Apple Inc (AAPL)

AAPL (NASDAQ:Consumer Durables) EQUITY
$93.65
neg -0.62
-0.66%
Today's Range: 92.59 - 94.72 | AAPL Avg Daily Volume: 49,117,200
Last Update: 02/11/16 - 3:59 PM EST
Volume: 49,682,760
YTD Performance: -10.44%
Open: $93.72
Previous Close: $94.27
52 Week Range: $92.00 - $134.54
Oustanding Shares: 5,544,583,000
Market Cap: 526,679,939,170
6-Month Chart
TheStreet Ratings Grade for AAPL
Buy Hold Sell
A+ A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D D- E+ E E- F
TheStreet Ratings is the source for accurate ratings that you can rely upon to make sound, informed financial decisions. Click here to find out about our methodology.
Analysts Ratings
Historical Rec Current 1 Mo. Ago 2 Mo. Ago 3 Mo. Ago
Strong Buy 22 20 19 19
Moderate Buy 3 3 3 3
Hold 7 9 9 9
Moderate Sell 0 0 0 0
Strong Sell 0 0 0 0
Mean Rec. 1.53 1.66 1.68 1.68
Latest Dividend: 0.52
Latest Dividend Yield: 2.19%
Dividend Ex-Date: 02/04/16
Price Earnings Ratio: 10.06
Price Earnings Comparisons:
AAPL Sector Avg. S&P 500
10.06 10.30 27.19
Price Performance History (%Change):
3 Mo 1 Yr 3 Y
-19.27% -22.74% 38.93%
GROWTH 12 Mo 3 Yr CAGR
Revenue 27.90 0.49 0.14
Net Income 35.10 0.28 0.08
EPS 42.80 0.45 0.13
Earnings for AAPL:
EBITDA 82.49B
Revenue 233.72B
Average Earnings Estimates
Qtr (03/16) Qtr (06/16) FY (09/16) FY (09/17)
Average Estimate $2.01 $1.74 $9.10 $9.96
Number of Analysts 16 14 19 16
High Estimate $2.40 $2.04 $10.02 $11.00
Low Estimate $1.89 $1.56 $8.42 $8.41
Prior Year $2.33 $1.85 $9.22 $9.10
Growth Rate (Year over Year) -13.89% -5.83% -1.28% 9.45%
Chart Benchmark Timeframe
Average Frequency Indicator Chart
Scale Symbol Comparison Bollinger Bands
By

Tony Owusu

 | Feb 11, 2016 | 1:54 PM EST

A decline in international indices predicated the fall in U.S. markets today.

By

Dick Arms

 | Feb 11, 2016 | 7:00 AM EST

One key to the timing of a rally, which could last a number of weeks, is the price of oil.

By

Cody Willard

 | Feb 9, 2016 | 5:00 PM EST

Lately, we've seen a complete repudiation of the concept of 'Don't Fight the Fed.'

By

Mark Sebastian

 | Feb 9, 2016 | 4:00 PM EST

There's just one thing I really rely on.

By

Christopher Versace

 | Feb 9, 2016 | 2:45 PM EST

We find ourselves coming back to one central theme -- the resetting of growth expectations. 

By

Doug Kass

 | Feb 9, 2016 | 10:48 AM EST
There's a gravitational pull over history toward higher stock prices. The long-investment community dominates the landscape. Like the dodo bird, shorts are scarce (and have gotten even more scarce in recent years). Bullish sentiment sells better than bearishness. Investors prefer a rising, profitable market to a declining, unprofitable one. Who wants to hear that the market and individual stock outlooks stink? All told, self-confidence of view and bullish commentary are nearly systemic on business TV despite growing possibilities of numerous outcomes (some of them adverse). Check out Dr. Jeremy Siegel on CNBC yesterday. He and many other "talking heads" rarely seem as if they've met a market that they didn't like. "I was far too bullish last December," Siegel admitted, referring to a prediction then that valuations could stay on the high side. In November, he had even called the idea of the Dow hitting 20,000 during 2016 "a real possibility." A Still-Conflicted Analyst Community Analysts travel in crowds -- their earnings estimates are typically grouped in close ranges. And many still face conflicts of interest despite former New York Attorney Gen. Elliot Spitzer's 2003 efforts to separate Wall Street research from investment banking. As Jim Grant has noted, Wall Street exists not to sell profitable and objective ideas, but to sell investment products. Analysts who deliver "Sell" recommendations are often ostracized, and sometimes even barred from company conference calls (as has happened to banking analyst Mike Mayo). Other analysts are destined to become part of the investor-relations or finance departments of companies they follow, so why jeopardize things with critical analysis? Perennially Upbeat Managements
By

Doug Kass

 | Feb 8, 2016 | 6:17 PM EST
Again, I am endeavoring to be opportunistic (trading) in a market that is fragile,  too volatile and unpredictable to be comfortable with an abundance of many longer-term investments. At the bottom this afternoon, things looked dreadful. It was not easy to make a long trading rental and add to existing shorts. The S&P 500 ended at 1853, very close to my fair market value of 1860. The U.S. dollar weakened a bit after a five day period of consolidating against the euro. Bonds dropped by nearly 10 basis points in yield at the intermediate- and longer-term maturities. Non taxables were well-bid and closed-end municipal bond funds were slightly higher on the day. High yield was junky, reflecting systemic concerns in the European Union and China (large reserve pull down). iShares iBoxx $ High Yield  Corporate Bond Fund (HYG) was down 91 cents and SPDR Barclays High Yield Bond ETF (JNK) was down 40 cents. Blackstone/GSO Strategic Credit Fund (BGB) got pulled down and traded poorly. Gold fell from its highs but still closed $32.70 to the good. Silver was up 55 cents. I had been working on a positive thesis on gold but other projects got in the way, and I blew the opportunity as the price has risen on eight out of the 10 last trading days.   In agricultural commodities, wheat got schmeissed (down eight cents) and corn was down three cents. Lumber was flat. Crude closed down 84 cents, at $30.25, but natural gas was up six cents. Energy stocks, including Exxon Mobil (XOM) and Schlumberger (SLB), prospered today, despite a depressed commodity price. It might be foreshadowing better oil prices; we will see. Banks again were weaker as European institutions took a nosedive. I added to my large position. But life insurance wasn't any better, falling from the pressure of lower yields. I covered some MetLife (MET) and Lincoln National (LNC) shorts. Brokerages got caught in the systemic rumors and concerns and were lower on the day; I added to Morgan Stanley (MS) and Goldman Sachs (GS). Oaktree Capital Group (OAK) ended the day fractionally higher. Retail that I owned wasn't half bad; Best Buy (BBY) and Bed, Bath and Beyond (BBBY) closed higher, but Macy's (M) retreated by 60 cents. That said, remodeling favs Home Depot (HD) and Lowe's (LOW) continued the thrashing that accelerated on Friday. After the close, The Gap (GPS) reported that same-store sales were down 8%. However, its guidance was better than expected and the stock is rallying a small fraction after hours. Lululemon (LULU), Coach (COH) and Under Armour (UA) were all much weaker in a poor apparel space. Autos were mixed; Ford (F) was higher and General Motors (GM) lower. I wonder, after great gains on the short side, whether I am outstaying my welcome. But, I have taken down these shorts to small. Media was awful -- even good performer Comcast (CMCSA) faltered. New lows for Disney (DIS). Old tech was weak, led by Microsoft (MSFT) and Intel (INTC), but bounced off their lows along with the rest of the market. Staples were broadly higher, led by PG, which embodies the flight to safety.  Biotech was decimated. Valeant Pharmaceuticals (VRX) was down by another $6.50 and my spec fav Intrexon (XON) was down by a beaner. Allergan (AGN) hit a new recent low at $266. (T)FANG weakness and future were chronicled in my opening missive today. The acronym was lower, but Alphabet (GOOGL) and Netflix (NFLX) managed to rise modestly. Tesla (TSLA) got hit badly (down $14), as did Facebook (FB) and, to a lesser degree, Amazon (AMZN). NOSH was starving; Nike (NKE), O'Reilly Automotive (ORLY) and Home Depot (HD) were down bigtime. Starbucks (SBUX) rallied off the lows to end the day flat. CRABBY was mixed, led to the downside by Citigroup (C); I added it. Disease-like laggards Potash (POT) and Twitter (TWTR), which reports Wednesday, continued to lag.  iShares China Large-Cap (FXI) -- a Best Ideas List participant as a short -- doesn't have an uptick in it.  Apple's (AAPL) strength was conspicuous , up $1.20. During the day I added to many of my existing longs and added to new banks Regions Financial (RF) and BB&T (BBT); I put them on the Best Ideas List. Again, i see banks as multiyear plays and not as short-term trades. I also covered small positions in a broad list of my core shorts, including DIS, MET and LNC. As mentioned, I day traded an aggressive position in SPY for a profit. I will continue to try to accomplish that feat. I ended the day at market neutral. For the time being and assuming no change in fundamentals, I remain a SPY buyer between the capitulation low (two Wednesdays ago at $181.25 and about $183.50) and I remain a seller on strength above $185. I know that's a pretty tight range, which likely will be resolved s
By

Cody Willard

 | Feb 8, 2016 | 3:30 PM EST

Its video library alone is worth billions.

By

Brian Sozzi

 | Feb 8, 2016 | 1:00 PM EST

Listen to management and you would think the stock is up 100% since its IPO.

By

Doug Kass

 | Feb 8, 2016 | 10:25 AM EST
Tesla (TSLA), which I put on my "Best Short Ideas" list in October and made my "Short Trade of the Week" on Jan. 28, fell from $275 last July to around $153 this morning (dropping -$13 on Friday alone). Facebook (FB) has fallen from $115 on Feb. 1 to about $101 today (and -$7 on Friday). Amazon (AMZN) has tumbled from nearly $694 on Dec. 29 to $479 this morning (down $36 on Friday). Netflix (NFLX), which is also on my "Best Short Ideas" list, has tanked from almost $131 on Dec. 4 to $81 at last check this morning (including -$7 on Friday). Alphabet/Google (GOOG, GOOGL) has dropped from nearly $795 on Dec. 29 to around $695 for GOOG so far today (-$24.44 on Friday). I've been short on the TFANGs with the exception of Alphabet. (I profitably covered my FB and AMZN shorts recently, but remain short on NFLX and TSLA). A Little History The market's technical complexion began to change in late 2014, with Wall Street's leadership narrowing.  I consistently warned at the time that historically, a narrowing market bodes poorly for stocks' major indices. Typically, leadership narrows because around 98% of stocks are facing challenges while the remaining 2% float in euphoria. But mathematically, the major indices' few winners can't long disguise what's going on with everyone else. Nonetheless, investors embraced the TFANGs for seven years. To paraphrase Peter, Paul and Mary: "Puffed, the Magic Dragon Lived by the sea. And frolicked in the autumn mist In a land called Silicon Valley." But last March in The Power of Free, I warned that while social-media and the technology disruptors like the TFANGs might be at the edge of huge innovations, they might also represent "profitless prosperity." As I wrote at the time: "For me, at these valuations and within the context of the broader market's levels, there is a bit of you either are a believer or you aren't. Obviously, anything can happen in the short term, and more power to profitable trading. As an investment, however, the markets (and their valuations) seem to be saying that Facebook, OpenTable, Priceline (PCLN), TripAdvisor (TRIP), Yelp (YELP), GrubHub (GRUB), LinkedIn (LNKD), Salesforce (CRM) and that ilk are indeed not just changing the world for consumers and corporations, but are going to be profit machines for decades. That is not hyperbole. Being here to stay, which is even uncertain for some of the aforementioned names, is not even close to good enough, in my humble opinion. I am not a believer in social media, new tech, sustainable profit margins of the cloud, the endless power of big data, the optimistic prospects for smart advertising and the like being profit machines for decades. I am not even a believer that a majority of these companies will be profit machines, ever. Rather, the new social-media paradigm is reminiscent of another new paradigm infamously featured in a column in Wired Magazine back in 1997: The Long Boom: A History of the Future 1980-2020. Written by Peter Schwartz and Peter Leyden, the article started with the following summary of view that proved to turn out poorly, as two recessions (one was shallow; the other represented the deepest contraction in nearly 80 years) followed soon after during the next decade: 'We're facing 25 years of prosperity, freedom, and a better environment for the whole world. You got a problem with that?' -- Doug's Daily Diary, The Power of Free (March 9, 2015) Given the deep recent drops in the TFANGs, LNKD and DATA, we must now ask: What were investors thinking when the TFANGs were a lot higher? My answer: Onc
Bunge (BG) reported so-so earnings today while warning the new year is starting off dully....
I mentioned in my earlier comment to Doug Kass that I thought the algos would trigger the ...
15:38:42 DEEEMARK ---> Midcap or Russell could bottom today says DeMark, broader averag...
The VWAP should give us support now for the last hour of trading. If it fails, there is no...

REAL MONEY PRO'S BEST IDEAS

News Breaks

Powered by
Except as otherwise indicated, quotes are delayed. Quotes delayed at least 20 minutes for all exchanges. Market Data provided by Interactive Data. Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings and ratings provided by Zacks. Mutual fund data provided by Valueline. ETF data provided by Lipper. Powered and implemented by Interactive Data Managed Solutions.

TheStreet Ratings updates stock ratings daily. However, if no rating change occurs, the data on this page does not update. The data does update after 90 days if no rating change occurs within that time period.

IDC calculates the Market Cap for the basic symbol to include common shares only. Year-to-date mutual fund returns are calculated on a monthly basis by Value Line and posted mid-month.