Apple Inc. (AAPL)vs MU Holdings, Inc. (MU)

Quick verdict

Apple Inc. (AAPL) and MU Holdings, Inc. (MU) appeal to different investors. On our six-factor framework, AAPL scores 2 and MU scores 4. MU looks cheaper on the multiples that matter, while MU grows faster and AAPL earns higher returns on capital. Overall, MU edges this comparison, but the right pick depends on whether you prioritise value, growth, income or balance-sheet safety.

2-year relative performance

At-a-glance comparison

Business model and revenue mix

Apple Inc. operates in Consumer Electronics (Technology), while MU Holdings, Inc. sits in Software—Infrastructure (Technology). Because both compete in the same sector, this is a direct head-to-head and the financial differences below are especially meaningful. AAPL carries a beta of 1.10 versus 1.76 for MU, meaning MU has historically been the more volatile of the two.

Valuation

On valuation, MU is the cheaper stock. AAPL trades on a forward P/E of 26.84 and EV/EBITDA of 31.46, against 29.96 and 32.42 for MU. Price-to-sales is 11.06 vs 4.11, and free-cash-flow yield is 3.6% vs 5.5%. A higher multiple is only justified if the company can sustain faster growth or wider margins, which is exactly what the next sections test.

Growth profile

MU is the faster grower. AAPL has compounded revenue at 6.4% over three years with EPS growth of 22.6%, while MU has delivered 20.5% revenue and 13.3% EPS growth. Growth like this is the single biggest driver of long-term returns, but it also tends to come with a richer valuation, so it must be weighed against the multiples above.

Profitability and quality

On profitability and quality, AAPL is stronger. AAPL posts a 32.6% operating margin, 146.7% return on equity and 49.6% return on invested capital. MU posts 44.1%, 24.8% and 22.2% respectively. Return on invested capital above roughly 15% is a hallmark of a durable competitive advantage, so this metric deserves particular attention.

Balance-sheet risk

MU has the safer balance sheet. AAPL carries net-debt/EBITDA of -1.50x with a current ratio of 1.07, versus -0.74x and 1.58 for MU. Lower leverage gives a company more room to invest through a downturn and reduces the risk of dilution or distress.

Price performance and shareholder returns

Over the past year AAPL returned 73.5% against 50.4% for MU; on a three-year annualised basis it is 27.2% vs 27.0%. AAPL yields 0.3% and MU yields 0.2%. Past performance never guarantees future results, but the multi-year track record shows how the market has rewarded each business so far.

Which stock fits which investor

For value-oriented investors, MU is the better fit on today's multiples. Growth investors will likely prefer MU, which is expanding faster. Income investors should lean toward MU for its higher shareholder yield, while investors who prize quality-at-a-reasonable-price will favour AAPL for its superior returns on capital. This is a comparison of facts, not a recommendation — your time horizon, risk tolerance and existing holdings should drive the final decision.

• Value: MU
• Growth: MU
• Income: MU
• Quality: AAPL

Frequently asked questions

Is AAPL or MU the better buy right now?

Neither is universally "better." AAPL scores 2 and MU scores 4 on our six-factor framework. MU is cheaper, MU grows faster, and AAPL is higher quality — so the right pick depends on your objective.

Which stock is cheaper, AAPL or MU?

MU is the cheaper stock across forward P/E (26.84 vs 29.96), EV/EBITDA (31.46 vs 32.42) and price-to-sales (11.06 vs 4.11).

Which has grown faster, AAPL or MU?

MU has the stronger growth profile, with three-year revenue CAGR of 6.4% for AAPL versus 20.5% for MU.

Which stock pays a bigger dividend?

AAPL yields 0.3% and MU yields 0.2%, so MU is the stronger income choice.

Related comparisons

• AAPL vs AMD
• AAPL vs AMZN
• AAPL vs AVGO
• AAPL vs BABA
• AAPL vs BAC
• AAPL vs COIN