The AI catalyst
While Apple has been slow to leverage the opportunity of AI, the company is poised to rectify that situation over the coming year, according to Wedbush analyst Dan Ives. The veteran tech analyst recently raised his price target on Apple to a Street-high $350, up from its previous level of $320, while maintaining an “outperform” (buy) rating on the stock. That represents potential upside for investors of 26% compared to the stock’s closing price on Monday.
Apple for the win?
Ives maintains an outperform (buy) rating and a $210 price target on Nvidia, which would push its market cap to $5.1 trillion if it surpasses that benchmark over the coming year. On the other hand, if Apple stock were to reach Ives’ price target of $350 in 2026, its market cap would climb to $5.17 trillion, pushing it just ahead of Nvidia.
Seasoned investors know that price targets – like predicting what the stock market will do next – is a fool’s errand (small “f”), and the only thing we know for sure is that the future is uncertain.
That said, given Apple’s track record of defying the odds, I wouldn’t put it past the iPhone maker to retake the haughty crown of market cap supremacy. And at 33 times forward earnings, it’s cheaper than Nvidia’s forward multiple of 39.
I likes it, slow and careful… But, as with any stock, there is a risk factor… I had to overrule my financial guy years ago, he wanted me out of APPL, but I resisted… I think I won this one…
Not for nothing, the in the realm of technological companies in the midst of turmoil, those numbers are essentially the same.
I am my financial guy.
I don’t have a formal background in finance, but I know a lot of math, the same way that I don’t have a formal background in computers but I know a lot about them, too.
Avoiding finance guys has paid off abundantly for me and my family.
(That said, I’ve paid for the services of doctors, lawyers, and tax guys.)
-awlabrador
Depends on how you look at it. If you look at the reasoning behind what investors are willing to pay (i.e. the P/E they are willing to accept), then the numbers aren’t even close to being the same. People accept a higher P/E when higher growth is expected, and a lower P/E when lower growth is expected. One of the companies is growing at single digit rates (or perhaps sometimes at low 2-digit rates), while the other company is growing much faster at well into the two digit rates. You would expect the faster growing company to have a much higher P/E than the slower growing company, not a nearly equal P/E.