• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia
Apple

Math error in Apple’s favor? Was its all-time high $110, not $100?

By
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Down Arrow Button Icon
August 12, 2014, 4:51 AM ET
Yahoo Finance

Several readers have asked about the effect of Apple’s repurchase program on its earnings per share.

It’s a good question, given how closely technical traders follow a company’s EPS and PE (price per earnings) ratios.

I may not be the best person to ask, however, given my track record on tricky math problems. Which is why I’m happy that a SeekingAlpha contributor named Gary Morton has taken on the task.

In a note published Saturday, Morton points out that the 12-month trailing (TTM) numbers most traders use are calculated by simply adding together the reported EPS for the most recent four quarters.

That’s fine when the number of shares outstanding doesn’t vary much from one quarter to the next.

But Apple is in the midst of the largest dollar volume stock repurchase in history, one that has sharply reduced its outstanding share count (the denominator in EPS).

The result is a material discrepancy between Apple’s key statistics as they are commonly reported and what those number actually are. I’ve summarized Morton’s adjustments in the table below:

Screen Shot 2014-08-12 at 9.58.25 AM

The opinion of valuation experts might change, says Morton, if they knew that Apple was about to begin a massive roll out of new products with a PE ratio below 15. (The S&P 500 average, by contrast, is currently 19.21.)

What does this mean for the average investor?

“At the least,” writes Morton, “you can conclude that Apple is a stronger valuation play than most believe. At the most, if you believe in the company’s future, you may conclude that Apple is a screaming buy.”

LINK: Apple’s EPS And All-Time High Are Higher Than You Think

UPDATE: Readers who know more than I about these things are debating the merits of Morton’s assumptions and calculations in the comment stream. But the large error in share counts in an earlier version of this story was mine alone.

Follow Philip Elmer-DeWitt on Twitter at @philiped. Read his Apple (AAPL) coverage at fortune.com/ped or subscribe via his RSS feed.

About the Author
By Philip Elmer-DeWitt
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.