Apple shares hit new all-time closing high

Apple closing highIn Nasdaq trading today, shares of Apple Inc. (AAPL) rose $3.76, or 1.17%, to $325.21, a new all-time closing high. Apple’s all-time intraday high of $327.85 was set during trading on January 29, 2020.

Apple’s 52-week low stands at $168.42.

Apple currently has a market value of $1.423 trillion.

The top five U.S. publicly-traded companies, based on market value:
1. Apple (AAPL) – $1.423T
2. Microsoft (MSFT) – $1.397T
3. Alphabet (GOOGL) – $1.017T
4. Amazon (AMZN) – $1.021T
5. Facebook (FB) – $601.017B

Selected companies’ current market values:
• Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA) – $567.090B
• Walmart (WMT) – $329.992B
• Disney (DIS) – $257.611B
• Intel (INTC) – $286.944B
• Cisco (CSCO) – $206.556B
• Adobe (ADBE) – $179.220B
• Netflix (NFLX) – $161.020B
• IBM (IBM) – $136.422B
• SoftBank (SFTBF) – $97.034B
• Sony (SNE) – $84.115B
• Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) – $57.688B
• Dell (DELL) – $39.143B
• Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) – $31.738B
• Twitter (TWTR) – $29.820B
• Spotify (SPOT) – $26.952B
• Nokia (NOK) – $23.785B
• BlackBerry (BB) – $3.389B
• Fitbit (FIT) – $1.759B
• Sonos (SONO) – $1.731B
• RealNetworks (RNWK) – $49.937M

AAPL quote via NASDAQ here.

MacDailyNews Take: Hello, $325!


  1. Boy, what a race. Microsoft is now right behind. Not that it really means anything. And with Apple buying so many shares back, the total valuation drops more than the stock rises as a result of those buybacks.

    1. Hey Mel, if the market valuation drops, how does the stock holder’s value rise re: buybacks? I was under the impression the value remains constant, but the lesser stock count translates to each share increasing in value? (Question asked without influence to stock gaining value in market.)

      Sorry for elemental question.

      1. The idea is that fewer shares available in the market drive up the price of the remaining shares, thus increasing the value of shareholders’ portfolios. But since Apple has something like 4.38 billion shares outstanding, whatever they buy back are mere drops (maybe cups) in a barrel. Didn’t do much good when AAPL took a tumble in 2018 (which I attribute to Wall Street traders trying to punish Apple for halting its practice of announcing iPhone sales and making their jobs harder). AAPL’s been on a tear over the past four or five months, and some attribute at least part of that to Apple’s buybacks. Maybe, but I don’t — ahem — buy it. (Sounds too much to me like “tax cuts will pay for themselves” — something that has never actually happened.) I think it is partly the result of lazy “analysts” who only ever looked at iPhone sales now having to actually do their jobs and learn something about the company. It does retire those shares and so Apple pays out less in dividends (since Apple doesn’t pay dividends to itself). For a less jaundiced view, here’s a good place to learn more:

        1. “The idea is that fewer shares available in the market drive up the price of the remaining shares, thus increasing the value of shareholders’ portfolios” (Catalinaman)

          I understand the cause/effect here, but Mel’s comment, “with Apple buying so many shares back, the total valuation drops,” I don’t.

          It would seem, yes, buybacks realign/shift the value, but I can’t see how the company’s market value would actually change because of buybacks (rise/or drop)?

          1. It doesn’t. Apple buys shares at the market rate. If Apple buys 100 shares at $100 each, those shares are removed from the market. Their value drops to $0, but the other shares retain their value. You might think that Apple’s valuation has dropped by $10,000 (100 x $100), but with those shares out of play, people who hold the remaining shares, recognizing a more limited supply, demand a higher price from those who want to buy. Theoretically. It’s supposed to be a self-correcting mechanism. But AAPL’s share price goes up and down constantly for a seemingly infinite number of reasons. If you buy 100 shares of AAPL at the same price and at the same time as Apple is buying shares, your shares do not drop to $0, and you can re-sell them at any time. You have a $10,000 asset until the next market trade that establishes the new market price at the next moment. And so on. The price moves are complex and dynamic, but analysts’ explanations are simplistic and static. The only important question for you is, how long will you hold before you decide to sell? So, if you bought and held 100 shares of AAPL at the split-adjusted closing price of $4.00 on Jan. 1, 2000, because of splits, you would now own 2,800 shares. That $4,000 investment would now be worth over $910,000 (more, if you re-invested your dividends to buy more shares). Anyone who actually did that could be a millionaire by the end of this year, and likely will be within the next two (if economic conditions don’t drastically change).

      2. The problem is that it’s mostly a myth. If Apple spends $30 billion buying back 100 million shares, which is the size of buybacks Apple has been doing, the total valuation drops by $30 billion. Apple loses all that money as well. It’s gone.

        But 100 million shares is just about here’s the problem. Take the eps for the 100 million shares sold, and distribute those earnings among the remaining 4.4 billion shares. It’s not much is it? Theoretically, the share price should rise by the amount added to each share after the buyback.

        But there’s no evidence that shares do rise by even that tiny amount. If they do, it’s for a short time as big investors take advantage by selling shares, and then the shares drop again. Buybacks are popular among big investors because of that, as well as what Warren Buffet said last year when asked about Apple buying shares back. He said that he loves it because he owns more of the company without having to pay another penny. He didn’t even mention the supposed increase in the price of RT he shares, because he knows it’s not real, long term.

        But for most everybody else who doesn’t own 5% of Apple, that not relevant. Only the share price and the dividend is.

    2. I think it means something and that is how Microsoft is still valued by Wall Street at a higher multiple which implies Microsoft has far more growth potential than Apple. However, there’s little can be done about it and Microsoft does have about 3B more outstanding shares than Apple and that puts Apple at an advantage when it comes to paying out less dividends each quarter. 3B shares is no small number.

      I do happen to find it rather annoying that Microsoft is valued higher than Apple, but Wall Street worships any company with a cloud business. Unlimited growth potential they say, but that remains to be seen. If it’s really true, then Apple should have gone after a cloud business and taken at least some of that low-hanging cloud fruit. Apple may be on fire, but Microsoft is keeping pace with Apple quite easily and it doesn’t require any new products to do so. Apple has to scratch and claw to keep iPhone sales high while Microsoft can simply sit back and let companies come to them for cloud services.

      1. Apple probably should have developed a cloud business. But they probably looked at that as a commodity play, and Apple doesn’t do commodities. Had they taken that path, though, I think they’d be in even better shape today. Look what happened when they tried a smart commodity play and released iTunes for Windows. It was that vision thing … and the world changed.

    3. It’s not a race. We’re not betting on horses, here. Both can be winners. If one gets ahead of the other in market cap (currently, AAPL), the only real reward is — temporary bragging rights. Whoop-de-doo.

  2. Apple simply shrugged off the FAKE IMPEACHMENT debacle and the first House Speaker in history, throwing a temper tantrum ripping up one of the greatest SOTU speeches — EVER — on live TV. What a lowlife!

    I watched her petulant news conference earlier today where Nancy gleefully reminded us Trump was impeached FOREVER.

    What clueless Pelosi did NOT say, Trump was ACQUITTED FOREVER and NOT GUILTY FOREVER. Shove it sore loser…

    1. I am waiting for the condemnation by conservative American Christians of Donald J. Trump’s blasphemous performance at the National Prayer Breakfast on February 6. The keynote speaker noted that in a country torn by polarization it is up to people of faith to love their enemies. Mr. Trump took the microphone and began his remarks with “I don’t agree.”

      He then demonstrated his hatred for his enemies by turning the longstanding bipartisan event into a totally partisan attack. I do not think it is too much to point out that this also expressed his hatred for the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 5:44, Luke 6:27, and Luke 6:35.

      Like anybody else, the President has the right to criticize the opinions and actions of others as demonstrating faulty political judgment (although that was not the time or place for it). His remarks went far beyond that, however. It was bad enough that he questioned the loyalty to our constitutional republic of the party that received more votes in 2016 than he did.

      He far more seriously crossed the line to specifically criticize his critics’ religious faith at a prayer meeting that several of them were attending. When the head of the Executive Branch—one who has expressly said, “Article Two lets the President do whatever he wants”—starts defining one set of religious beliefs and practices as OK, while another set is not OK, that sounds exactly like the Establishment of Religion that the First Amendment specifically forbids.

      When someone with that alleged power says that Senator Romney cannot be honest about whether his beliefs affect his voting and that Speaker Pelosi cannot be serious about “praying for those in authority” in obedience to 1 Timothy 2:2, he is implicitly threatening their Free Exercise of Religion. That is also forbidden to the Federal Government by the First Amendment.

      Yes, tearing up a speech is rude. Tearing up the Constitution and Bible is more than rude.

      1. Per the Article Two ref, do you honestly believe…that HE believes, as prez, he can do anything he wants?

        Are you one that believes his comment “ask the Russians” about Hillary’s emails, gives credence, or proof, to his illicit/inappropriate/direct association with Russia/Putin?

        Trump’s lips flap all-too freely at times, and he often fails to put thoughts in proper context. He does it ALOT and it’s problematic. Does he actually think he’s king-like, or can/will function as such? I experience a little disbelief when I hear/read of those that do.

        1. I have no idea what he actually believes. As Queen Elizabeth I said, “We have no windows into men’s souls.” All we can know is what he says, included repeated citations of Article II by him and his spokesmen, and how he behaves, which is as if there were no limits—“I could shoot somebody in the middle of Park Avenue,” and “if you’re famous, you can grab them by the…” Even some of the Republican Senators who voted not guilty think that the Ukraine situation could have been avoided if he hadn’t thought he was untouchable.

          I think it is entirely possible that he believes nothing at all, He does not seem to draw any distinction between opinion and facts, between observed data and “alternate facts.” His comments about Romney clearly indicates that he simply finds the notion that people might be motivated by faith or principle incomprehensible. Mr. Trump is the ultimate illustration of a post-modern epistemology that regards the notion of “facts” as a myth. There is nothing but opinions that serve the speaker’s self-interest.

          That makes him uniquely unqualified to deal with issues that actually do have factual foundations, like high-tech questions. Apple can agree with his opinions, but they cannot alter physical or mathematical facts, which really do exist as more than opinions.

          1. “I have no idea what he actually believes.”

            Yes, probably the most HONEST statement you have ever posted President Trump HATER.

            “I think it is entirely possible that he believes nothing at all, He does not seem to draw any distinction between opinion and facts, between observed data and “alternate facts.”

            Yeah, please tell us AGAIN how you have not acknowledged or complimented ONE economic or any OTHER accomplishment while Trump is president.

            You are a LIAR, FAKE and a FRAUD. Nuff said…

            1. Con Don is a liar, fake, and a fraud. TxUser has been nothing but honest, forthright, and honorable.

              If you have any evidence whatsoever to prove the above statements wrong, Goeb, show your evidence. Of course we all know that you never actually do this, but it’s fun to see you incapable of proving your twisted view of reality.

      2. “The keynote speaker noted that in a country torn by polarization it is up to people of faith to love their enemies.”

        That’s a tough one since Pelosi and Trump have shown no “love” for each other as it should be.

        President Trump received more electoral votes as the framers where wise to insure all voices will be heard. Obviously you are saying 2.8 million votes in one liberal city outweigh the will of the people nationwide. No, it does work that way and get over it already over three years later.

        “When someone with that alleged power says that Senator Romney cannot be honest about whether his beliefs affect his voting and that Speaker Pelosi cannot be serious”

        I totally agree with President Trump! He called out their FALSE MEDIA MOTIVES and speaking plainly and honestly is his greatest gift. Sorry you can’t handle the PLAIN TRUTH.

        Tearing up the Bible and Constitution, you are woefully mistaken and the heightened drama is FALSE! That would be the Democrat Party, get a GRIP FAKE CONSERVATIVE…

        1. GeoB, My preference would be to ignore you, but my experience with both you and your Dear Leader is that you take silence as just an excuse to grab another mile.

          I did not say that Trump and Pelosi have shown love for each other. I said nothing about the Speaker at all, other than to note that tearing the speech was rude. I did say that the President listened to somebody quoting the Gospels and then disagreed with them. I did say that the National Prayer Breakfast is not the appropriate venue for a partisan attack on the religious faith of other Americans. I did say that to say what he said in that context was blasphemous. Most of us who fail to show concern for our neighbors (and we are all sinners) feel a little guilty about it; we do not trumpet it as a virtue in a room full of religious leaders. To do so is not normal behavior.

          I never said that the President was not elected lawfully. He is our President, God help us, because he did receive the majority of Electoral College votes (even if his percentage was below the 230-year median). I have no need to “get over it.” What I did say is that it is bizarre to claim that the majority of American voters are un-American, which is what you are saying when you suggest that only Trump supporters are truly patriots. What’s next, to suggest that people who do not vote for the incumbent should only be treated as 3/5ths of a human being?

          As I observed in a previous comment, we do not have windows into other people’s souls. It is rather presumptuous to claim that Romney and Pelosi are being insincere when the only evidence is that they honestly believe what they are saying. Just because you disagree with their opinions does not mean that they do not hold them. I disagree with your opinions, but I have never suggested that you are lying about them. Only someone with profound psychological issues is paranoid enough to accuse other people without evidence of being liars and not simply wrong.

          The Declaration of Independence and US Constitution were based on the presumption that “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Lord Acton, who coined that phrase, was the leading Roman Catholic layman in England, and he was talking about the Pope.) There is a complex system of checks and balances that simply does not work when one branch of government (the Senate) concedes absolute power to another (the Presidency). The constitutional structure assumes that no single party will exercise absolute power. The embarrassing display at the National Prayer Breakfast shows that the President not only thinks he knows more about climate than the scientists and more about war than the generals, but more about God than the Christian scriptures and community.

          Conceding him expertise in areas where he is not an expert, such as encryption technology or health care, is a formula for disaster. Apple has been lucky to maintain its balance so far. Let’s hope it continues to be lucky.

          1. “I said nothing about the Speaker at all, other than to note that tearing the speech was rude.”

            Yes, rude indeed!

            “I did say that the National Prayer Breakfast is not the appropriate venue for a partisan attack on the religious faith of other Americans.”

            I don’t believe it was a partisan attack, more like HONEST CLARITY exposing FAKE motives and despicable acts only Pelosi and Romney are capable of using the media for their selfish purposes. Refreshing to call it out where it matters MOST.

            “I never said that the President was not elected lawfully. He is our President, God help us”

            NO, God help you LYING FAKE CONSERVATIVE. Simply tired of your deceit.

            As to the rest of your tedious opinions, Trump will be elected in a landslide and Pelosi will go down in defeat as the WORST speaker of the House in history.

            Nov. 3, 2020, you should remember that…

      3. Abortion is one of many mortal sins proudly supported by the Democratic Party. Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are two of the most prominent champions of moral evil in public life today. Not only should they routinely be denied Holy Communion, but they should be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. President Trump has not just the right but the obligation to forcefully criticize these snakes, and to investigate the corruption and criminality they are involved with. I don’t know who Pelosi prays to, but God is not her master.

    2. You only have one topic, don’t you? And it’s clearly not AAPL. You offer no insight, no information, no data, no original thought. Of all the topics on MDN, this is the one that is the most fact-based. If you must sputter and rant in these messages, take it to another topic. You don’t own any APPL shares. You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about. You have no power here.

      So let me reiterate MDN’s take: Hello, $325!

    3. The impeachment was real. What happened yesterday is that McConnell rejected the option to appoint President Pence to office. Very few people, including what’s left of the GOP, believes Donlad to be not guilty. They simply didn’t want to risk their reelection campaigns by going against Moscow Mitch.

      Must be that Pence isn’t trustworthy enough?

    4. That’s funny. The corrupt president being acquitted by the corrupt Republican senate who refused to hear witnesses and read documents that proved his corruption, and so would have been forced to convict, and remove him.

      Go on believing the crap that he’s innocent of being the most corrupt (and incompetent) president we’ve ever had.

  3. She’s still trying to get the peanuts out of her teeth. It was one of her foci during the State of the Union address. I was feeling it for her. She had a lot on her mind that evening…and today, apparently. Don should offer her some floss.

  4. I’m glad Apple is doing so well as it is. I thought the Coronavirus was going to hit Apple really hard as analysts start find reasons how Apple is going to suffer in terms of lowered production. I feel certain there will be loss of production, but that’s something that can’t be controlled when nature has the upper hand. I’m sure it must be very tough on employees in that region of China and that’s as important as slowed product sales.

  5. Isn’t this article about AAPL reaching a new closing high? I didn’t see that it was about prayer breakfasts, the Bible, God or political party. Can’t you assholes find another forum to be irrelevant.

Reader Feedback

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