Apple Inc. (AAPL)

Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.

Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.

Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.

Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.

Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.

Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.

Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.

Share reduction while SONO is at 9.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.

Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.

Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.

Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.

Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.

Positive 5Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.

3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 39.39%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.

Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.

Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.

Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.

Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 131.73% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.

5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONO's 131.73%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.

3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONO's 127.50%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.

Equity/share CAGR of 5.59% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.

Dividend/share CAGR of 53.67% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.

3Y dividend/share CAGR of 19.92% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.

Inventory is declining while SONO stands at 28.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.

Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.

Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.

Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.

R&D dropping or stable vs. SONO's 5.90%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.

Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.