Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc.: Strategic Comparison
Our analysts compile business strategy profiles from public financial filings, press releases, and analyst reports. Each profile is reviewed for accuracy before publication by our editorial desk and updated on a rolling basis.
Key Differences at a Glance
| Field | Apple Inc. | Broadcom Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $383.2B | $48.5B |
| Founded | 1976 | 1991 |
| Employees | 161,000 | 20,000 |
| Market Cap | $3.45T | $620.4B |
| Headquarters | United States | United States |
| Revenue / Employee | $2.38M / employee | $2.42M / employee |
| Valuation Multiple | 9.0x P/S | 12.8x P/S |
Current Strategic Alignment & Momentum
Executive Catalyst & Theme Analysis (September 2026)
Apple Inc. Strategic Vector
FY2025 Baseline*Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As Apple Inc. navigates the Consumer electronics, software, and services market from its headquarters in Cupertino, California (founded in 1976), a pivotal strategic theme is **Workflow Automation**. With reported annual revenue of $383.2B (FY2025) and a global workforce of 161,000 employees, the company's execution on workflow automation will directly influence its market share against peers such as Microsoft, Samsung, Google.
Broadcom Inc. Strategic Vector
FY2025 Baseline*Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As Broadcom Inc. navigates the Semiconductors & Enterprise Software market from its headquarters in San Jose, California (founded in 1991), a pivotal strategic theme is **Workflow Automation**. With reported annual revenue of $48.5B (FY2025) and a global workforce of 20,000 employees, the company's execution on workflow automation will directly influence its market share against peers such as Nvidia, Intel, Qualcomm.
Quick Stats Comparison
| Metric | Apple Inc. | Broadcom Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $383.2B | $48.5B |
| Founded | 1976 | 1991 |
| Headquarters | Cupertino, California | San Jose, California |
| Market Cap | $3.45T | $620.4B |
| Employees | 161,000 | 20,000 |
| Revenue / Employee | $2.38M / employee | $2.42M / employee |
| Valuation Multiple | 9.0x P/S | 12.8x P/S |
Apple Inc. Revenue vs Broadcom Inc. Revenue — Year by Year
| Year | Apple Inc. | Broadcom Inc. | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | $416.2B | $63.9B | Apple Inc. |
| 2024 | $391.0B | $51.6B | Apple Inc. |
| 2023 | $383.3B | $35.8B | Apple Inc. |
| 2022 | $394.3B | N/A | Apple Inc. |
| 2021 | $365.8B | N/A | Apple Inc. |
Business Model Breakdown
Overview: Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc.
This in-depth comparison examines Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. across revenue, market value, business model, competitive positioning, and long-term growth strategy. Whether you are researching Apple Inc. on its own, evaluating Broadcom Inc., or weighing the two companies side by side, the breakdown below highlights where each company leads and where the gap between Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. is widest.
On the headline numbers, Apple Inc. reports annual revenue of $383.2B against $48.5B for Broadcom Inc., while their respective market capitalizations stand at $3.45T and $620.4B. Apple Inc. is headquartered in United States and Broadcom Inc. operates from United States, and those different home markets shape how each company competes.
Apple Inc.: They're wrong. That's more annual revenue than Netflix, Spotify, and Adobe combined. The iPhone isn't the product. He runs a toll booth with 2.2 billion active devices passing through it every day. And yet the interesting question isn't how big Apple is. It's how long the model holds when regulators in Brussels and Washington are actively trying to pry open the walled garden that makes all of this work. That sounds cynical, but the numbers bear it out. But here's what the revenue split obscures: the iPhone isn't really a standalone product anymore. The average Apple household owns 3-4 devices. Services: The Real Margin Engine The App Store, where Apple takes 15-30% of every transaction from 1.8 million apps. Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Arcade, Apple News+, Fitness+, and the Apple One bundle that packages them together. AppleCare extended warranties. Services gross margins exceed 70%. Hardware margins sit around 36%. Every dollar that shifts from hardware to services makes Apple more profitable without selling a single additional device. That's the compounding engine Wall Street loves. The Supporting Cast They're network glue. The Capital Return Machine This isn't just shareholder friendliness — it's a structural choice. It's in the accumulated weight of 2.2 billion devices, each one generating recurring revenue and raising the cost of departure. You'd need to replicate the hardware, the OS, the chip design, the app network, the retail stores, the privacy brand, and the migration path — simultaneously. Nobody's doing that. But the iPhone's strategic function has shifted. The average iPhone user upgrades every three to four years. The Services relationship, once established, rarely ends. The Act's App Store provisions require Apple to allow alternative payment systems and third-party app stores on iPhones sold in Europe, directly attacking the mechanism by which Apple collects 15-30% of every digital transaction on its platform. It's Huawei. And the reason tells you everything about where Apple is actually vulnerable. In late 2023, the Mate 60 Pro appeared with a 7nm chip nobody in the West expected. By 2025, Huawei reclaimed double-digit smartphone share in China while Apple's share dropped below 15% in the country. It just needs to make Apple irrelevant in the world's largest smartphone market, and it's doing exactly that. They ship more phones, move faster on hardware form factors, and compete across every price tier from $150 to $1,800. The Galaxy S series matches iPhone spec-for-spec most years. Apple wins on captivity. If Gemini can manage your life, write your emails, organize your photos, and anticipate your needs better than anything Apple offers, then iOS stops being the reason you buy an iPhone. You buy whatever runs the best AI. They own the workplace. Apple has never cracked enterprise in a meaningful way. The Mac is tolerated in corporate environments, not preferred. Each attack hits a different wall of the fortress. And Apple's fortress has many walls. Apple doesn't need to win every battle. It needs to avoid losing all of them at the same time. That dip — the only year of revenue decline in over a decade — reflected consumer spending pressure and a challenging PC market. It had no lasting effect. Hardware gross margins run approximately 35-40% on iPhone, lower on Mac and iPad. Services margin differential means every dollar of Services revenue is worth nearly twice the profit of a dollar of hardware revenue. The iPhone revenue concentration — over 50% of total revenue from a single product category — creates structural exposure to any factor that disrupts the two-year replacement cycle: economic recession, geopolitical disruption to Taiwan Semiconductor supply chains, or competitive pressure from Android manufacturers gaining traction in the premium segment. The EU Digital Markets Act already forces Apple to allow sideloading and alternative payment systems in Europe. Epic Games won the right to external payment links. Apple depends on Chinese manufacturing (Foxconn, Pegatron, Luxshare) for the majority of iPhone assembly while simultaneously selling into China for roughly 17% of revenue. If US-China tensions escalate further, Apple faces the nightmare scenario of supply disruption and demand collapse happening at the same time. Then there's the AI gap. Apple shipped. A promise called Apple Intelligence that requires the newest hardware and still can't do half of what ChatGPT does. If consumers decide AI capability matters more than AI privacy, Apple's differentiation becomes a limitation. I'll make it concrete. My family has four iPhones, two MacBooks, an iPad, two Apple Watches, and AirPods for everyone. We have 11 years of photos in iCloud. Our group chats are in iMessage (and yes, the blue bubble thing is real social pressure among teenagers). My wife's health data — menstrual tracking, heart rate history, sleep patterns — lives in HealthKit with no export path to Android. We have $400+ in purchased apps. Family Sharing manages screen time for our kids. Find My tracks our AirTags on luggage and keys. Apple Pay is configured on every device. Switching to Android would take weeks of active migration work, and we'd still lose data. That's a hostage situation dressed up as convenience. And Apple has 2.2 billion devices worth of hostages. Apple's A-series and M-series chips deliver performance-per-watt that Qualcomm and Intel can't match because Apple controls both the hardware and the software stack. The M-series Mac transition wasn't just a spec bump — it gave MacBooks 15-20 hour battery life and silent operation that changed what a laptop could be. Privacy has become the cherry on top. Cynical? Maybe. Effective?. For consumers who care about data protection Apple is the only credible choice among the major platforms. Services is the primary lever. Apple Intelligence is the hardware upgrade catalyst. By restricting AI features to iPhone 15 Pro and newer, Apple created artificial obsolescence for 1.5+ billion older devices. If the AI features prove genuinely useful — better Siri, smart summaries, image generation — they could compress the upgrade cycle from 4 years back toward 3. Health is the long game. Apple Watch already does ECG, blood oxygen, crash detection, and fall detection. Non-invasive glucose monitoring — if they crack it — would be the most significant health technology breakthrough in decades and would make Apple Watch medically indispensable for hundreds of millions of diabetics and pre-diabetics worldwide. That's not a product upgrade. That's a category transformation. Tata and Foxconn facilities in India are already assembling iPhones for export. Vision Pro? I'm skeptical in the near term. At $3,499, it's a developer kit priced as a consumer product. The real bet is that spatial computing becomes a platform in 5-7 years, and Apple wants to own the network before it matters. Everything depends on one variable: whether Apple Intelligence becomes genuinely useful before the market decides it's permanently behind in AI. The upgrade cycle compresses as 1.5 billion older iPhones become functionally obsolete. If Apple Intelligence remains a marketing label stapled onto mediocre features — if Siri still can't set two timers reliably while ChatGPT is writing code — then the narrative shifts permanently. Consumers start choosing phones based on AI capability rather than network. The blue bubble loses its grip when the green bubble has a better assistant. The regulatory question matters, but it's secondary. Steve Wozniak had built a computer circuit board that he wanted to share with friends at the Homebrew Computer Club. Steve Jobs saw something different: a product that ordinary people, not just engineers, might want to buy. The Apple I sold 200 units. Apple had found its first killer application. The 1984 Macintosh introduced the graphical user interface to the mass market, drawing on technology developed at Xerox PARC that Jobs had seen and recognized as defining before Xerox understood what it had. The Mac was expensive, partially closed, and initially sold in limited volumes. These aren't independent businesses. Tim Cook became CEO in 2011, inheriting the company Steve Jobs had rebuilt from near-insolvency in the late 1990s. App Store revenue is the highest-margin component of the highest-margin segment in the company. Huawei doesn't need to beat Apple globally. That's tens of billions in incremental iPhone revenue without acquiring a single new customer. Apple cannot survive being perceived as the company that missed the most important technology transition since mobile. Wozniak and Jobs retained the company. VisiCalc, the first spreadsheet software, ran on the Apple II and created the business case for personal computers in commercial settings. Jobs was forced out of the company by the board in 1985.
Broadcom Inc.: Broadcom combines a long operating history with a current strategy shaped by FY2025 financial results, leadership priorities, and competitive pressure.
Business Models: How Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. Make Money
Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. pursue distinct approaches to generating revenue, and understanding how each company operates is the foundation of any fair comparison between Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc..
Apple Inc. business model: Apple operates a complex, dual-engine premium consumer model. The large foundational engine is selling expensive, high-margin physical hardware (primarily the iPhone). However, the true, long-term financial engine driving its multi-trillion-dollar valuation is 'Services.' By locking the consumer into the iOS ecosystem, Apple generates reliable, high-margin SaaS recurring revenue through iCloud, Apple Music, and taking a major, controversial 30% cut of every transaction in the App Store. The business model is predicated on the obsessive integration of proprietary hardware, operating systems, and high-margin digital services to create an inescapable, premium consumer ecosystem. By tightly controlling every aspect of the user experience—from custom silicon design (Apple Silicon) to the App Store marketplace—the company minimizes commoditization and commands the highest profit margins in the global consumer electronics industry. The installed base of active devices serves as a powerful, high-yield monetization engine, driving predictable recurring revenue through iCloud subscriptions, Apple Music, and lucrative App Store commission fees. This uniquely balanced approach between high-margin hardware sales and rapidly expanding, capital-light software services ensures long-term revenue resilience, insulating the company from the inherent cyclicality of consumer hardware replacement cycles.
Broadcom Inc. business model: Broadcom operates a specialized acquisition model. The company targets entrenched, complex technologies (like smartphone Wi-Fi chips or critical enterprise software) that vast corporations cannot function without. Upon acquisition, Broadcom instantly guts the sales and marketing departments, stops investing in experimental R&D, and raises prices on the remaining "sticky" customer base, generating, high-margin cash flow to fund the next acquisition. Broadcom operates a specialized, dual-engine business model consisting of essential semiconductor solutions and sticky enterprise software infrastructure. In its semiconductor division, Broadcom eschews generic mass-market chips, instead focusing on complex, mission-critical custom silicon (like networking switches and custom AI accelerators) for a concentrated base of hyperscale cloud providers and smartphone manufacturers (like Apple). In its software division, built through aggressive acquisitions of CA Technologies, Symantec, and VMware, Broadcom targets Fortune 500 enterprises. The company generates predictable, recurring SaaS and licensing revenues from these software acquisitions by focusing on core products, cutting peripheral R&D, and migrating existing customers to higher-value subscription models. This unique combination of high-margin, specialized hardware monopolies paired with embedded, recurring enterprise software makes Broadcom a resilient, cash-generating machine that consistently funds dividend payouts and further aggressive consolidation within the tech sector.
Competitive Advantage: Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc.
The durability of a company's moat often decides long-term winners. Here is how the competitive advantages of Apple Inc. stack up against those of Broadcom Inc..
Apple Inc. competitive advantage: The M-series chips gave MacBooks a genuine performance and battery advantage that Intel never could. Notice something odd about this model: it's almost impossible to compete with because the advantage isn't in any single product. Drop the word "moat" for a moment. That's not a moat. The silicon advantage is the technical layer underneath. The privacy angle transforms from limitation to advantage.
Broadcom Inc. competitive advantage: The ethernet switching chips that route data across the world's hyperscale data centers, the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth radios embedded in virtually every iPhone Apple has shipped in over a decade, the storage controllers managing enterprise disk arrays, and the broadband gateway chips terminating cable modems in tens of millions of American homes — all of these are Broadcom products. The company's approach to semiconductor design is explicitly not to compete across all categories — it does not make CPUs, consumer GPUs for gaming, or memory chips — but rather to identify connectivity, networking, and signal processing niches where the economics favor long design cycles, high switching costs, and customer relationships that span decades rather than product generations. Broadcom's Tomahawk and Trident series of ethernet switching ASICs are the industry standard for hyperscale data center switching fabrics. The company holds an estimated 60 to 70 percent share of the merchant silicon market for high-end data center switching, a position reinforced by an enormous software ecosystem and years of co-engineering with network operating system vendors. This guidance, when it was articulated in late 2024, was one of the most bullish data points from any technology company regarding the scale of the AI infrastructure investment cycle. Customers who invest years of software integration work atop Broadcom silicon have enormous switching costs. The industry debate between InfiniBand (favored by Nvidia for training clusters) and ethernet (where Broadcom leads) plays out every time a hyperscaler designs a new AI data center. IBM's Red Hat OpenShift and the broader open-source Kubernetes ecosystem represent a longer-term architectural alternative — not a near-term VMware replacement for most enterprises, but a destination toward which application modernization efforts are directionally pointed. The Apple relationship provides Broadcom with guaranteed volume scale that makes its Wi-Fi business economically distinctive, but any disruption to that relationship would erode the cost position that makes Broadcom competitive in the broader merchant wireless market. Across these battlegrounds, what distinguishes Broadcom is not that it is winning every fight — in some areas it is conceding markets it cannot defend profitably — but that it has systematically concentrated its resources in segments where switching costs are highest, customer relationships are deepest, and technological leads, once established, are durable. This curatorial approach to competition, unusual for a company of Broadcom's scale, is the strategic signature of the Hock Tan era and the clearest explanation for how a company that does not build the flashiest chips or write the most innovative software has become one of the most valuable technology companies on earth. For partners in the VMware ecosystem — the thousands of value-added resellers, managed service providers, and system integrators who had built businesses around VMware's channel program — Broadcom's simplification of the partner program and reduction of channel incentives created genuine business disruption. Finally, Broadcom faces the challenge of integration complexity at scale. Broadcom's competitive advantages are grounded in structural realities of its end markets rather than temporary technological leads, and understanding why the company wins consistently requires looking beyond product specifications to the economic architecture of customer relationships. The most powerful advantage is switching cost density — a concept that describes not merely the cost of changing a software contract but the cascading technical, operational, and financial cost of replacing a technology that is embedded across an organization's entire infrastructure. The same logic applies on the semiconductor side: the hardware and software ecosystem built atop a Broadcom Tomahawk switching ASIC — including the NOS software, management tools, and automation frameworks — makes displacing the silicon a multi-year engineering project. The company's custom AI accelerator program works so with hyperscaler customers' internal teams that the resulting chips are, in many ways, co-owned intellectual achievements. Scale in manufacturing and design is a third pillar. Finally, Broadcom's financial model itself is a competitive advantage. Management has indicated that additional hyperscalers are evaluating custom ASIC programs, and winning one or two additional programs would materially expand the serviceable addressable market. The networking adjacency is equally significant: as AI clusters scale from thousands to hundreds of thousands of interconnected chips, the demand for high-bandwidth, low-latency ethernet switching — precisely Broadcom's core competency — scales proportionally.
Growth Strategy: Where Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. Are Headed
Future prospects matter as much as current results. The growth strategies below explain how Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. each plan to expand from here.
Apple Inc. growth strategy: Apple doesn't need the cash for operations, and reducing share count mechanically increases earnings per share even when revenue growth slows. The company's blended margins improve as Services grows faster than hardware. The buyback program has been one of the most effective capital return mechanisms in corporate history, compounding per-share earnings growth beyond what operating income growth alone would produce. You can't diversify away from China in three years when your supply chain took twenty years to build. That wasn't an accident — it was Apple weaponizing privacy as a competitive tool while simultaneously building its own advertising business. Apple's growth playbook under Tim Cook comes down to one idea: make each existing customer worth more money every year without requiring them to buy a new phone. India and manufacturing diversification serve dual purposes: reducing China risk and opening a growth market. India's middle class is expanding, 5G infrastructure is improving, and Apple's brand aspirational value is enormous there.
Broadcom Inc. growth strategy: Broadcom combines high-share semiconductor franchises with infrastructure software, then applies disciplined product focus, cost control, and cash-return policies.
Financial Picture: Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc.
A closer look at the financial trajectory of Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. rounds out the comparison.
Apple Inc.: Apple enters 2026 executing a structural transition toward 'Apple Intelligence'. Under CEO Tim Cook, the company generated a staggering $383.2 billion in revenue and maintains a $3.45 trillion market cap with exactly exactly 161000 employees. The financial narrative is characterized by an iPhone upgrade supercycle; because its on-device Generative AI features require significant localized neural processing power, hundreds of millions of consumers with older iPhones are being forced to upgrade. While the high-profile Vision Pro headset remains a niche, low-volume developer product, Apple's high-margin Services division (App Store, Apple Music, iCloud) continues its relentless double-digit growth, serving as the company's primary margin expansion engine.
Broadcom Inc.: Broadcom operates as one of the most critical, yet under-the-radar, infrastructural beneficiaries of the generative AI boom. Under the ruthless efficiency of CEO Hock Tan, the semiconductor and software giant generated exactly $48.5 billion in revenue and commands a $620.4 billion market cap with an optimized workforce of exactly 20000 employees. Broadcom's hardware division generates high-margin cash flows from designing custom AI ASICs (Application-Specific Integrated Circuits) for hyperscalers like Google and Meta, alongside its dominance in networking chips (Tomahawk). Simultaneously, the company completed the brutal integration of VMware, raising prices and shifting enterprise customers to subscription models, generating immense software cash flow despite customer backlash.
Company-Specific SWOT Notes
Apple Inc.
Apple's core strength is vertical integration across hardware, software, custom silicon, services, retail, and privacy positioning, creating switching costs that lock in over 2.
IPhone generates roughly 52% of revenue, creating concentration risk.
Services expansion toward +, Apple Intelligence driving hardware upgrades, health-monitoring features deepening wearable retention, India manufacturing growth, and Vision Pro spatial computing represent the primary growth vectors.
Macroeconomic cycles, regulation, technology shifts, and execution mistakes could reduce growth or profitability for Apple Inc.
Broadcom Inc.
Broadcom holds estimated 60-70 percent merchant market share in hyperscale data center ethernet switching silicon, near-dominant share in cable modem chipsets, and the leading position in enterprise virtualization software through VMware.
Broadcom generated approximately $19.
The VMware acquisition left Broadcom with approximately $67 billion in long-term debt as of fiscal year-end 2024, representing a significant leverage ratio relative to even the company's exceptional EBITDA generation.
The AI infrastructure buildout represents the largest semiconductor demand expansion in decades.
The European Union opened an investigation in mid-2024 into Broadcom's VMware licensing practices, specifically scrutinizing whether the elimination of perpetual licenses and the requirement for VCF bundle subscriptions constitutes anti-competitive behavior.
Head-to-Head Scorecard
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue Scale | Apple Inc. | Apple Inc. reports the larger revenue base ($383.2B), which serves as a core operational scale signal. |
| Employee Productivity | Broadcom Inc. | Broadcom Inc. generates higher revenue per employee ($2.42M / employee vs $2.38M / employee), signaling greater operational leverage. |
| Valuation Multiple | Broadcom Inc. | Broadcom Inc. commands a higher valuation multiple (12.8x P/S vs 9.0x P/S), indicating greater investor premium on future growth. |
| Profitability Potential | Comparable | Both organizations prioritize market penetration or are at equivalent reporting tiers. |
| Company Age | Apple Inc. | Founded in 1976 vs 1991. The earlier pioneer typically commands longer historical institutional legacy. |
| Innovation Moat | Apple Inc. | Higher aggregate count of major acquisitions and key R&D releases indicates a more active technology absorption velocity. |
| Scale (Employees) | Apple Inc. | A significantly larger reported workforce supports enhanced global distribution capability. |
| Market Cap | Apple Inc. | Higher public valuation denotes greater forward-looking investor conviction in earnings potential. |
| Future Outlook | Tied | Strategic auditing assesses that both maintain defensive leadership vectors within their core market clusters. |
Who Wins Each Category?
Apple Inc. reports the larger revenue base ($383.2B), which serves as a core operational scale signal.
Broadcom Inc. generates higher revenue per employee ($2.42M / employee vs $2.38M / employee), signaling greater operational leverage.
Broadcom Inc. commands a higher valuation multiple (12.8x P/S vs 9.0x P/S), indicating greater investor premium on future growth.
Both organizations prioritize market penetration or are at equivalent reporting tiers.
Founded in 1976 vs 1991. The earlier pioneer typically commands longer historical institutional legacy.
Who Wins: Apple Inc. or Broadcom Inc.?
Reviewed by Swet Parvadiya, September 2026 - Author Profile
Our analysts compile business strategy profiles from public financial filings, press releases, and analyst reports. Each profile is reviewed for accuracy before publication by our editorial desk and updated on a rolling basis.
Frequently Asked Questions: Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc.
Is Apple Inc. better than Broadcom Inc.?
Verdict: Between Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc., Apple Inc. is the stronger overall option based on higher annual revenue. The decision still depends on which factors matter most for your needs, but on the weight of the evidence above, Apple Inc. comes out ahead in this Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc. comparison.
Who earns more — Apple Inc. or Broadcom Inc.?
Apple Inc. earns more with $383.2B in annual revenue versus Broadcom Inc.'s $48.5B. Apple Inc. leads on total revenue based on latest verified figures.
Which company has higher revenue — Apple Inc. or Broadcom Inc.?
Apple Inc. reported $383.2B, while Broadcom Inc. reported $48.5B. The revenue leader is Apple Inc. based on latest verified figures.
Apple Inc. revenue vs Broadcom Inc. revenue — which is higher?
Apple Inc. revenue: $383.2B. Broadcom Inc. revenue: $48.5B. Apple Inc. has the larger revenue base of the two companies.
Which company generates more revenue per employee — Apple Inc. or Broadcom Inc.?
Broadcom Inc. leads in workforce productivity, generating $2.42M / employee per employee compared to $2.38M / employee for Apple Inc.. Apple Inc. operates with a team of 161,000 employees while Broadcom Inc. employs 20,000.
What are the current strategic priorities for Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc. in 2026?
In 2026, Apple Inc. is prioritizing *Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As Apple Inc., while Broadcom Inc. is focusing on *Strategic Analysis (September 2026 Update):* As Broadcom Inc.. These strategic vectors determine how each company allocates capital and defends its moat in Consumer electronics.
How do the valuation multiples of Apple Inc. and Broadcom Inc. compare?
On a price-to-sales basis, Apple Inc. trades at 9.0x P/S with a market capitalization of $3.45T on $383.2B in revenue, compared to 12.8x P/S for Broadcom Inc. with a market capitalization of $620.4B on $48.5B in revenue.
Sources & References
- SEC EDGAR: Apple Inc. Annual Filings (10-K, 8-K)
- Apple Inc. Corporate Website
- Apple Inc. Annual Report 2025 - Revenue and Financial Data
- sec.gov
- apple.com
- apple.com
- data.sec.gov
- SEC EDGAR: Broadcom Inc. Annual Filings (10-K, 8-K)
- Broadcom Inc. Corporate Website
- Broadcom Inc. Annual Report 2025 - Revenue and Financial Data
- sec.gov
- investors.broadcom.com
- investors.broadcom.com
- data.sec.gov
Cite This Page
Automatically generated citations for researchers.
CorpDigest. (2026). Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc. Comparison. Retrieved , from
CorpDigest. "Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc. Comparison." CorpDigest, 2026, . Accessed .
CorpDigest. "Apple Inc. vs Broadcom Inc. Comparison." CorpDigest. 2026. Accessed . .