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.

Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.

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.

5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 34.84%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.

Positive 3Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.

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

5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 35.03%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.

Positive 10Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.

Positive 5Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.

Positive short-term CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.

Positive short-term equity growth while SONO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.

Dividend/share CAGR of 111.76% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.

Dividend/share CAGR of 29.51% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.

3Y dividend/share CAGR of 13.49% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.

Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.

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

Positive BV/share change while SONO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.

We have some new debt while SONO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.

We increase R&D while SONO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.

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