Who Owns e.l.f. Cosmetics Company?

e.l.f. Cosmetics Bundle

Get Full Bundle:

	5 FORCES	$15	$10
	BCG	$15	$10
	CANVAS	$15	$10
	4P's MIX	$15	$10
	PESTLE	$15	$10
	SWOT	$15	$10

TOTAL:

ADD TO CART

Who owns e.l.f. Cosmetics today?

e.l.f. Beauty went public in September 2016 (NYSE: ELF), shifting ownership from founders and private equity to a broad institutional base; insiders now hold low-single-digit stakes while institutions and ETFs dominate the float. As of 2024–2025, market cap topped $20–25 billion amid record sales.

Major holders include large asset managers and index funds; no single controlling shareholder exists, and voting power is distributed across institutions, insiders, and retail investors. See strategic context in e.l.f. Cosmetics Porter's Five Forces Analysis.

Founders and Early Ownership of e.l.f. Cosmetics trace to 2004, when Joseph Shamah and Scott Vincent Borba launched an affordable, trend-led makeup brand that retained tight founder control through early bootstrapped growth and friends-and-family capital.

Founders

e.l.f. Cosmetics was co-founded by Joseph Shamah and Scott Vincent Borba in 2004; Shamah was 23 at launch and Borba brought beauty product expertise.

Early Ownership Split

Founders held majority control initially alongside small friends-and-family investors; exact founding cap table percentages were not publicly disclosed.

Bootstrapped Growth

Early DTC sales, including $1 price points, funded growth and kept voting control concentrated with the founding pair during the brand's first years.

Founder Transition

Borba moved out of daily operations by the late 2000s and later exited his equity while Shamah remained through subsequent institutional investment rounds.

Shareholder Agreements

Early agreements reportedly used standard vesting and buy-sell mechanics to enable founder liquidity and orderly succession as the company scaled.

Brand Vision

The founders’ focus on affordable, cruelty-free products established brand equity that later attracted private equity and public market investors.

Founders’ concentrated ownership and operational control in the 2004–2010 period shaped early strategy and facilitated the transition to larger-scale retail distribution and eventual institutional ownership.

Key Early Ownership Facts

Founding ownership and early exit dynamics influenced e.l.f. Cosmetics’ path to professionalization and public markets; see institutional investor interest after scaling.

• Co-founded in 2004 by Joseph Shamah and Scott Vincent Borba
• Initial funding: friends-and-family and bootstrapped direct-to-consumer revenue
• Borba exited equity by late 2000s; Shamah remained through institutional rounds
• Early shareholder agreements used standard vesting and buy-sell provisions

For context on target customers and retail strategy that supported early ownership value creation, see Target Market of e.l.f. Cosmetics.

e.l.f. Cosmetics SWOT Analysis

• Complete SWOT Breakdown
• Fully Customizable
• Editable in Excel & Word
• Professional Formatting
• Investor-Ready Format

GET TEMPLATE ➔

Key events reshaping e.l.f. Cosmetics ownership include TSG Consumer Partners’ 2009–2014 private equity sponsorship, the Sept. 22, 2016 IPO at $17/share, subsequent institutional accumulation (2019–2023) and strategic M&A (Naturium ~$355 million in 2023), and large-cap index inclusion by 2024–2025 as market cap exceeded $20–25 billion at peaks.

Ownership is widely held with no corporate parent; insiders collectively hold low-single-digit percentages while top mutual funds and passive ETFs typically own mid- to high-single-digit stakes, reflecting the transition from founder and PE control to broadly dispersed public ownership.

Ownership snapshot and governance

Major shareholders are dominated by index and large active managers, and governance shifted toward a majority-independent board aligned with institutional stewardship.

• TSG led the PE phase, enabling scale and retail deals
• IPO (Sept. 22, 2016) democratized ownership; TSG reduced its stake over time
• By 2024–2025, Vanguard, BlackRock, State Street, Fidelity, Capital Group are usually largest holders
• No single shareholder controls the company; no e.l.f. Cosmetics parent company exists

For related context on company purpose and culture see Mission, Vision & Core Values of e.l.f. Cosmetics

e.l.f. Cosmetics PESTLE Analysis

• Covers All 6 PESTLE Categories
• No Research Needed – Save Hours of Work
• Built by Experts, Trusted by Consultants
• Instant Download, Ready to Use
• 100% Editable, Fully Customizable

GET TEMPLATE ➔

The board of e.l.f. Cosmetics through 2024–2025 is composed mainly of independent directors with consumer, retail and digital expertise, complemented by management representation including Chairman and CEO Tarang P. Amin; the governance structure emphasizes independent-led committees and routine shareholder engagement.

Committees including Audit, Compensation, and Nominating & Governance are chaired by independent directors; there are no private equity, family, or founder-controlled seats following TSG Consumer Partners full exit, and no dual-class share structure.

Board and Voting Snapshot

Voting at e.l.f. Beauty follows a one-share-one-vote model, so institutional investors and free float determine governance outcomes; management insiders hold modest minority stakes.

• One-share-one-vote common stock; no dual-class or super-voting shares
• Top institutional holders collectively influence votes via proxy; institutional ownership around 60–70% as of 2024 filings
• No high-profile proxy fights through 2025; active shareholder engagement on ESG, compensation, and board refreshment
• See detailed board and strategy discussion in Marketing Strategy of e.l.f. Cosmetics

e.l.f. Cosmetics Business Model Canvas

• Complete 9-Block Business Model Canvas
• Effortlessly Communicate Your Business Strategy
• Investor-Ready BMC Format
• 100% Editable and Customizable
• Clear and Structured Layout

GET TEMPLATE ➔

Recent shifts in e.l.f. Cosmetics ownership reflect rapid market-cap growth (2023–2025) that drew heavier passive/index inclusion and greater concentration among large asset managers, while institutional ownership and dispersed retail float continue to define control.

Institutional accumulation and active-manager engagement rose alongside index-driven passive inflows; governance themes now emphasize board independence, pay-for-performance and ESG disclosures, shaping proxy outcomes.

Ownership Concentration

Top asset managers—Vanguard, BlackRock, State Street—expanded stakes as ETF/index inclusion grew, contributing to periods where institutions held over 90% of shares.

M&A and Capital Use

The Naturium acquisition (~$355M, closed 2023) modestly increased shares outstanding; issuance tied to compensation or M&A has not produced a controlling shareholder.

Insider Stakes

Executive and director holdings remain in the low-single-digit percentage range; ongoing equity awards and scheduled 10b5-1 plans provide limited additional liquidity.

Governance Outlook

Management signals ongoing public-company independence with no privatization moves; analysts expect continued institutional accumulation if market-cap growth persists and selective equity issuance for strategic M&A only.

For related context on competitors and market positioning, see Competitors Landscape of e.l.f. Cosmetics

e.l.f. Cosmetics Porter's Five Forces Analysis

• Covers All 5 Competitive Forces in Detail
• Structured for Consultants, Students, and Founders
• 100% Editable in Microsoft Word & Excel
• Instant Digital Download – Use Immediately
• Compatible with Mac & PC – Fully Unlocked

GET TEMPLATE ➔