit said.

Policymakers generally hold rates at a higher level to tamp down price increases, but a rapidly deteriorating jobs market could nudge them to slash rates further to boost the economy.

“Usually, as you get closer to a policy meeting, it becomes quite apparent and transparent what the Federal Open Market Committee is going to do,” said Nationwide Chief Economist Kathy Bostjancic, referring to the Fed’s rate-setting committee.

“This time is very different,” she told AFP late last month.

Financial markets rallied following Williams’ statement on November 21 that rates could go lower in the “near term.”

Futures markets currently show more than 87 percent odds that the Fed will cut rates to between 3.50 percent and 3.75 percent, according to CME FedWatch.

– Dearth of data –

The Fed moved into rate cutting mode this fall, with rate cuts both in September and October.

But a government shutdown from October 1 through November 12 sapped the central bank of most of the key data points for assessing whether inflation or employment is now the bigger priority.

The latest available government data showed the jobless rate crept up from 4.3 percent to 4.4 percent in September, even as hiring beat expectations.

While delayed publications on September’s economic conditions have trickled out, the US government has canceled full releases of October jobs and consumer inflation figures because the shutdown hit data collection.

Instead, available figures will be published with November’s reports, but only after the Fed’s upcoming rate meeting.

The US personal consumption expenditures price index rose to 2.8 percent on an annual basis in September, from 2.7 percent in August, according to delayed data released on Friday.

The “Fed faces a bit of a paradoxical situation,” said EY-Parthenon Chief Economist Gregory Daco. “The Fed says these decisions will be data-dependent, but there isn’t a lot of data to go on.”

Daco expects a “weak majority” to favor another interest rate cut, but believes there could be multiple dissents.

– Looking beyond Powell –

Besides Wednesday’s decision, the Fed will also release projections for its 2026 economic and monetary policy outlook.

Next year will already mark a period of significant change with the conclusion of Powell’s tenure as chair in May.

Trump, who has relentlessly criticized Powell for not cutting rates more aggressively, signaled this week that his chief economic adviser Kevin Hassett could succeed Powell.

Hassett has appeared to be in lockstep with Trump on key economic questions facing the Fed. But if appointed, Hassett could also face pressure from financial markets to buck the White House on interest rates if inflation worsens.

“The institutional constraints often end up leading appointees towards some level of political independence,” said Daco, noting decisions require a board majority.

Whomever Trump picks will need to be confirmed in the US Senate.

While UniCredit predicted “political interference will have a modest impact on Fed policy,” deeper consequences cannot be ruled out.

“We have not assumed Trump will get de-facto control of the Fed,” UniCredit said, adding that such an outcome is “a non-negligible risk.”

myl-bys-jmb/iv