AAPL vs. SNOW: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Company Overview

AAPL’s market capitalization of 3,008.82 billion USD is substantially larger than SNOW’s 70.06 billion USD, indicating a significant difference in their market valuations.

With betas of 1.21 for AAPL and 1.21 for SNOW, both stocks show similar sensitivity to overall market movements.

Performance Comparison

This chart compares the performance of AAPL and SNOW over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).

Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

Valuation Metrics Comparison

This section compares the market valuation of AAPL and SNOW. Key takeaways regarding their valuation, when viewed within their industry context, are presented in the commentary that follows.

• AAPL’s Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratio of 31.05 is very high, indicating its stock trades at a significant premium to its earnings, possibly due to strong investor sentiment or high growth expectations. SNOW’s P/E ratio of -49.94 is negative, signaling it is currently unprofitable.
• AAPL’s Forward PEG ratio of 2.88 is very high, suggesting its stock might be overvalued if its price has substantially outrun its future earnings growth forecast. SNOW’s Forward PEG ratio of -1.31 is negative, often an indicator of issues such as negative current earnings or anticipated earnings contraction, which calls its fundamental valuation into question.

Dividend Comparison

AAPL provides a 0.50% dividend yield, potentially offering a blend of income and growth, whereas SNOW currently does not pay a dividend, possibly retaining profits to fund operations or growth initiatives.

Financial Strength Metrics Comparison

This section evaluates the financial strength of AAPL and SNOW. Noteworthy observations on their financial resilience, considered from an industry perspective, are detailed in the points that follow.

• AAPL’s current ratio of 0.82 is considered low. This may signal potential challenges with its short-term liquidity, implying that its current assets might offer a limited buffer for meeting its immediate debts and could affect its capacity to smoothly manage upcoming financial duties.