Sales were down 10% following a pronounced slowdown in the Asia-Pacific region. This is not the first time that the Group - which generates over a third of its sales in China - has suffered such a downturn. It's reasonable to assume that it won't be the last either.

Estée Lauder's overexposure to the Middle Kingdom has not prevented its valuation from remaining firmly anchored at around x35-x40 earnings over the last decade. This, despite a modest annualized growth rate, or at any rate well below that of L'Oréal, which more than doubles its sales.

It's true that under the leadership of its talented CEO Fabrizio Freda, the group has succeeded in rejuvenating the image of its eponymous franchise and developing a portfolio of promising brands, including Clinique, Jo Malone, MAC, Bobbi Brown and La Mer. Last year, it also acquired Tom Ford.

If Estée is more profitable than L'Oréal, it's also because the American company is more liberal in its use of financial leverage than its French rival, which is traditionally more cautious, vertically integrated and renowned for its quasi-military corporate culture.

The $15 billion in profits made by Estée Lauder over the last decade were returned in full to shareholders, two-thirds of them via share buy-backs. This is a bit of a sticking point when it comes to the group's management, as these share buy-backs were carried out at very high valuation multiples.

L'Oréal, on the other hand, has favored dividend distributions. Excluding the purchase of Nestlé's stake - a strategic rather than a financial operation - the French group has only once pulled out the bazooka on share buybacks. That was in 2013-2014, when its market capitalization fell to a multiple of x20 profits.

Estée Lauder's valuation is still well above this level.