Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

rubenbmathisen OP t1_j3a6d3m wrote

Data: IMF, NASDAQ, World Bank

Tools: RStudio; ggplot2

−18

Kenilwort t1_j3a8v0n wrote

I think you should add the population of those countries combined. I'm curious. And nice data presentation, definitely fits the sub!

edit: I see you've added that

−13

911memeslol t1_j3a9g3u wrote

Fun fact; the richest guy on earth is richer than the poorest guy on earth!!!!!!1!1!1!1!1!1!

31

twitchyeye84 t1_j3a9s5g wrote

Replying to ghostmastergeneral (#1,299,805)

I think it means rich people are rich and poor people are poor. See the chart? The rich people put their money in apple stock, while even all these poor countries put together couldn't come up with enough money to buy as much apple stock as the rich people have.

If you think about it though, say they did try to somehow harness the entire GDP and pump it into apple. It would just help the rich who already own the stock become even richer!

Yeah it means nothing.

−30

Hazzawoof t1_j3aaosz wrote

A bit odd to compare gdp to market cap. A more useful comparison would be total wealth vs market cap or gdp vs earnings. Apple's earnings were a touch under $100b over the last 12 months. That equates to the bottom 41-45 countries based on OP's data.

114

Psychological-Ice361 t1_j3aaoxc wrote

You’re comparing two completely different metrics. More relevant would be comparing Apples operating income to GDP. Apples operating income for 2022 was ~$120B, which is a little more than the GDP of Sudan.

124

Woodie626 t1_j3aclwt wrote

So you need $64,000,000+ to be worth more than a country.

−7

Ublungu t1_j3agj5m wrote

all years those countries produce an apple company

2

newpua_bie t1_j3agmga wrote

Replying to PalpitationFine (#1,300,026)

As someone who worked as a professor for 6 years, I'm not surprised (though I sincerely hope it's not in econ). Many PhD students are dumb as rocks. After you get in it's very hard not to graduate. Sure, they make you jump through various hoops but in the end it's mostly just for show and you get your degree in the end.

27

Eric1491625 t1_j3ajdes wrote

Replying to RD__III (#1,300,155)

Even that is too much. You need to compare a company's Economic Value Added to GDP, not all revenues.

If a country imports $200 of components to assemble a $300 Apple product it generates only $100 of GDP. But from Apple's perspective, if Apple imports $200 of components to sell a $300 product it generates the full $300 as revenue (but only $100 of EVA, which would be the correct comparison).

39

rubenbmathisen OP t1_j3aliyf wrote

Replying to RD__III (#1,300,155)

The comparison in the graph simply says that Apple’s market cap is approximately equivalent to the value of what 110 countries produce in a year. Nothing more, nothing less. There are certainly other interesting comparison one could make, but they dont undermine that fact.

−64

tankthestank t1_j3am2dj wrote

I came here to dunk on a meaningless comparison, but y'all have it covered already.

​

Anyways, here's a fun fact... did you know if you weigh all the pigeons in New York at once they weigh more than they all eat in a day?

32

wyseguy7 t1_j3amcek wrote

Market cap and GDP are not the same concept. Market cap is a “stock” measurement, representing lifetime value, whereas GDP is a “flow” sort of measurement, representing annual value.

23

RD__III t1_j3anh4a wrote

Replying to rubenbmathisen (#1,300,310)

Yes. I can read English. why do you compare the market cap to GDP. Why don’t you compare the value of what apple produces in a year to these other countries? That would make sense for a comparison. Market Cap to GDP doesn’t make sense.

To better phrase it, a monkey can throw two numbers on a bar chart. What makes your data beautiful compared to a monkeys?

39

otaku_nazi t1_j3aqpjy wrote

I have 2 legs

Apple has zero

Hence I am better than apple.

Do most people even know what GDP even means

51

nikolatosic t1_j3b2u27 wrote

It makes zero sense to compare these two metrics because

Market cap is not GDP

Companies are not countries

This is like saying a car is faster than a banana

34

ihateusednames t1_j3b2v5a wrote

Yeah I bet they're just innovating the absolute fuck out of those phones 👍

−1

DrinkinDoughnuts t1_j3b9twj wrote

This is a very odd comparison. It's similar to compare someone's net worth to someone else's yearly salary, doesn't really make sense. One is accumulated wealth over time, the other is how much they make in given year.

6

helenig t1_j3bd3hj wrote

It makes more sense to compare Apple to oranges

3

dadarknight07 t1_j3bd7oq wrote

New bar chart idea

Number of laughs from reading comments dunking on the ludicrous comparison on this chart

Vs

Number of insightful wisdoms gleaned from the chart

5

dadarknight07 t1_j3bdfej wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,300,542)

That’s just it. It DOESNT show how massive apples market cap is via a comparison for perspective because the comparison is invalid.

It just shows apples market cap and then a separate number next to it. No perspectives obtained from a comparison.

18

blekksprut_ t1_j3bgm6w wrote

When I actually think about this, it is so depressing. these products are so overvalued and people are undervalued. :/

−1

EnderPBO t1_j3bhnev wrote

Why not just 2 trillion instead of 2000 billion

2

alchemil t1_j3bhv15 wrote

I spy with my little eye.. my nation

1

bosssx t1_j3bijle wrote

Replying to rubenbmathisen (#1,300,113)

You labeled the chart and they still don't want to read.

I wonder if some on told them it would take 5 years of their income to buy a sports car. They would say that "income and cars are different you can't compare the two"

−8

rubenbmathisen OP t1_j3bjv8u wrote

Replying to bosssx (#1,301,285)

Exactly. There is no rule that says you cant compare a flow to a stock (as many here seem to believe). Its freqently done in economics, and in general it can be quite helpful to understand the size of the stock (as with your sports car example).

−5

volthor t1_j3bw6mx wrote

market cap vs gdp? pointless chart

5

homerjdimpson t1_j3bzgtk wrote

Replying to bosssx (#1,301,285)

Isn’t the purpose of visual data to make it more easily understandable for valid comparisons? This is like Purdue pharma showing logarithmic data and saying, you labeled it and they still don’t wanna read.

Depending on OPs intended conclusions it’s sort of misinformation or manipulation.

5

purple-lemons t1_j3bzxn0 wrote

Revenue and spending would be a more useful measure

2

wombatlegs t1_j3c5k83 wrote

Replying to hiccupseed (#1,299,856)

Is that the same as saying the numbers have different units?

One is dollars, the other is dollars per year, and the time length is somewhat arbitrary. Market cap is not even real money.

15

ackillesBAC t1_j3cavfk wrote

Market cap and GDP both made up numbers to represent wealth that doesn't actually exist

2

Artorix92 t1_j3cbw8r wrote

Let's keep simple, is the same than France :)

1

marcoiiim t1_j3cebba wrote

GDP is a per annum calculation comprised of backward looking data. Market Cap is primarily a present value calculation based on forward looking expectations, on a perpetual basis. Both completely different statistics with completely different purposes.

3

jeriously t1_j3ci0v2 wrote

Is that only a projective predicted report, right?

1

dml997 t1_j3ckjby wrote

Dishonest comparison. GDP is annual. Cap is total value. You cannot compare the two. If you are at all honest, compare GDP to annual revenue, or total value of countries assets to market cap.

6

Mkanpur t1_j3cq8ms wrote

Now compare the violent crime rate in Pittsburgh to the number of whales in the Pacific, that will give you the real information

3

Rad_Dad6969 t1_j3cqf8z wrote

We provide Apple with government subsidies equal or greater to the GDP of the bottom 10 countries on the list.

We pay apple more than some countries are worth just to keep their shareholders rich. We don't help our own companies compete with Apple, We just pay the giants to get bigger.

2

dadarknight07 t1_j3d897c wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,302,747)

Worth (stock) and income (flow) are two different categories of measurement. It doesn’t make sense to compare one of those of one entity with the other of those of an entirely different entity. It’s non sequitur.

Your example is more valid as a comparison as net income and revenue are both in the flow category of measurement.

OPs example is like comparing the total incomes of a neighborhood in LA with the total enterprise value of all the McDonald’s in Ecuador. You can put them next to each other in a chart. But doesn’t really make sense.

3

[deleted] t1_j3esgfj wrote

Nice picture, but IMHO makes no sense...

1

gunfell t1_j4iy6wc wrote

Replying to newpua_bie (#1,369,411)

"The Council of Graduate Schools produced a study on the PhD completion and attrition. The study looked at 49,000 students attending 30 institutions in 54 disciplines comprising 330 programs. Astonishingly, the completion rate ten years after students begin their doctoral program remains low at 56.6%."

even when accounting for external factors that could lower that number, it is pretty low.

but you say

"Many PhD students are dumb as rocks. After you get in it's very hard not to graduate."

your school is ranked higher in what? nonsense?

what you're saying doesn't add up. so i am just going to go with the reasonable path of ignoring you.

1