> This is where we get into some intriguing comparisons. Microsoft’s P/E is a solid 48 and Alphabet’s hovers around 50…but Apple’s is a meager 17. >There's a l

> This is where we get into some intriguing comparisons. Microsoft’s P/E is a solid 48 and Alphabet’s hovers around 50…but Apple’s is a meager 17. >There's a legitimate point there, clouded by the exaggeration. Apple is indeed fetching a lower multiple, because it has had very low growth for years. If you go back to 2009, Apple's PE was quite low and has stayed low ever since, despite Apple being in one of the largest revenue growth periods in it's history. With net income going from 8.24 Billion Dollars in 2009 to 41.73 Billion Dollars in 2012, you would think a growth spike in a companies bottom line of that magnitude would result in a stock that trades at a pretty high PE ratio. Oddly, it didn't, with Apple's PE ratio fluctuating in the teens and low 20's during that period.