Apple Inc. (AAPL)vs Ford Motor Company (F)

Quick verdict

The simplest fact about this pair is the one that shapes everything else: over its trailing twelve months to March 2026 Ford lost money, posting a net loss of $6.1bn on revenue of $189.9bn, while Apple earned $128.9bn on revenue of $466.8bn in its twelve months to June 2026. That makes any side-by-side of earnings multiples meaningless — Ford has no usable P/E, and comparing one to a blank is not analysis. On the factors that could be scored, Ford took valuation on its 0.26 times sales and 1.31 times book, and took income on a 4.98% dividend yield against Apple's 0.31%. Growth, quality, balance sheet and momentum could not be scored at all, which is why the headline tally of 4 to 2 rests on two factors rather than six. Apple carries the "mature, high-quality" tag, Ford "income, mature".

At-a-glance comparison

Not scored — Growth: no three-year EPS growth for F. Quality: no ROIC for F. Balance sheet: no interest coverage for AAPL; no net debt/EBITDA for F. Momentum: no share-price return data for either company. A factor missing a figure for either company cannot be won by either, so it adds half a point to each score, as a tie does.

Business model and revenue mix

Two very different ways of turning capital into revenue sit here. Apple, listed on Nasdaq in consumer electronics, designs and sells iPhone, Mac, iPad and wearables alongside a services arm spanning the App Store, iCloud, Apple Music and Apple Pay — a mix that produced a 48.65% gross margin in the twelve months to June 2026. Ford, a NYSE-listed auto manufacturer, builds cars, trucks and SUVs under the Ford and Lincoln brands and runs the Ford Credit financing operation; its gross margin over the twelve months to March 2026 was 8.04%. Revenue scale differs by roughly two and a half times in Apple's favour, but the structural gap is wider than the turnover gap: Ford's share count of 4.07bn supports $189.9bn of sales, Apple's 14.59bn shares support $466.8bn.

Valuation

On the multiples that still work for a loss-making manufacturer, Ford is the cheaper share and takes this factor. At the 14 October 2026 close it traded on 0.26 times trailing sales and 1.31 times book, with a free cash flow yield of 19.46% struck against $9.5bn of trailing free cash flow and a $49.1bn market capitalisation. Apple, at a $5,005.2bn market capitalisation, traded on 10.72 times sales, 46.55 times book and 30.07 times EV/EBITDA, with a free cash flow yield of 2.73%. Its trailing P/E of 39.33 and PEG of 5.72 have no counterpart on Ford's side, because Ford's trailing earnings per share was negative $1.55 — a negative denominator produces no ratio, so the earnings-based comparison simply cannot be made here.

Growth profile

This factor could not be scored, because Ford's three-year earnings-per-share CAGR is absent — that figure is not computed when EPS was a loss at either end of the window, and Ford's trailing EPS is negative $1.55. What the revenue lines do show: Ford compounded sales at 5.82% a year from fiscal 2022 to fiscal 2025 and 8.05% a year from fiscal 2020, while Apple compounded at 1.81% over the three-year window and 8.68% over five. Apple's earnings growth is available on both windows — 6.88% a year since fiscal 2022 and 17.86% since fiscal 2020, the longer figure starting from a lower fiscal 2020 base and flattered accordingly. Ford was named best for growth, but on revenue growth alone, since no earnings growth figure exists for it.

Profitability and quality

Margins are where the two part company most sharply. Apple converted revenue to a 33.17% operating margin and a 27.62% net margin over the twelve months to June 2026, giving $154.9bn of operating income and $128.9bn of net income. Ford's trailing twelve months to March 2026 produced an operating loss, a negative 3.77% operating margin and a negative 3.20% net margin — $7.2bn and $6.1bn of red ink respectively. Both figures are reported operating income, not a substitute measure. Note that Ford still generated $9.5bn of free cash flow despite the accounting loss, a reminder that depreciation-heavy manufacturers can be cash-positive and loss-making at once. Apple's free cash flow of $136.7bn sits a little below its operating income. No percentage change between a profit and a loss is shown, because such a figure would not be a growth rate.

Balance-sheet risk

The balance-sheet factor could not be scored: Apple has no interest-coverage figure, which requires both operating profit and a reported interest expense, and Ford has no net-debt-to-EBITDA ratio, which needs total debt, cash and a positive EBITDA. Ford's interest coverage was additionally withheld as not interpretable, since a financing arm's interest costs are not comparable with an industrial's. The figures that are available: Apple held $39.5bn of cash against $84.3bn of total debt at 27 June 2026, net debt of 0.27 times EBITDA, and a current ratio of exactly 1.0 against shareholders' equity of $107.5bn. Ford held $17.6bn of cash at 31 March 2026, a current ratio of 1.09 and equity of $37.5bn. Neither company wins this factor; it is unscored, not level.

Price performance and shareholder returns

Returns on capital tell opposite stories, though the quality factor itself could not be scored because Ford has no return on invested capital — that calculation needs total debt, cash and equity, and invested capital of at least a twentieth of total assets, a test a company with a large finance book does not clear. Apple returned 84.08% on invested capital and 148.75% on equity in the twelve months to June 2026; the equity figure is inflated by a slim $107.5bn equity base after years of buybacks, so the 84.08% ROIC is the fairer read. Ford's return on equity was negative 14.82%, consistent with its trailing loss. No company was named best for quality. On shareholder returns, Ford's 4.98% yield and 0.63% buyback yield beat Apple's 0.31% yield, 12.13% payout and 1.64% buyback yield.

Which stock fits which investor

Income-oriented buyers have a clear candidate: Ford paid $0.60 per share over its trailing year for a 4.98% yield, roughly sixteen times Apple's 0.31%, and it was picked as best for income on that basis. Value-screen users will also note Ford's 0.26 times sales, 1.31 times book and 19.46% free cash flow yield. The trade-off is that the yield is being paid by a business that reported a $6.1bn net loss. Investors prioritising demonstrated profitability and capital efficiency will look instead at Apple's 33.17% operating margin, 27.62% net margin and 84.08% return on invested capital, accepting 39.33 times trailing earnings and 46.55 times book for them. Momentum investors get nothing from this page: no licensed share-price history is held, so one-, three- and five-year returns are unavailable for both and that factor is never scored.

• Value: F
• Growth: F
• Income: F
• Quality: Not scored

Frequently asked questions

Why is there no P/E ratio for Ford?

Ford reported a trailing net loss of $6.1bn and earnings per share of negative $1.55 over the twelve months to March 2026. A price-to-earnings ratio built on a negative denominator carries no meaning, so none is shown. Apple's trailing P/E of 39.33, as at the 14 October 2026 close, therefore has nothing to be compared against.

How can Ford generate free cash flow while losing money?

Ford produced $9.5bn of free cash flow in the twelve months to March 2026 despite a $6.1bn net loss. Non-cash charges such as depreciation on a capital-intensive manufacturing base can keep cash generation positive while the reported profit line is negative. That free cash flow underpins the 19.46% free cash flow yield against a $49.1bn market capitalisation.

Which company scored higher overall?

Ford scored 4 to Apple's 2. Ford won valuation and income outright; growth, quality, balance sheet and momentum could not be scored and each added half a point to both sides. So the margin rests on two scored factors, not a broad sweep.

Is Apple's 148.75% return on equity reliable?

It is accurate but flattered. Apple's shareholders' equity stood at just $107.5bn at 27 June 2026 against $128.9bn of trailing net income, a base thinned by sustained buybacks — the 1.64% buyback yield is the current year's contribution. The 84.08% return on invested capital is the steadier gauge of capital efficiency.

Why are one- and five-year share price returns not shown?

No licensed share-price history is held for either company, so one-, three- and five-year share-price returns are unavailable for both and momentum is never scored on this site. The prices used — $342.96 for Apple and $12.05 for Ford — are exchange closing prices as of 14 October 2026.

Go deeper: guides for this comparison

• Balance-sheet risk: net debt, interest cover and the current ratioThe three numbers that show whether a company can carry its debt, how to read each one, and what they reveal about Pfizer, Intel, Disney and Palantir.
• Dividends vs buybacks: how companies hand cash back, and how to judge itDividend yield, payout ratio and buyback yield explained with real companies, why a high yield can be a warning, and how to tell whether a payout is sustainable.
• Free cash flow yield: the valuation measure that is hardest to fakeWhy cash beats reported earnings, how free cash flow yield works, and what the gap between profit and cash reveals at Apple, Amazon, Microsoft and Salesforce.
• Operating margin: why Nvidia keeps 65 cents of each dollar and Ford keeps noneWhat operating margin measures, why it differs so much between business models, and what Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Nvidia, Intel and the carmakers teach about pricing power.

Related comparisons

• AAPL vs AMD
• AAPL vs AMZN
• AAPL vs BAC
• AAPL vs COIN
• AAPL vs CVX
• AAPL vs DIS