Katy Huberty is no longer covering Apple for Morgan Stanley

Posted:
in General Discussion edited July 21
A new analyst is assuming coverage of Apple for investment bank Morgan Stanley, replacing the well-known Katy Huberty, who has a long track record of correct Apple forecasts.

Katy Huberty
Katy Huberty


The bank sent out a note to investors on Thursday penned by analyst Erik Woodring and his team. In that note, Morgan Stanley said that "[w]ith this report, Erik Woodring is assuming coverage of Apple, Inc."

It isn't clear why Huberty is no longer covering Apple for the investment bank, or what her new coverage will look like. The analyst still works for Morgan Stanley, it just seems like she isn't going to be focusing on Apple any longer.

AppleInsider has reached out to Morgan Stanley for comment.

Huberty is a Morgan Stanley veteran who joined the bank straight out of business school two decades ago. She analyzed a variety of technology stocks, including Apple.

The analyst has long been known to be bullish on the iPhone maker. Compared to other analysts in the field, Huberty has a much better track record of accurately forecasting the company's trends and earnings.

For example, Huberty was optimistic about Apple Silicon Macs, correctly predicting that the new first-party chips could drive a bump for the segment. She also accurately forecast sustained iPhone growth thanks to the next-generation 5G standard.

She was also a vanguard in correctly predicting Apple's continuing shift toward a Services- and subscription-based business. That's a viewpoint now shared by other analysts, including Erik Woodring, her apparent Apple coverage replacement.

In addition to her research notes to clients and investors, Huberty also frequently participated in Apple earnings calls with CEO Tim Cook and CFO Luca Maestri.

Huberty's last Apple research note on record trimmed the company's 12-month price target to $180. She said that ongoing supply issues and foreign exchange rates were likely to limit June quarter upside, but maintained that Apple could still post solid growth in the September quarter.


Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    jas99jas99 Posts: 120member
    Too bad. I typically found her analyses informative.
    anantksundaramsconosciutololliverramanpfaffwatto_cobrabushman4jony0
  • Reply 2 of 16
    future manfuture man Posts: 105member
    Kathy was not only correct in her analysis of Apple, but she was a ray of sunshine and optimism is a sea of doom & gloom fires casts. She will be sorely missed!
    anantksundaramsconosciutololliverwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 3 of 16
    badmonkbadmonk Posts: 1,106member
    Agree, the only one I respected & who understood Apple innately.  She will be missed.
    anantksundaramlolliverwatto_cobrabushman4jony0
  • Reply 4 of 16
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,361member
    All great posts above ^^^

    Nothing more to be said.
    sconosciutowatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 5 of 16
    retrogustoretrogusto Posts: 1,007member
    In her early years, she was consistently among the most unreasonably bearish regarding Apple, and Gene Munster, who was at Piper Jaffray at the time, was probably the most bullish. Then at a certain point (quite a while ago) after numerous embarrassing quarters she must have realized that she was grossly underestimating Apple, and she’s been pretty consistently bullish ever since, which has been a much more successful strategy. I tried to dig up some of her old comments, but couldn’t really find them, just an old Andy Zaky column bemoaning her pessimism.
    sconosciutodoggonethtwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 6 of 16
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,325member
    In her early years, she was consistently among the most unreasonably bearish regarding Apple, and Gene Munster, who was at Piper Jaffray at the time, was probably the most bullish. Then at a certain point (quite a while ago) after numerous embarrassing quarters she must have realized that she was grossly underestimating Apple, and she’s been pretty consistently bullish ever since, which has been a much more successful strategy. I tried to dig up some of her old comments, but couldn’t really find them, just an old Andy Zaky column bemoaning her pessimism.
    I like Katy a lot. but I have to truthfully say that it was in 2004 that Gene got me to significantly increase my Apple holdings, which I've kept ever since.
    edited July 21 watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 7 of 16
    y2any2an Posts: 134member
    Overlooking all the years before she became their Apple Analyst where she forecast fear and gloom…
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 16
    davidwdavidw Posts: 1,684member
    melgross said:
    In her early years, she was consistently among the most unreasonably bearish regarding Apple, and Gene Munster, who was at Piper Jaffray at the time, was probably the most bullish. Then at a certain point (quite a while ago) after numerous embarrassing quarters she must have realized that she was grossly underestimating Apple, and she’s been pretty consistently bullish ever since, which has been a much more successful strategy. I tried to dig up some of her old comments, but couldn’t really find them, just an old Andy Zaky column bemoaning her pessimism.
    I like Katy a lot. but I have to truthfully say that it was in 2004 that Gene got me to significantly increase my Apple holdings, which I've kept ever since.
    It was Jobs return to Apple in 1998, that got me invested in AAPL. Didn't need any analyst to tell me it was time to take the gamble. But if you were to follow Morgan Stanley (not sure if Katy was the analyst back then) future outlook for AAPL, you probably would not had invested in AAPL. I seem to remember for the longest time, that Morgan Stanley nearly always had the lowest predicted future outlook share price for AAPL. And often, it was below AAPL current share price. Say that AAPL was at $75 and other analysts was predicting AAPL will be anywhere from $85 to $95 one year out, Morgan Stanley would predict AAPL would be at $70. And it wouldn't be until AAPL hit $90, that Morgan Stanley would raise their one year outlook prediction to $85. But I don't recall Morgan Stanley ever having a sell rating for AAPL.

    I think that it wasn't until Cook became CEO and Apple began paying share holders a dividend and instituted their share buy back program, that Morgan Stanley started being more in line with other analyst. And of course Apple hitting the $1T mark in 2018 and then the $2T mark just two years later, might had played a role in Morgan Stanley bearish one year outlook turn around.  

    But I don't recall Morgan Stanley being more bearish or even bearish at all, when it came to quarterly earnings. They might not had ever predicted any blow out quarterly earnings but also didn't predict any misses. But back in those days, if you didn't predict a blow out quarterly earning from Apple, you were bearish. It was their one year outlook back then, that always seem clearly bearish. And that's one of the numbers investors look at when deciding whether to invest in a stock. Traders are the ones that look at quarterly earning predictions. 
    Alex1Nwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 9 of 16
    doggonedoggone Posts: 326member
    In her early years, she was consistently among the most unreasonably bearish regarding Apple, and Gene Munster, who was at Piper Jaffray at the time, was probably the most bullish. Then at a certain point (quite a while ago) after numerous embarrassing quarters she must have realized that she was grossly underestimating Apple, and she’s been pretty consistently bullish ever since, which has been a much more successful strategy. I tried to dig up some of her old comments, but couldn’t really find them, just an old Andy Zaky column bemoaning her pessimism.
    I remember that too.  One example she spelled doom and gloom, I think AAPL was approaching 200 at the time. The stock fell sharply.  Instead of selling my shares I went all in and bought at the low.  Maybe I should thank her since she gave me an opportunity to add more stock to my holdings.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 16
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,844member
    You'd think someone so good at forecasting Apple's fortunes would keep all her forecasts and opinions to herself and just use it to make a lot more money investing in AAPL?

    Or maybe that's why Morgan Stanley stopped her from covering Apple?  Hmmm.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 16
    Paul_BPaul_B Posts: 82member
    Who?  She works for a bank...just saying...
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 16
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Paul_B said:
    Who?  She works for a bank...just saying...
    Just saying what?  We all know she works for a bank, it's in the article.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 13 of 16
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,794member
    Hope the Erik Woodring is as good and thorough as Katy Huberty. She will be missed.
  • Reply 14 of 16
    bushman4bushman4 Posts: 843member
    Katy Hubertys realistic approach and on track analysis will be missed by the many that appreciated her view on Apple. 
     It takes time for an analyst to develop contacts and insight into Apples way of operation and logic   
    That said, Katy Huberty you’ll be missed by the Apple Community

  • Reply 15 of 16
    unquestionably, the most informed and forward-looking analyst on AAPL was Ben Rosen, then VP at MS in the early 80's.  Working with Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs, he convinced MS to take on the IPO along with Hambrecht: Dick Fisher, Barton Biggs, Neil Garonzik and me.  It was MS's first industrial company IPO since Upjohn in 1957.

    Yes, that Ben Rosen! -- founder of Sevin Rosen, Compaq Computer and others
    rundhvid
  • Reply 16 of 16
    Read the room. She’s getting a promotion.
Sign In or Register to comment.