• Home
  • Latest
  • Fortune 500
  • Finance
  • Tech
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

Trendingnow

1

As U.S. Treasury intervened in the bond market, the Netherlands rushed 86 tons of gold out of America because of ‘geopolitical unrest’

2

'Critical employees will begin to retire': Trump’s new pay plan will deny most federal roles a raise, and it has workers warning of a retention crunch

3

One of MacKenzie Scott's latest donations takes her HBCU giving to well over $1 billion

1

As U.S. Treasury intervened in the bond market, the Netherlands rushed 86 tons of gold out of America because of ‘geopolitical unrest’

2

'Critical employees will begin to retire': Trump’s new pay plan will deny most federal roles a raise, and it has workers warning of a retention crunch

3

One of MacKenzie Scott's latest donations takes her HBCU giving to well over $1 billion

Is Apple undervalued at $260?

By
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Philip Elmer-DeWitt
Down Arrow Button Icon
July 26, 2010, 11:21 AM ET
Google source logo
Add Fortune on Google for similar content.

Yes, says a Romanian mathematician. But not as much as Microsoft.



Click to enlarge: Source: Nicolae Mihalache Ciurdea

Having run-up an even $100 (62%) over the past year, it’s hard to think of Apple  as a bargain at $259.10 a share. But that’s how you should look at the stock, according to a historical analysis of Apple’s share price sent to us over the weekend by Nicolae Mihalache Ciurdea, a Romanian mathematician who teaches at the University of Paris and was one of the blogger-analysts who participated in last week’s earnings smackdown.

He charts Apple’s (AAPL) performance over the past 12 quarters using a series of criteria, the most familiar being its trailing price-to-earnings ratio, which fell during the financial crisis from a high of 51.5 in Q4 2007 to a low of 12.8 in Q1 2009 before recovering to just under 19.6 today.

But he quickly moves beyond P/E to more sophisticated measures, namely

  • P – $/E = The ratio of share price minus cash holdings to earnings
  • PEG = Price over earnings divided by annual growth rate
  • P – $EG = PEG after Apple’s cash holdings are taken out of the share price

The last two criteria, he argues, are the best way to measure the value of a stock, because a company that is growing rapidly and has a huge cash hoard should be more valuable to investors than one that isn’t growing and carries a lot of debt. Historically, a PEG (or P – $EG) less than 1 is considered undervalued.

That sounded reasonable to us. So we took Ciurdea’s analysis one step further and applied it not just to Apple, but also to Google (GOOG), Amazon (AMZN), Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) and Microsoft (MSFT). We used Friday’s closing price and the most recent quarterly earnings to measure growth year over year.

Can you guess which of the five stocks, by this measure, is the most valuable, and which the least? Answers below the fold.



All five stocks have PEGs below 1, so can be considered undervalued.

But measured by P – $EG, Microsoft at $25.81 is the best bargain and Google at $490.06 is the worst.

Apple is close behind Microsoft — twice as valuable at $259.94 as HP at $46.5 and three times as valuable as Google.

UPDATE: At the request of several readers, I’ve taken another crack at the spreadsheet, this time using forward-looking EPS and P/E ratios, cash and marketable securities (not just cash) and long-term growth estimates from Thomson Financial. Here’s what that looks like:



In this version — which uses different data than Ciurdea’s model —  things have tightened up considerably. Google has zoomed ahead of both Apple and Microsoft, and Amazon has moved into overvalued territory.

In the end, Daniel (“deagol”) Tello, who helped me work through several iterations of the spreadsheet — each with very different results — had this to say:

“I’m sure by now you realize how futile this exercise is. The conclusion of who ends at the top or the bottom in the PEG column is only as good as analysts consensus for next year’s EPS and the LT growth. AMZN and GOOG used to beat analysts handsomely, except for the last couple of times when they’ve come soft or even missed. HPQ and MSFT tend to beat only by a small margin.
AAPL is almost always a huge blowout. Consecutively for the last 27 quarters. That’s almost 7 years.”

See also:

  • Earnings Smackdown: The best and worst Apple analysts
  • Ballmer’s is still bigger than Jobs’
  • Apple blow-out: Profits up nearly 78%

[Follow Philip Elmer-DeWitt on Twitter @philiped]

About the Author
By Philip Elmer-DeWitt
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon
Google source logo
Add Fortune on Google for similar content.

Latest in


Most Popular

Fortune Secondary Logo
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • World's Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
  • Lists Calendar
Sections
  • Finance
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Features
  • Leadership
  • Health
  • Commentary
  • Success
  • Retail
  • Mpw
  • Tech
  • Lifestyle
  • CEO Initiative
  • Asia
  • Politics
  • Conferences
  • Europe
  • Newsletters
  • Personal Finance
  • Environment
  • Magazine
  • 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
  • Group Subscriptions
About Us
  • About Us
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map
  • About Us
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map
  • Facebook icon
  • Twitter icon
  • LinkedIn icon
  • Instagram icon
  • TikTok icon
  • YouTube icon

    Latest in


    Most Popular

    © 2026 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.