Category Archives: AAPL

Apple Inc. Price Momentum Indicator

Below is the Price Momentum Indicator for Apple Inc. (AAPL).

Continue reading

Apple Price Momentum Indicator

Below is Apple Inc. (AAPL) from 1982 to 2023 applying the Price Momentum Indicator.

Continue reading

Apple Inc. Price Momentum $AAPL

We published the first Price Momentum for Apple (AAPL) on May 14, 2022 when stock was trading at $147.11 and concluded the write up with the following:

"Recently, analysts on media were suggesting this is a great opportunity to purchase Apple. While that may be true, our model suggest better time lie ahead."

The stock has fallen 8% since last May. However, more importantly, our Price Momentum model suggests this is a better time to evaluate Apple. Continue reading

Apple Inc. Price Momentum $AAPL

Below is a chart of Apple Inc (AAPL) from 1980 to 2022, reflecting Price Momentum data. Continue reading

Tax Shifting Update: January 2019

Government will fight to support Apple, but Perrigo must battle alone- by Cliff Taylor, The Irish Times

Key Takeaways: 

  • The Irish government will help Apple (AAPL) defend again an EU claim of €14 billion in taxes while Perrigo (PRGO) will not get support for €1.64 billion sought by the Irish Revenue office.
  • With 2017 revenue at $229 billion at Apple and $4.946 billion at Perrigo, the claim against Apple is only 6.11% of 2017 revenue while the claim against Perrigo is 33.15% of 2017 revenue.
  • Apple doesn’t need the help of the Irish authority but will get it, Perrigo needs the help of the Irish authority but won’t get it.
  • This is a classic catch-22, if the Irish Revenue agency wins their case of taxes owed by Perrigo then it will legitimize the EU’s claim against Apple.  The Irish Government wants what is owed to it but does not want its biggest client to lose a case that marginally affects its bottom line.
  • The expected outcome of either case is tentatively slated for two years after the initial claim.
  • We suspect that the implications of the Perrigo case will dawn on the Irish Revenue Authority and they will settle for far less than what was initially sought and it will be deemed a victory on all sides.

Retrospective: Bristol-Myers pulls $25 bln assets out of Ireland by Matthew Tostevin, Reuters March 16, 2007

Key Takeaways:

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMY) pulled $25 billion out of Ireland in March 2007.
  • “It’s a holding company. It does not have any business operations or workforce,” said Brian Henry.
  • “Henry declined to comment on a report in The Irish Times that the move was to benefit from even lower corporate tax rates elsewhere…”
  • The performance of BMY stock price after the shifting of $25 billion out of Ireland coincides, but not necessarily caused by, with a peak and subsequent decline of -34.71%.

image

Apple Inc. Downside Targets

On April 14, 2012, we provided the following downside targets for Apple Inc. (AAPL):

pre-split price post-split price
$424.15 $60.59
$297.43 $42.49
$212.08 $30.30
$117.05 $16.72

Along with the downside targets we included a charting of the expected levels, as seen below on a split adjusted basis:

image

On July 17, 2013, we said the following of of Apple:

“Currently, Apple is demonstrating a basing pattern that if successful, could result in a breakout to the upside.  At the current levels, we wouldn’t be opposed to buying some shares of Apple with the expectation that the stock could decline an additional –25% to –35%.”

Since July 17, 2013, Apple’s price has seen the following breakout to the upside:

image

Below are the Speed Resistance Lines based on the work of Edson Gould as of November 19, 2018.  As has been the case in the past, we can only be confident of the conservative downside target being achieved. Continue reading

Chart of the Day: Sears, Just Like Apple

There was a time when the Chairman and CEO of Sears Holdings (SHLD) said the following:

“At Sears Holdings, we seek to create long-term value for our shareholders. Like Apple, we seek to do so by improving our operating performance, innovating, and delighting customers.”

-Eddie Lampert, Chairman of the Board. Sears Holdings February 24, 2011. link.

Since February 24, 2011, when Sears Holdings (SHLD) was trading at $62.19, the stock price has declined to the present value of $0.34 or a loss a lot of money.

image

Apple: Fallen and Almost There

On January 8, 2016, we posted the following chart:

image

That red line that says 150 was our projected downside target based on the historical average from as far back as 2004.  The update to this chart is below (Altimeter levels adjusted for dividends):

image

Apple is on the cusp of hitting that downside target.  What happens if the stock breaks through on the downside, then you’d want to consider the investment merit of the stock based on conservative fundamental data.  Keep in mind that the current P/E ratio of 10 should jump before the stock marches higher.

Do you remember that article we posted on September 23, 2012, about how adding Apple (AAPL) to the Dow Industrials would be “not so great”? Yeah, well, since being included into the index on March 19, 2015, Apple has declined –28% and the company that it replaced, AT&T (T), has increased +19%.  True to form, the inclusion of Apple into the Dow Jones Industrial Average coincides with decline in the stock price.  The adjustment period should be coming to an end.  Let’s see how this plays out.

Apple Inc.

image

Reference:

Apple meets NLO Upside Target

On August 19, 2014, Apple (AAPL) stock price rose as high as $100.66.  When Apple was trading at $61.61 on March 9, 2013, we said the following with the accompanying chart:

“Apple Inc. (AAPL) is at the top of our watch list as it is within 5% of the one year low.  In our April 14, 2012 test of the quality of Edson Gould’s Speed Resistance lines, Apple fell from $636 [adjusted price of $90.85] to our projected level of $424.15 [adjusted price of $60.59] (found here).  Now that the stock has achieved our downside target, we expected that a reaction to the upside is likely.”

image

On July 17, 2013, when Apple was trading at $61.47, we re-affirmed our view of the upside potential for Apple with the following commentary:

“Currently, Apple is demonstrating a basing pattern that if successful, could result in a breakout to the upside.  At the current levels, we wouldn’t be opposed to buying some shares of Apple with the expectation that the stock could decline an additional –25% to –35%.”

The work of Edson Gould has proven to be astounding when considered in its context.  On April 14, 2012, we posted an article titled “Considering the Downside Prospects for Apple”.  At that time, we were revising the previous estimates of downside risk done on February 5, 2012 (third party source available here).

What was mentioned on February 5, 2012 is critical to understanding how Edson Gould’s downside projections work.  At the time, we said:

“The very first thing that we look for, to determine speed resistance lines, is the most recent peak in the price. Because AAPL is continually making new highs, we only need to use the latest price of $455.68 [post split price of $65.09] as our starting point….As the price of Apple increases, so too does the SRL lines based on the work of Edson Gould.”

This means that as long as the price of the stock increases to a new high the speed resistance lines are expected to increase as well.  Only when the stock starts on a declining trend can we expect that the stock price might go to the conservative and extreme downside targets.

image

On April 14, 2012, when Apple was trading at $90.89 (pre-split price of $636.23), we said the following:

“…we believe that, based on the current speed resistance lines, no one would expect Apple to decline to our conservative downside target of $424 (post split price of $60.57)...”

The strength of Gould’s downside risk estimates is that we didn’t even have the peak price of $100.71 set on September 18, 2012 but we were still able to see the conservative downside target of $60.57 achieved.  Had we used the peak price, we would have achieved the $67.14 conservative downside target much earlier than the $60.57 level.

Review: Apple’s Altimeter

Continue reading

Nasdaq 100 Watch List: July 12, 2013

Below are the Nasdaq 100 companies that are within 11% of their respective 52-week lows. Stocks that appear on our watch lists are not recommendations to buy. Instead, they are the starting point for doing your research and determining the best company to buy. Ideally, a stock that is purchased from this list is done after a considerable decline in the price and rigorous due diligence. Continue reading

Actavis buys Warner Chilcott, Upside Seems Limited

On May 21, 2013,  Actavis (ACT) announced that it would acquire Warner Chilcott (WCRX) for $20.08 per share (found here) and the deal is expected to close by year-end 2013.  This has turned into an incredible string of companies that have been on our New Low Observer Watch Lists and ultimately get acquired.

On April 30, 2012, we gave Warner Chilcott a sell recommendation after the stock gained +57.11% in 3 months(found here).  After that sell recommendation, Warner Chilcott declined –35% by mid-December.  We reiterated our sell recommendation of Warner Chilcott on September 6, 2012 (found here), from that level the stock decline –12.93%, to the December 13, 2013 low.

image

As regular readers of our work know, we compare investments on an annualized return basis.  In the example above, the annualized gain from December 16, 2011 to April 30, 2012 sell recommendation or the December 31, 2013 completion of the merger, are as follows:

  • 12/16/2011 to 4/30/2012:   +276% (excluding special dividend)
  • 12/16/2011 to 12/31/2013:   +80% (including special dividend)

There are several concerns regarding the transaction between Actavis (ACT) and Warner Chilcott (WCRX) that should be taken into consideration.  First and foremost, is the current price action of Actavis stock.  Price action determines a majority of relative fundamental value attributes. Below is the Speed Resistance Lines [SRL] based on the stock price for Actavis since June 2006.

image

Any transaction being carried out by Actavis at the current price is heavily dependent on the stock price remaining at $120 and above.  According to Gould’s SRLs, Actavis has a conservative downside target at $87.01 and an extreme downside target at $43.51.  Our experience indicates that the conservative downside target is a lock, at this point.  This is in spite of the fact that the price could double before getting to such a downside target, as was the case with our April 2012 conservative downside target of $420 for Apple (AAPL) (found here).   While the conservative downside target appears to be a lock, the extreme downside target begs some kind of explanation of how it is possible to decline –50% or more.

The first consideration that comes to our mind is the strategic nature of the purchase.  The Actavis purchase of Warner Chilcott will lower the corporate tax rate from 29% to 17% because WCRX is located in Dublin, Ireland as reported by Bloomberg News (found here).  While the reduction of the tax rate seems to be beneficial, it has done little to contribute to Actavis’ earnings.  Already there has been faux outrage by Congress over the fact that Apple has legally dodged their “fair share” of corporate taxes through entities located in Ireland (found here).  We believe that with Congress spotlighting the issues related to legal tax avoidance, some areas that were once loopholes will be closed.  This will require more time to come up with new legal tax avoidance strategies.  Also, with Warner Chilcott being domiciled in Ireland, the focus of the Apple entities, Ireland may be the first target for changes to the tax loopholes that presently exist.

Another challenge is the dramatic increase in sales and earnings due strictly to the merger (found here).  As reported by Zacks Equity Research, based on the preliminary numbers, sales for Actavis are supposed to jump from 7% to 25% by 2014.  Also, annual earnings are supposed to increase 30% from the current level which stands in the negative for the trailing twelve months.  However, little of the gains for Actavis will be a direct result of internal efficiencies and significant improvement of sales.  This come at a time when Warner Chilcott appeared desperate for a buyer after private equity shareholders cashed in most of their chips after substantial special dividends nearly equal to the IPO price set in 2005.

At the time of Watson Pharmaceutical’s acquisition of Actavis in early 2012, it was announced that, “…Including synergies, Watson anticipates the acquisition will be greater than 30% accretive to 2013 Watson non-GAAP EPS, with accretion accelerating in 2014 through organic growth and further achievement of synergies(found here).  In the announcement of the merger between Actavis and Warner Chilcott (WCRX), the company press release says that it will be “…immediately Accretive With Opportunities for Substantial Operational Synergies and Tax Savings” and “…The transaction is expected to be more than 30 percent accretive to Actavis non-GAAP earnings per share in 2014, including anticipated synergies.(found here).  Aside from using nearly the exact same language in the press releases for two different companies, the set up for 2014 could be a big disappointment.

In spite of the accretion that is suggested, Actavis’ 2013 first quarter earnings was –$0.79, down from the $0.43 in the prior year period (found here). In addition, the 2012 fourth quarter earnings were down –10% from the same quarter in the prior year (found here). The 30% immediate accretive non-GAAP gains due to the acquisition of Actavis has not yet been realized.  Also, non-GAAP earnings are not contributing to the bottom line in the form of positive annual net earnings.  It is possible that the merger with Warner Chilcott is simply covering up the failings of Actavis to come through on promises of “immediately accretive” value for the Watson Pharmaceutial/Actavis merger.

Finally, according to Value Line Investment Survey, based on estimated 2013 cash flow, Actavis has a fair value of $120.28.  Since 2006, Actavis has traded below Value Line’s fair value while never trading above such a level.  This trend persisted even after Watson Pharmaceutical acquired Actavis, which was concluded in October/November 2012.  At the current price of $130, Actavis is 3% above Value Line’s estimated 2016-2018 fair value.  We think the persistence of Actavis to trade at or below Value Line’s fair value estimates will continue to dominate the stock price going forward.

It appears that paper gains due to mergers and acquisitions through the use of tax reductions and non-GAAP reporting is not a fundamental shift in Actavis’ ability to increase shareholder value.  Additionally, the +56% parabolic run-up in the price along with Edson Gould’s Speed Resistance Lines and Value Line’s fair value estimates suggest that the downside risks are significant.

Technical Failure for Apple?

On May 8, 2013, Apple (AAPL) reached as high as $463.84 on a closing basis.  Since that time, Apple has been in a declining trend.  The failure of Apple to materially exceed the previous intermediate peak of $463.58 could indicate that there is significant downside risk. 

For now we believe that Apple has established a “line” where either accumulation or distribution of the stock is taking place.  The failure to exceed the $463.58 indicates, for now, that the next technical test is at the $420 level.

image

One of the primary issues with the current run from the April 2013 low is the fact that trading volume has been in a declining trend.  Declining volume with a rising price is a very unhealthy situation.  Typically, falling volume in the face of a rising price is resolved with rising volume and a declining price.  In the chart below, the last two instances of rising trading volume resulted in exceptional price declines.  (Keep in mind that these rising volume occurrences have taken place within a –50% decline in average trading volume since the bull market began March 2009.)

image

We’d be cautious about the prospects for Apple in light of the fact that the stock appears to be on the cusp of a rising trend in the trading volume which happens to coincide with a declining price.  A decline below $384 would mean that Apple could decline to our extreme downside target.

Apple’s Pain May Be a Warning for the Dow Indices

Since the bull market run began in 2009, Apple (AAPL) analysts have been making persuasive arguments for the stock.  The fundamental case for Apple includes price-to-earnings, price-to-sales, cash reserves, China as an untapped market, etc.  However, as investors have found out, it is the price that matters most as Apple’s stock has taken a hit from the high of $702 on September 19, 2012 to the current price of $443 (March 18, 2013).  While fundamentals are important, there is one obvious problem and that is the trading volume.

In the section on Dow Theory, in the Edwards and Magee book Technical Analysis of Stock Trends, volume is interpreted in the following manner:

“…in a Bull Market, volume increases when prices rise and dwindles as prices decline; in Bear Markets, turnover [volume] increases when prices drop and [volume] dries up as they [prices] recover (33).”

When we compare the previous bullish moves in Apple’s stock price, we find that the most recent run-up stands out as trading volume has not only failed to increase with the stock price, it has been on a divergent path by declining.  However, we need to see how different this most recent rise in the stock price is in contrast with the previous bullish moves.

In the bull market run of Apple from December 30, 1997 to February 29, 2000, the stock price rose +900% while average trading volume increased +1,000%.

image

In the bull market run of Apple from April 1, 2003 to December 30, 2007, the stock price rose over +1,400% while average trading volume increased +1,000%.

image

In the bull market run of Apple from January 21, 2009 to the present, the stock price rose nearly +900% while average trading volume decreased -51%.

image

The obvious problem with the current rise in the price of Apple from the January 21, 2009 low to the September 19, 2012 high is that while the stock price has increased dramatically, the trading volume has fallen precipitously. Already, Apple has inexplicably declined –36% from the high. There is little in the way to indicated that the blood-letting is over.

According to Robert Rhea, in his book The Dow Theory, “…the volume of trading has proved to be such a useful guide in attaining proficiency in the art of forecasting market trends that it is necessary to urge all students to study intently the relation of volume to price movement (88).”

It would be foolish for us to think that the decline in volume, from 2009 to the present, while the stock price increased wasn’t a warning sign. It is suggestive of the fact that all was not well and therefore the party had to end at some point in time.  This is despite the otherwise glowing fundamentals that are associated with Apple.

Now, if the almighty Apple can decline –36% in spite of the glowing fundamentals as the Dow Industrials and Dow Transports keep going higher, then what is the fate of two main components of Dow Theory?  By all indications, we should be considered to be in a bear market based on the fact that the price of the Industrials and Transports is increasing as the trading volume dries up.

From our vantage point, there are two distinct outcomes possible for the stock market, based on the above quoted sources.  Either the stock market explodes higher than anyone has ever imagined possible or the stock market declines, –20% to –30% from the current level, as average trading volume skyrockets.  However, our experience so far has been for volume to decrease as the price increased.  Therefore, by our logic, when and if volume starts to increase it will be because institutions will be selling instead of buying the market.

While we have constructed two possibilities, the probabilities are something else altogether.  We think that the fact that volume has been in a clear declining trend, the probabilities favor a decline of the stock market over a sustained increase.  To put this idea into perspective, when we wrote our April 14, 2012 article titled “Consider the Downside Prospects for Apple,” we said that Apple would decline to $424 (found here).  After the article was written, Apple increased by +11%.   However, after Apple peaked, the stock declined –30% from the price where our article was written.  Our only question is, was it worth seeing a rise of +11% only to realize a loss of –30%?

Notes:

  • Because we have a substantial amount in cash and a majority of our holdings that are the profit portion intended to compound over time, we are only compelled to sell those positions that are recent short-term purchases that are more than 5% of our existing portfolio.
  • Our Canadian Dividend Watch List should be coming out this week