Analysts race to boost Apple price targets

Cantor Fitzgerald boosted its Apple Inc. (AAPL) price target to $160 from $14 after the company reported historic results. Cantor called Apple’s results “exceptional,” and it thinks Cupertino will enjoy upcoming catalysts, including the Appel Watch and China’s continuing 4G ramp.

Citing Apple’s Q115 results, Evercore ISI has raised Apple’s price target to $140 from $135.

Janney Capital raised their estimates for Apple following “blowout” Q1 results. Janney maintains its Buy rating and Apple and upped its target to $127 from $117.

Morgan Stanley has upped Apple’s price target to $133 from $126.

UBS has boosted their Apple price target to $130 from $125.

Deutsche Bank raised its price target for the stock to $110 (already several dollars underwater) from a rather laughable $102.

Citing “blow out” Q115 results, Bernstein raised its price target on AAPL shares to $135 from $122.

JPMorgan raised its price target for Apple to $140 from $112.

Related articles:
Apple Inc. posts biggest quarterly earnings of any company ever – January 27, 2015
Apple destroys Street with all-time record earnings – January 27, 2015

5 Comments

  1. If an analyst were any good at what they profess to do, shouldn’t they be able to boost their target prices for Apple long BEFORE the stock reaches that point ? Setting a target that has almost been reached is hardly a challenging task.

    Most analysts seem to be looking backwards, like a historian, rather than accurately predicting the future.

  2. The results that should really scare Apple’s competitors is how well they did in China and ROW. There is huge upside there and other phone makers do not have a product that can compete.
    Who knows how the Apple Watch will do, but given the amount of potential first adopters (including me) it will start off very well.
    What is sad is that Macs did extremely well too but the amount of revenue they generate compared to the phones is low. In reality, the ASP for an iPhone vs Mac is no much different ($700 vs $1400) and iPhones volume is 10 times more.

  3. Boosting Apple’s price targets means absolutely nothing. I see absolutely no connection between Apple’s price targets and Apple’s money-making ability. Look at Apple’s recently compressed P/E. It compressed like a wet sponge which is ridiculous. Apple is only more undervalued now than it was the day before.

    Where’s the Apple premium for becoming the top smartphone seller in China or dominating mobile payments with Apple Pay or making corporate history in terms of quarterly profits. Apple gets no premium at all. Why is Apple’s P/E ratio increasingly lower than the S&P 500 when its growth has proved much greater?

    I have no interest in these people’s price targets for Apple because they’re less than useless. Let me know when Apple’s institutional ownership starts to increase and then maybe I’ll take notice.

    Don’t get me wrong. I’m not complaining about Apple’s current share price per se, but the reasoning behind it makes no sense at all to me. Apple’s P/E should seemingly be at least a point or two higher than it is from a fundamental standpoint. If a company is fairly valued then delivers or exceeds the revenue projected then why should the P/E compress? Am I wrong in my assessment?

  4. an·a·lyst
    ˈanələst/
    noun
    1. A person who manipulates stock prices for his own personal gain. 2. Someone deemed an expert, despite continually getting things wrong. 3. An idiot.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.