Office Hours #Q&A #WWDC #transcript
Recording and transcript of the June 9, 2026 Asymco One Office Hours, recorded the day after Apple's WWDC 2026 keynote. Horace Dediu shares his impressions of the event and takes questions from Asymco One subscribers.
Subscribe to Asymco One to listen to the recording and read the transcript.
Sign up and latest updates at asymco.com/live.
Another 10% do not provide a rating.
Over the past 20(!) years, Apple net income has grown at a compounded annual growth (CAGR) of 26.6%, Revenue growth has compounded at 21.5% and share price has compounded at at 27.7%. That means the company has been doubling at least every 3 years for more than 20 years.
The graph below shows share price and yearly earnings (and multiples of those earnings) since 2006. Note the vertical scale is logarithmic. The Price line has been growing at 27% or doubling every 2.6 years. The exercise of predicting the share price based on extrapolation is left to the reader.
In spite of this, data shows that 21 out of 49 analysts who follow Apple have the equivalent of a "Hold" or "Sell". An additional 5 follow it but have no opinion.
It takes significant courage to predict a reversal of a 20 year trend. That a majority of analysis implicitly or explicitly believe Apple is on the precipice of failure may come as a surprise given the recent rise in price and optimism around AI. The graph shows the percent of Hold/Sell/Underperform/no opinion has been rising.
The graph below shows the targets published recently.
The targets are sorted by rating and then value. The "Buy" rated are encapsulated, the rest have all the other ratings. The Red line is the average of all ratings. Some of the ratings and targets, especially the lowest, are out of date.
We will be discussing this and other Apple-related topics at our upcoming June Office Hours on Tuesday, June 9th, 2026 (day after the WWDC'26 keynote.) Sign up today!
Why the most common measure for valuation is inadequate in an age of AI
Software and services companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta are spending on Capital Expenditures at the rate of heavy industry manufacturing. This defies their description as "asset light" business models which depend on services, distribution or platform economics.
The problem isn't just semantic. It is that for their entire existence, these companies were valued for their profitability and measured in terms of a P/E ratio and earnings growth. The situation has changed dramatically. Their revenues are up, the earnings are up and growth is up and share prices are way up. But not their P/E ratios. Why is this?
Consider the graph below showing the (forward) P/E ratios of the Dot Com market leaders vs. the market leaders today.
This even as share prices and value concentration have risen even faster than in the Dot Com era. Seen from the P/E basis, it does not look like we are in a bubble. Earning growth is way up so the share prices are not outrageous on that basis. That is contrary to 1999 when P/E ratios in the hundreds were considered normal. Expectations of an internet fueled boom were speculative. Expectation of an AI earnings boom seem well founded.
But these companies could still be over-valued. The P/E ratio is not the full picture. It is in fact a simplifying shortcut which ignores significant pockets and omissions of value.
For this analysis I'll use a sample including some of the largest market caps in the world with two exceptions. The exceptions are Lilly (LLY), Berkshire Hathaway (BRK-B) which are on the list but not in the top 10 (though in top 15) and Saudi Aramco and Broadcom which are in the top 10 but not on the list[1].
| Company | Market Cap |
| NVDA | $5,709,746,405,376 |
| AAPL | $4,379,916,369,920 |
| GOOG | $4,811,891,146,752 |
| MSFT | $3,041,424,048,128 |
| AMZN | $2,874,514,866,176 |
| TSM | $2,166,463,135,744 |
| TSLA | $1,664,912,326,656 |
| META | $1,569,837,154,304 |
| BRK-B | $1,044,046,610,432 |
| LLY | $897,716,060,160 |
The following diagram shows the P/E ratios of the sample relative to the top 100 US market caps[2]. Note that, with one exception, the companies are not in the dark red zone with above P/E of 60. The exception is, of course, Tesla, which, at P/E of 400+ is 14x the average multiple.
Moreover, compared with the S&P 500, these P/E ratios are in-line with the median. The following graph shows the sample set with P/E ratio vs. Market Cap.
Excluding the one anomaly the relationship seen is that higher market caps roughly correspond to higher P/Es. Nvidia has a market cap over $5.7 trillion with a P/E of 48 while Meta has a market cap of $1.5 trillion and a P/E of 22.5.
Higher P/Es should also correspond to higher growth rates. The graph below shows the relationship between P/E and growth, both in the most recent quarter (MRQ) and trailing twelve months (TTM).
There is a loose relationship between P/E and TTM growth but not with last quarter's growth. The one anomaly is even more prominent as it shows negative growth with exceptional valuation. Fundamentally however the relationship between P/E and growth is weak. Companies having widely divergent growth show similar P/E ratios. Alphabet for example has seen its P/E ratio in the 20s with growth in the 80s TTM and 50s MRQ.
This might sound familiar. From 2008 to 2020 Apple was trading at a P/E ratio in the teens and low 20s while growing as fast as 80%. The logic was captured by my analogy of the goose that lays the golden eggs. Apple was able to create extraordinary products but the market considered such hits fleeting. It valued consistency over heroism. Getting on base vs. home runs. And so the P/E began to rise only once Services became more prominent. Regardless of how foreseeable this pattern was, it took a decade and is still ongoing for the pricing to catch up.
But the situation with AI companies (that is, all the big tech companies but Apple) is that their earnings today are somewhat an illusion.
An old maxim that says "earnings are an opinion while cash flow is a fact.[3]"
This is because Net income can be manipulated by accounting abstractions, whereas cash flow is based on bank transactions.
To wit: Net income (earnings) is calculated using accrual accounting, which relies heavily on judgment calls rather than bank balances. Companies recognize revenues the moment a contract is signed, even if the cash won't be collected for months. Or they can dial in a delay as they desire.
Because of varying accounting policies, two identical companies with the exact same physical business can report vastly different earnings figures.
Cash flow is objective and simply tracks the actual movement of money in and out of the business. Real dollars either enter the bank account or they don't. A company can look highly profitable on an income statement but still go bankrupt if its cash is trapped in unpaid invoices or unsold inventory.
Finally, cash flow can be strongly negative while earnings are strongly positive. This is because investment in capital equipment does not appear in the income statement.
Therefore true economic value is determined by the cash a company can actually distribute or reinvest rather than how it declares profitability based on accounting abstractions.
AI companies are not necessarily hiding behind suspect earnings but their extraordinary capital expenditures are draining their cash and thus what investors have access to.
Earnings seem to be soaring so the ratio P/E suggests a modest valuation. This is based on opinion or at least incompleteness.
We should look at a better indicator. It's the EV/FCF ratio. We will look at this next.
Horace speaks carefully and with knowledge about opinions, facts and fantasies, and shares what he thinks John Ternus’s most important job is.
Topics include:
Listen to Asymetric in your favorite podcast app.
A Series on Valuation in the age of AI
Apple recently hit an all-time high. Today the stock is trading at a P/E of 35. The P/E ratio is the current share price P divided by the last four quarters’ net earnings per share E. But we also have a pretty good idea of the earnings for the next quarter, ending June (now almost half-way completed). The guidance very clearly suggests that on a one Quarter forward basis the P/E ratio is 34.
I’ve maintained for at least 15 years that a reasonable multiple for Apple is 35. This was mainly because other large cap technology companies were also trading around that number. While at this ratio, if a company is growing at 22% it means that an investor will make their money back in about 10 years. Thereafter all free cash flows will go entirely to the investor’s pocket. That seems a reasonable return. It’s not a particularly risky bet to assume 20% growth for 10 years if you look at (a) history and (b) how many people in the world have not yet started using Apple products and (c) assess how well management is doing their job.
So by this measure, Apple seems to be reasonably priced. Historically it has not been reasonably priced but that is due to the disconnect between understanding the business and falling for the usual false tropes. The following graph shows the share price and where it fell between the bands of Earnings multiples. The grey areas represent periods of significant share price decline.
But much of the volatility of the stock is also due to overall sentiment collapse. That has happened on many occasions, most notably the 2008 financial crisis and “great recession.” (Another was the Covid crisis.) In these cases, regardless of underlying strength, the shares were available very cheaply.
Today perhaps we should ask if a bubble is forming due to exuberance around AI which is inflating the market in unsustainable ways.
There are four reasons why the current asset value explosion is different.
First, it is highly concentrated in a handful of names.
| 2005 S&P 500 top 10 | % of the S&P index | 2026 S&P 500 top 10 | % of the S&P index |
| Exxon | 3.1% | NVDA | 7.8% |
| MSFT | 2.5% | GOOG | 7.3% |
| Citigroup | 2.2% | AAPL | 6.4% |
| GE | 2.0% | MSFT | 4.6% |
| Walmart | 1.7% | AMZN | 4.4% |
| BoA | 1.6% | Broadcom | 3.0% |
| J&J | 1.6% | TSLA | 2.4% |
| Pfizer | 1.4% | META | 2.3% |
| Intel | 1.3% | Walmart | 1.6% |
| AIG | 1.3% | Berkshire Hathaway | 1.5% |
| Total | 18.7% | 41.3% |
Second it is fueled by equity not debt. Third, it involves disproportionate capital expenditure rather than M&A. Fourth it is accompanies by sharply growing revenues (though not as sharp as investment growth.)
In other words, whereas the equity value is growing rapidly, so is income and investment without leverage. This is a low-debt with high income scenario. Previous crises were high income with high debt (2008) or low income with low debt. (Dot Com).
That’s not to say that we have uniform fair equity values. We need to do quite a bit more due diligence to determine the state of the valuations precisely because we have unusual capital allocation strategies.
To cover this topic I’ll will break the analysis into multiple posts. They are:
Please return to these pages in the next few days to read these posts.
Asymco Bulletin is a digest of all the work we have published for the week ending May 3, 2026.
Editor's Note: Starting next week, we will be sending Asymco Bulletin to Asymco One subscribers only. You will still receive Updates when new posts are published per your notification settings.
In Asymco One's May 1, 2026 Office Hours session, review of Apple's Q2 2026 earnings, segment growth: iPhone at 22%, Services at 16%, iPad at 8%, Mac at 5.7%, and wearables at 5%. Steady, foundational growth of Services, Gross margins reached nearly 50%, R&D spending surged, a shift in Apple's capital return strategy showing perhaps the hand of John Ternus. Guidance suggests 16% revenue growth, 22% EPS growth. Analyst sentiment turned positive post-earnings, with most price targets rising above $310. Apple's evolving identity as an engineering-centric company was the focus of many questions. →
Revenue and EPS consensus, year-ago results and my expectations Yahoo Finance Yahoo Finance’s revenue estimate for Apple in Q2 stems from 31 analysts. As of April 25, the average estimate is $109.69 billion, with a low of $107.08 billion and a high of $115.37 billion. For the earnings per share estimate, 32 analysts put it at an average of $1.95. The low is $1.56 and the high is $2.16. TipRanks TipRanks also does its own analyst polling on Apple’s quarter. In its forecast as of April 19, its consensus is for a revenue of $109.45 billion, with a high of →
The Economist Interview: Hints at the future direction of the company → As is often the case, a 45 minute discussion turns into two sentences. The article sadly does not provide hints at the future direction of the company. But we can…
TD Cowen: 15% revenue growth, 10% growth guidance → Apple is projected to gain market share in both smartphones and PCs, driven by strong iPhone 17 demand and the new MacBook Neo, with anticipated revenue growth of over 15% in Q3 and positive sentiment ahead of earnings.
UBS Raises Price Target from $280 to $287 but Maintains Neutral Rating → Apple's fiscal Q2 shows promise with iPhone strength and solid Mac demand, especially for the budget-friendly Neo and AI-capable Mac mini, potentially boosting earnings beyond expectations.
Morgan Stanley forecasts fiscal second-quarter EPS of $1.74 → Despite memory pricing pressures, Apple's strong iPhone sales, potential AI and foldable iPhone announcements, solid free cash flow, and favorable market conditions position it for better-than-expected earnings and a possible stock rise to $300 by September.
Is Apple borrowing Samsung’s Market Expansion Strategy? → Bernstein SocGen maintains optimism on Apple's strategic pricing and ecosystem strength, forecasting EPS growth and potential market share gains, while Samsung faces smartphone profit challenges but thrives in memory.
Separately, it’s been reported that Samsung might see its first operation loss from its phone division, resulting in Apple capturing 100% (or more) of global smartphone profits. Simultaneously, Samsung is seeing huge profit gains from memory, even overtaking Nvidia’s profitability. This is remarkable…
Apple share of the smartphone SoC market grew from 15% to 19% in Q1 → In Q1 2026, global smartphone SoC shipments fell 8%, but Apple thrived in the premium market by leveraging its efficient supply chain and passing costs to consumers, boosting its market share from 15% to 19%.
Google to sell TPU chips as Gemini shows returns → Why pour cash into Nvidia when you can craft your own cutting-edge chips like Google, and then turn that innovation into a lucrative side hustle by selling them to tech giants like Meta and Anthropic?
The Vision Products Group Expanding → Gurman's 2025 dissolution claim clashes with 2026's active Vision Products Group hiring spree. The Vision Products Group posted 14 new senior roles last week.
Asymco One gives you full access to our research, analysis, and commentary. Subscribe with code BULLETIN for a discount.
Feedback: Have questions or comments? Reach out to us at contact@asymco.com. We’d love to hear from you.
Office Hours #2026FQ2 #presentation #transcript · 2 comments
A transcript of the May 1, 2026 Asymco One Office Hours, recorded one day after Apple's Fiscal Q2 2026 earnings call. Horace Dediu presents his analysis of the quarter and takes questions from Asymco One subscribers. Hosted by Horace Dediu and Farshad Nayeri.
Horace Dediu: So I'll do a short presentation, and then we're going to open it up for questions. We are speaking approximately one day after Fiscal Second Quarter 2026 earnings call. Let's dig into it and see if we can understand it even better.
First, I think that there was a comfortable beat from already a highly elevated expectation.
So we had a range of estimates— I collected those from Yahoo and TipRanks, each one had about 30 [analysts], probably a lot of overlap between them. So we had a range of about 105 to 115 in terms of revenues in billion, and then we had EPS in a range of about 1.6 to about 2.15.
And not only did it beat the consensus, but also you can see what happened a year earlier, which is the circle at the bottom of the graph. So the beat was from already a pretty high growth rate expected from the year before.
So we have a measure of how each of us, myself included, performed relative to the actual results.
I was about 1.8% under revenues delivered, and 1.6% on EPS. And then you can see red is Yahoo and blue is TipRanks.
So speaking for myself, I was perhaps a little bit too conservative on my revenues, and I was a little bit more accurate, relatively speaking, on EPS. Roughly speaking, again, I think these are not big errors, 1% to 2%. Worst case, 3% on the consensus basis.
Now, on the segments, these are the actual growth that we ended up with, iPhone almost 22%, 16% on services, 8% on the iPad, which is impressive. 5.7 on the Mac, we'll talk about that a little bit, and 5% on wearables and growth.
Segment level, again, the worst case, you're looking at an 8% overestimation on the Mac. The Mac— I think a lot of people, once they saw the Neo come out, once they heard about the Mac mini stockouts, when they heard about the Claude bots, you know, everybody buying up all these Macs, there was an expectation of a big boom in the Mac, but those all happened fairly late in the quarter. My expectation was a little bit over, but not as much. I was off about 3% on that estimate. So although we saw 5.7% growth, some people expected double digits. Also, the pros had the same fault there.
Overall, though, I think these are pretty impressive. I didn't break out the geographic segments. China grew extremely well. Rest of the world, that grew very well. Management also pointed out that they're doing very well in developing markets. So overall, regionally, there were some extraordinary performances. But as we see here, just the iPhone was incredible, 22%. Very similar to performance in the previous holiday quarter, where, again, unprecedented growth, or at least in the near history of the product.
And we'll get into some reasoning why that is. People talk about super cycles, people talk about the assumption that we have these giant surges once in a while. Well, here's how to look at it.
There are two graphs here. The bottom graph shows in green the net sales, but trailing 12 months, so it's smoothed out, so we don't see the spikes on the holidays. That's the green line. Above that, we have the EPS line. Now you'll see how they tracked very similarly for a while, and then they began to diverge. That occurred around COVID. It also occurred during the surge in services, especially subscriptions and services. But still, there's a similar pulse, if you will, a cyclicality to it.
I mean, part of that has to do with the introduction of a new form factor. This has been true all the way back since 2012. When a new iPhone comes, especially a new, distinctive-looking iPhone, people will go out, especially in China, buy it for showing off that they have the latest, which there's nothing wrong with that. But then the second year usually is not the same, the phone is not new, it's the same form factor. That has to do a lot with tooling. That's a long, old story, that the tooling is depreciated on a two-year schedule, so you're going to produce roughly the same look a couple of years in a row, and then by the next cycle, you'll see people upgrading or replacing their older phones. So you're going to have this— I guess what they used to call a super cycle.
And you see it also in the upper graph, where I try to separate out of sales just the phones. Now this is an estimate because we have no unit sales for the phones since 2018, so some of that is an estimate. But you'll see again, once you smooth out the cyclicality, you'll see these surges once in a while. Now, again, this is a valid observation, but I don't think it's the main driver. The oscillation isn't huge, it might be significant, but it's a blend of many things.
The bottom graph is particularly interesting. The gray areas are when the stock price fell. And the red line represents the derivative of EPS. And you'll see how, when that is about to dip, there's usually a stock price sale going on. I wouldn't say it's predictive, but it's an interesting pattern to go through.
So what's happening now? You'll see from the iPhone, there's a new surge happening. Now, when Tim has been asked this question, he says that, well, the iPhone 17's really nice, people really love it, and that's a good answer, but the fact is, it's a distinctive-looking product. Some say it's the orange color, but it's certainly attractive. So we're seeing this pattern, a nice surge.
We'll get into the guidance in a minute, and that actually demonstrates that we're in some kind of an acceleration. But here's the thing, underneath all that, services is just absolutely steady growth, compound growth, and as a result, it just lifts the whole story.
Here, services is at the bottom. Normally, in a graph like this, you want to put the oldest products at the bottom and the newer ones at the top, but I wanted to highlight the fact that services is foundational, in the sense of showing how it holds up everything else.
Most people put it the other way, they say the iPhone holds everything up, but services is looking more and more to be the thing that keeps people in the ecosystem. There's a lot of value there. There's a lot of things people depend on there, and I think it's one of the reasons people don't switch. So it's another one of these stories that people aren't appreciating enough. It's been years and years of pounding the table on services, but here you see it, just how important it is. It's the tide that lifts all the boats, and the boats being all the products.
So let's now talk a little bit about margins. Unbelievable, unbelievable margins. We just hit almost 50% on gross margins. Gross margin here is the blue line. And that's composed of two subcategories. We have services in red at the top, and we have products with the purple triangles.
And although products margins are exceptional— they're right around 40%— those services, again, are pulling the whole average up, and you can see that bend in the curve in the blue line, where we were very steady around 40%, but as services took more and more; it just pulled the whole curve up.
And we also see here operating and net margins, which also are going up, naturally. There is a little bit more operating expense. We'll get into that, which maybe decreases the slope of the bottom line. But this gross margin is absolutely incredible. We just haven't seen anything like this since 2010-11. We saw that surge back then, and then it sort of leveled out, and everybody was happy with 40%, and now we're flirting with 50. I just cannot believe it.
Just one more thing. I remember being an analyst decades ago, when I was looking at different companies in hardware and software, in phones and computers and so on, and everybody was really impressed by Microsoft, because Microsoft, had an 80% gross margin, because there was very little cost of sales. That's exceptional. An 80% margin business is a money printing machine. And everybody was impressed and jealous of Microsoft that they could pull that off. Of course, Microsoft, a software company, is going to have extraordinary margins, right?
And so for a phonemaker like Nokia, there was something to be jealous of. And here we are with Apple services, a significant component on the business, approaching also almost 80% right now. And it's still rising. I just can't get over how impressive this is.
A little bit about the difference between gross and net— you have to take out the operational expenses, and this is what we have here. It's interesting what's happened. Obviously, you see R&D overtaking on the absolute basis. So R&D overtook SG&A already in 2021. And now it's just [going] almost vertical.
By reading a little bit the guidance, I think it's going to taper a bit into the next quarter. But what we see is a significant R&D increase, also as a percent of sales, which you're seeing below in the graph below, but in a stacked fashion. In that sense, the two of them together are now approaching— haven't yet reached— a percentage of sales that was in evidence around 2007 and 8, when the iPhone was just emerging. But you'll see back then, R&D was tiny, SG&A was huge as a percent of sales. So much so that R&D—this is during Steve Jobs era, R&D was like 2% of sales. And now it's approaching 8%, which is extraordinary. Because that's an engineering company that's doing breakthrough work.
And that's something that Apple's not recognized for doing. There's a negative side of spending a lot on R&D. The positive, though, is that Apple is doing a lot of fundamental research now. This isn't fixing products, this isn't updating OS. This is engineering that is really driving what might be considered breakthrough. And that's something— and I've said this to the media when interviewed about Ternus and the succession— I said, the new CEO will need to be— this is before he was announced— I said [the CEO] would need to be someone who is acceptable to engineering, because Apple is an engineering company today. Fundamentally, culturally, operationally, it's an engineering company, and it is being now led by an engineer.
Steve Jobs was not an engineer. And none of the other CEOs were engineers. Tim Cook was an operations manager. He was excellent in a fundamental part of the business. And that is acceptable to engineers, culturally speaking. But the thing is that John is an engineer's engineer. He understands the culture of engineering and will understand how to motivate and retain talent, as well as to allocate capital effectively, not wasting it on pipe dreams. Engineers have a tendency to try to chase dreams, by the way, so you got to be harsh sometimes to shut things down. So, keep an eye on the R&D— it's a great story.
However overdoing it can be a problem. There are downsides to an engineering-led company where, again, it turns into kind of an engineering welfare state. Engineers tend to get projects and do a lot of navel-gazing, which needs to be managed carefully.
Now, let's just touch on ACTIVE. Active is the number of users, the fundamental measure of the value of the company. It's not counting iPhones. It's counting users, and these are the comments from management, just so we capture them. They come every quarter. Sometimes some products are mentioned, sometimes they're not.
So here's what we have exactly on the topic. Record upgraders and customers new to the Mac. They mentioned that Mac lifespans have been long, which is good and bad. They talk about the iPad, half the customers being— over half— new to the product. Same with the Apple Watch, this has been going on for a while.
So this is going to be important when we measure installed base, because if we see every quarter an estimate for the number of watches, or Macs, or iPads, you just take half of that and allocate it to the installed base, and the other half is growth of the installed base. So there's an interesting way to measure that, and I've been applying it. We're going to keep an eye on this.
And finally, there was a mention with respect to India during an answer to the question. The citation is that the iPhone, Mac, iPad, watch, all of these have a majority of customers that are new to the product in India. As you would expect, part of the developing market story. But this drum is still getting beaten. And that's a positive. Always want to look forward to that every quarter.
So let's jump in now to what I thought was the most unexpected comment during the call. I've pasted in here exact, verbatim the comments from the CFO. I need to point out a few things here, and I've highlighted these things in bold.
One is the dividend. The dividend number is 3.8. Last quarter was 3.9, so that's not a surprise. However, open market purchases were only $11 billion. Now, that is represented in the graph by the buyback, and that is this mustard color. And you'll notice it is extremely low. The previous quarter, we were over 25 on buyback, so we're less than half that. This is an anomaly. You'll see that it does not match the rest of the graph at all.
The blue area is dividends. The reddish area is net share repurchases, or settlements. And there's a pattern to both. Dividends has been growing in a predictable fashion, very steady. Buybacks have been somewhat steady, but up and down a little bit. During the last few periods, we've seen something unprecedented.
Now, you'll see that the 11 from last quarter was offset by a much higher number the previous quarter, but on balance, we're still down. And there's also these comments that say that they are abandoning the net cash neutral position. And I'm wondering if it's already started, because this $11 billion caught me by surprise.
I've highlighted that "our repurchase activity at any time can be affected by a number of factors that we take into account." So this was essentially explaining why sometimes there's a difference in the amount of purchases, right? And then in the middle of that commentary, he says, "as you're aware, we recently announced a CEO transition." Why does that comment fit in the middle of a paragraph, talking about the general theme?
I read this as it suggests that already the CEO choice is deciding how much to allocate to capital returns. And it appears— and again, I could be wrong— but it appears that John is probably against the idea of huge returns to shareholders in capital form. So keep an eye on this. This was, I found, very, very strange and out of character in a way. Very out of character of a Tim Cook presentation. I'm not judging it, I'm just pointing out that it isn't normal.
So here's the bottom line. This is the graph representing what's happening with the entire cash position and return of capital. The debt has decreased slightly, and it has been decreasing. And that's a good thing. As interest rates go up, you don't want to hold debt. A lot of that is fixed rate, but they're not taking on more. It seems like they're paying it down.
Net cash, which is the blue dotted line, has now been increasing two quarters in a row. Now, it's increased in the past, but never for long. It's had only one tick, during the holiday period. Here, where we're seeing two ticks— holiday and the quarter after.
Now, if you'll notice here, I'm going to try to zoom in. Those red lines represent what I would say were the trajectories to get to net cash zero. So that blue line, since they announced it, they kept missing the target. You would see that, another year goes by, and there's a notch up. Overall, the trend is down, but they haven't kept that path down all the way to zero. And that is now completely abandoned.
Again, we'll have to figure out why. The buyback, as I mentioned, halved— at least more than halved— to 11. Net cash zero abandoned, $100 billion net cash reduction. You'll see that this blue dot line has gone down by about half. It was down even further than that until it came back a bit. So that is going from about $160 billion net cash to the current $62 billion, which is why we get to 100 reduction. And $1 trillion overall return, which is, again, something they mentioned. In fact, they're at $1.085 trillion. And still $100 billion will be allocated further. Whether they actually spend it is another matter, but that's been approved.
So now— is this good news or bad news? I don't think it matters. I think at the end of the day, the value of the company doesn't change because of this. The value might be captured in the share price, or it might be captured as a percentage of the company that has been increasing.
In fact, let me just pop into the next slide. What does this mean? Are we never going to reach what I call the halving? Well, we were at the maximum 26.5 billion shares. And now we've reduced that to about 14.6. Half would be 13.2. So we're still going down. But there's 1.4 billion shares to go before it's half of what the max was. Now, this is an arbitrary figure. I just thought it was an interesting target to have. And as you can see, it's getting asymptotic as the price goes up. It should be harder and harder to get there. But we have $100 billion allocated. $260 billion at the current share price would need to be spent to get to half. But probably we're not going to get there. I really don't— if I were a betting man, I would say we're probably going to see this taper.
Let's look a little bit at guidance. This is based on what management already communicated. So if you put in the numbers they gave us, you will get revenue growth of 16%, coming at about— well, they guided 14 to 17, so I'm estimating 16 conservatively right now. That gets you to $108.7 billion. If you put in the other numbers— the margin, the OI&E and the tax— and do something about this share reduction. (We're still going to probably see a share reduction.) We're going to look at EPS 1.92. Which is another 22% growth. This is what we had last quarter as well.
I'm putting gross margin at the top of the guidance. [Last quarter] they went over. They guided high, and even so they went over, so I'm going to assume they're going to still hit towards the upper end of the range. I'm exactly at the upper end of that range.
If those things are true, the iPhone almost necessarily has to grow about 19%. Now, here, I'm dialing the Mac way up to 18% growth, because I do think they're going to get a lot more Mac Neos into customers' hands. Now, that's a lower price point, but it will drive sales. So yeah, I could be a little bit high on this. If I am, then iPhone needs to go a little bit higher because I still think they're going to get the revenue there.
They did warn that iPad is facing a tough comp, so I'm putting iPad down 3%. Wearables and home, 4%. It was 5% last time, so maybe consistency there. And Services, just the same as before, 16%, could come in a little bit less. But if it does, again, it's going to be put into something else like the iPhone.
So overall revenue growth, I think 16% is very much being telegraphed. And as I always say, they already have April on their books. They're communicating exactly at the end of April. They're not going to lie to us and withhold data from April. They know about a third [of the quarter] already, so that's why this guidance is so useful.
And, as you saw with my error analysis, nowadays, people's estimates are very close. There's a lot of consistency. We're not off more than a couple percentage from each other. That's just because they're so accurate on their guidance.
And speaking of analysts, one more graph. This is just some of the latest price targets. I'm just trying to bring everything together that came out today. This is all very brand new. A lot of targets moved up. Not that it's all that important, but people are getting more and more excited. Almost all the targets from anybody who has a positive— effectively a buy rating— is now above $310 as a target. There's two who are negative, that are at 270 and below. This is Barclays and Rosenblatt. And then there's a few which have no ratings. So they're typically neutral.
But overall, all these numbers are higher than they used to be. Now, again, I don't use that very much, but it's worth keeping an eye on things just to get a sense of how the sentiment is out there. And it looks like the stock is responding positively today. Not by much— 3% or so, last I checked. But that's the story today.
So given that, this is my first take on the quarter. Love to take questions.
-- End of Presentation --
Editor's Note: This presentation is made available to non-subscribers for a limited time. Subscribe to Asymco Oneforfull access to this and other content.
Below are Horace's live commentary during the release of Apple FQ2 2026 Earnings, lightly edited. For an in-depth look, and a discussion of what turned out to be a record-breaking quarter, join uss at Asymco Office Hours: Apple Live Q&A.
Transcript: Friday 30 April 2026, 4:30pm-6pm EST | asymco@mastodon
Apple will release earnings at 4:30PM ET and conference call begins half hour later and lasts for one hour. I will try to make some comments as I process the news. This might be the 75th Apple conference call I listen to.
My estimates: EPS $1.98 Rev. $109.2b iPhone Rev 55.716684 Mac Rev 8.640 iPad Rev 6.9552 Wearables & Home Rev 7.522 Services Rev 30.3753
iPhone revenue came in at $56.99 billion. My estimate was $55.71b.
Here is a graph of the expectations vs. actual Revenue results.
iPhone revenues grew 22%. Extraordinary. The growth barely slowed from 23% the previous quarter.
Mac revenue growth was 6%. Slightly less than I expected.
Revenues were up 17%, earnings per share were up 22%.
Best March quarter ever.
The board of directors has declared a cash dividend of $0.27 per share of the, an increase of 4 percent. Repurchase program authorized for up to $100 billion for the next 12 months. No surprises here.
Greater China growth was 28%.
Apple shares are down 0.6% after-hours. Normal drop when company beats on the top and bottom. The big drop comes when the CFO talks guidance.
John Ternus will join the call for a few remarks.
Gross margin came in at a record high of 49.3%. This is three months after the great memory panic of 2026 was declared.
Shares fall 0.81% after John Ternus remarks.
Apple reports double digit growth in every emerging market.
Mention of Mac Neo leads to more drops in the share price as the pain of share growth sinks in. Now down 1% after hours.
iPhones went to the moon, stock not mooning.
“Our strong business performance during the March quarter generated over $28 billion in operating cash flow and drove new March quarter records for both operating cash flow and EPS,” The fact that Apple did not turn over this cash flow t...
5% in Wearables and Home. Modest growth is shameful growth. Compounding shompounding.
Apple has 6 stores in India. So much more to do there.
Supply constraints mean that the growth could have been higher —CFO.
Active iPhone install base grew to all-time high. (No surprise). Customer satisfaction was 99% for iPhone 17 in the US.
Customer satisfaction for Mac was 97%.
Half of customers buying an iPad are new to the product. Most of these new customers are in emerging markets.
Customer sat for iPad at 98%.
Tap to pay (Apple Pay) now in 50 markets.
Net cash was $62 billion. No longer placing net cash neutral as a target!!!! OMG OMG.
June Q guidance: 14% to 17% growth. Shares recovered to +1.35%.
Margin guidance: 47.5% to 48.5%. Despite the great memory panic of 2026 being in full effect.
Shocked, shocked, shocked that CFO remarks did not crash the stock.
Several months to reach Mac supply demand balance. Neo and Studio constrained.
Net cash neutrality question and comments. Returned over $1 trillion so far. Another $100b allocated so they are still committed to that.
Shares now +4% in AH but not at record high.
Margins synopsis.
Tim says they did see higher memory costs. For the June quarter they expect significant higher memory costs and more beyond that. Still, margins are brilliant.
My estimates for unit shipments for Products.
Look at that R&D.
Any tariff refunds will be re-invested in US production or operations (beyond existing commitments.) —Tim the Enchanter.
India: low share is an opportunity; large middle class growing. I see no reason why it's not an equal opportunity to that of China.
That' a wrap. See you during the Office Hours tomorrow.
Expectations are low due to memory pricing, apparently.
Apple has multiple catalysts for strong revenue growth, so investors shouldn’t be spooked by any margin pressure from rising memory…
“Memory inflation will pressure margins, but this is well-known, and iPhone revenue upside sets up for a better than feared June quarter guide,” Woodring wrote.
He added that any announcements regarding an AI powered Siri at the company’s Worldwide Developers Conference in June, and the expected release of a foldable iPhone, would be positive tailwinds that can help push the stock higher after earnings.
Woodring, who rates the stock as Overweight with a $315 price target, also thinks Apple stands out against large tech peers as the company continues to report strong free cash flow while competitors continue to spend massive amounts of capex on building out AI infrastructure.
We expect gross margin downside to be more than offset by revenue upside in the June quarter guide, making for a better than feared earnings and a clearing event into WWDC this June, and the iPhone launch in September.While our gross margin forecast remains below Consensus given rising memory cost pressure, continued strength in iPhone, Mac, and Services revenue should more than offset this pressure and result in a June quarter implied EPS guide in-line with Street estimates (~$1.74) – a better-than-feared outcome against relatively low expectations.
At 28x next year GAAP EPS – roughly the midpoint of Apple's historical 24-34x valuation range – valuation is neither cheap nor taxing, but with our ~$10 of FY27 EPS 5% above Consensus, we see a path to $300 for Apple shares by this September, driven by modest multiple expansion and more robust positive EPS revisions.
Source: MacDailyNews
NB: Multiple catalysts, revenue upside, positive tailwinds, sentiment tailwind, favorable seasonal window, modest multiple expansion, thematically favorable backdrop, robust positive EPS revisions.
Neo and Claw incrementals
Apple is set to report fiscal second-quarter results on April 30, and investment firm UBS is expecting a “slight” upside to the consensus, based on Mac and iPhone-related strength.
“Supply chain checks and analysis of sell-through data suggest modest upside to our iPhone estimates while demand for the Neo and Mac mini suggests demand at least in-line with our Mac rev forecast,” UBS analyst David Vogt wrote in a note to clients. Vogt reiterated his Neutral rating on Apple but raised his price target to $287 from $280.
Turning to guidance, Vogt said he is expecting a “solid” offering for the June quarter and upped his earnings estimates as a result.
“Rising memory prices and Apple's ability to secure adequate supply is driving smartphone share gains for the iPhone product line at the expense of the broader Android ecosystem in our view,” Vogt explained. “In addition, solid demand for the Mac portfolio in part driven by initial success of the lower priced 'Neo' as well as demand for the 'mini' increasingly used to run AI agents like OpenClaw should drive incremental upside relative to our expectations.”
A consensus of analysts expects Apple to earn $1.94 per share on $109.73B in revenue for the fiscal second quarter.
Source: Seeking Alpha
NB: Missing the forest for the trees. Tune in to the post earnings discussion on Office Hours.
Share gains in both smartphones and PCs
TD Cowen analyst Krish Sankar reiterated a Buy rating and a $325 price target on AAPL stock. He expects Apple to report over 15% year-over-year revenue growth for the March quarter and to guide June-quarter revenue up about 10% year-over-year, driven by healthy iPhone 17 demand and the new MacBook Neo.
Key watch items: Apple’s ability to manage memory cost inflation and the launch of a compelling AI‑powered Siri. Sankar believes Apple will continue gaining share in both smartphones and PCs, with sentiment already positive heading into earnings.
Apple is set to report earnings on April 30. Currently, analysts expect AAPL to post revenue of $109.45 billion in fiscal Q2, up from $95.36 billion in the year-ago quarter. Further, the company is expected to report earnings of $1.95 per share, compared with earnings of $1.65 in the prior-year quarter.
Source: TipRanks
NB: Consensus building that memory crunch will be neutral to positive.
