iPhone 6, Apple Pay help keep Apple ranked 15th in global Fortune 500 rankings

Posted:
in General Discussion edited July 2015
On Wednesday Apple once again took 15th place in Fortune's annual Global 500 rankings, something the magazine credited to record sales of the iPhone 6 and the introduction of new product categories, such as Apple Pay.




The Global 500 charts the world's biggest corporations according to revenue for the fiscal year ending March 31. By Forbes' tally, Apple's revenue hit nearly $182.8 billion, up 7 percent from 2014. The company reaped $39.5 billion in profits, an increase of 6 percent.

Because Fortune's data ends in March, the list doesn't account for Apple's latest quarterly results, which saw $49.6 billion in revenue. It also doesn't factor in the launches of the Apple Watch or Apple Music.

One of Apple's chief rivals, Samsung Electronics, held on to 13th place with $195.8 billion in revenue. The company operates in a much broader array of product categories however, including TVs, cameras, home appliances, and computer parts.

Maintaining the top spot on the list was discount retailer Walmart, which saw revenue rise to $485.7 billion. Other companies in the top 10 were typically petroleum giants like Sinopec, Shell, and Exxon Mobil, some exceptions being carmakers Toyota and Volkswagen, and Chinese utilities giant State Grid.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 7
    ppietrappietra Posts: 171member
    182.8 B$ is what Apple earned in its 2014 fiscal year, so there is no iPhone 6 or Apple Pay factored in Fortune%u2019s ranking.
    How can they make a ranking without looking at the same period for every company!?
  • Reply 2 of 7
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ppietra View Post



    182.8 B$ is what Apple earned in its 2014 fiscal year, so there is no iPhone 6 or Apple Pay factored in Fortune%u2019s ranking.

    How can they make a ranking without looking at the same period for every company!?

    Fortune 500 is an annual revenue-based ranking.  Fortune uses full year results for all the companies in the list (companies may have different fiscal years but all are 12 months) so it's an apples-to-apples comparison - every company is missing some recent periods.

     

    Even if periods were identical, the value of the list is unclear.  Walmart is certainly huge but not as big, relative to Apple or Exxon as its revenues suggest; for the most part, its revenues are pretty close to its costs because it is a thin-margin reseller.  That's not a bad thing, it's just what its business is.

     

    Apple is remarkable for its astronomical profit and the relatively modest revenues it needs to earn those profits.  In fact, ANY profits are hard to come by in the hardware universe...

  • Reply 3 of 7
    chasmchasm Posts: 581member
    Not Apple's fiscal year (which ends in September) -- Fortune's fiscal year. So it looked at revenue from March 2014 to March 215. The iPhone 6 and Apple Pay were available for about half that time.
  • Reply 4 of 7
    smalmsmalm Posts: 644member

    Threats

    Chinese phone manufacturers

    Google's Android operating system

     

    Yeah, Apple is really a threat to both not leaving them a lot of room for breathing... 8-)

     

    @Ppietra

    Apple proforma CY 2014  (up from CY 2013)

    Revenue $199.6 B  (+14.7%)

    Profit $44.5 B  (+20.0%)

     

    @chasm 

    No that's clearly not true.

    Apple's revenue in that period was $212.1 B.

  • Reply 5 of 7
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chasm View Post



    Not Apple's fiscal year (which ends in September) -- Fortune's fiscal year. So it looked at revenue from March 2014 to March 215. The iPhone 6 and Apple Pay were available for about half that time.



    No - April 2014 to March 2015 would be 212 billion.  Calendar year for 2014 would be 199.6 billion.  Fortune looks at "company fiscal years that end in 2014"  so Apple is 182.8.  Seems stupid to me but this is how they do all of their lists.  Next year they should be around 11 or so.

  • Reply 6 of 7
    ppietrappietra Posts: 171member
    @ rare comment


    It isn’t a true apples-to-apples comparison. All data is for 12 month periods but different 12 months have different events that can affect performance. Microsoft data for example starts in July 2013, Samsung in Jan 2014. The two periods suffered very differently from exchange rates effects around the world.


    "Even if periods were identical, the value of the list is unclear."


    People might not find real value in the ranking but it exists and who ever made it must respect some basic rules of logic and use good methodologies. The only justification I can imagine is if not every company in every country gives quarterly reports, making it impossible to reliably  calculate revenues for the same period for everyone.
  • Reply 7 of 7
    Fortune is considering Apple's revenues for the Fiscal Year ending in Sep 27, 2014. Fair enough. What is not clear is where their revenues for Samsung are coming from. Per Bloomberg, Samsung's revenues for YE Dec 31, 2014 is $177.7bn, significantly less than Apple's $182bn for FE 2014.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/financials/financials.asp?ticker=SSNLF&dataset=incomeStatement&period=A&currency=US Dollar
Sign In or Register to comment.