(HedgeCo.Net) For more than a decade, Apple was not just Berkshire Hathaway’s largest equity holding—it was the defining symbol of Warren Buffett’s late-career evolution. Once skeptical of technology, Buffett ultimately embraced Apple as the ultimate consumer brand, a cash-generating ecosystem with loyalty bordering on utility status. At its peak, Apple accounted for well over 40% of Berkshire’s public-equity portfolio, an unprecedented level of concentration for a firm known historically for diversification.
So when Berkshire disclosed in late 2025 and early 2026 that it had trimmed its Apple stake, investors took notice.
When that disclosure was followed by news that Berkshire had simultaneously initiated a roughly $350 million stake in The New York Times Company—six years after Buffett publicly exited the newspaper business altogether—the surprise deepened.
Together, these two moves tell a far more nuanced story than “selling tech” and “buying media.” They reflect a valuation-driven portfolio recalibration, a generational leadership transition, and a reaffirmation of Berkshire’s core philosophy: durable franchises matter—but only at the right price.
This is not a rejection of Apple. Nor is it a nostalgic return to print journalism. It is Berkshire Hathaway doing what it has always done best at inflection points: protecting downside, recycling capital, and positioning for the next decade rather than the last one.
Apple at Berkshire: From Skepticism to Crown Jewel
To understand why trimming Apple matters, it’s worth revisiting just how central the position became.
Berkshire first invested in Apple in 2016, a move that initially puzzled Buffett observers. Buffett had long argued that he avoided technology because it lacked predictability. Apple, however, fit a different mental model. He didn’t see it as a tech company. He saw it as a consumer products business with extraordinary brand loyalty, pricing power, and recurring revenue.
Over the years, that thesis proved spectacularly correct.
Apple’s iPhone ecosystem became a cash machine. Services revenue grew steadily. Share buybacks reduced the share count aggressively, magnifying Berkshire’s ownership stake without requiring incremental capital. As Apple’s stock compounded, Berkshire’s position ballooned.
By the early 2020s, Apple had become:
- Berkshire’s single largest holding by a wide margin
- A dominant driver of Berkshire’s reported investment income
- A symbolic endorsement of “modern Berkshire,” willing to own high-quality mega-cap growth businesses
For years, Buffett described Apple as “probably the best business in the world.”
That’s precisely why trimming it now is so instructive.
Why Berkshire Trimmed Apple: Valuation, Not Doubt
The most important point investors often miss: Berkshire did not exit Apple. It trimmed it.
That distinction matters enormously.
1. Valuation Compression Risk
By late 2025, Apple was trading at valuation multiples well above its long-term historical averages. While Apple remains a phenomenal business, its future growth profile is inherently more mature than it was five or ten years ago.
For Berkshire, which measures success in absolute, long-term returns rather than relative benchmarks, the question becomes simple:
Can Apple realistically deliver returns from today’s price that justify its outsized portfolio weight?
Trimming Apple reflects a recognition that:
- Much of the upside had already been realized
- Future returns may increasingly resemble the broader market
- Concentration risk had grown asymmetrically large
This is classic Berkshire behavior. The firm has repeatedly trimmed or exited exceptional businesses—not because they deteriorated, but because price overtook value.
2. Portfolio Risk Management at Scale
Berkshire is no longer a $100 billion company. It is a trillion-dollar capital allocator when you combine operating businesses, public equities, and cash.
At that scale, concentration cuts both ways. Apple’s success helped Berkshire enormously—but allowing a single equity to dominate the portfolio indefinitely would expose shareholders to:
- Regulatory shocks
- Technological disruption
- Macro-driven multiple compression
Trimming Apple is less about Apple itself and more about prudently managing exposure in a portfolio that must remain resilient across decades.
3. The Abel Transition Factor
While Warren Buffett remains Chairman, Greg Abel’s ascension to CEO in 2026 introduces a subtle but important shift. Abel inherits a portfolio shaped by Buffett’s convictions—but he also inherits the responsibility of risk-proofing Berkshire for a post-Buffett world.
Reducing reliance on any single holding—no matter how iconic—aligns with that mandate.
This doesn’t mean Abel is “less bullish” on Apple. It means he is more focused on structural balance.
Enter The New York Times: A Surprising—but Telling—Purchase
If trimming Apple raised eyebrows, Berkshire’s decision to buy The New York Times Company raised far more.
Buffett famously exited the newspaper industry in 2019, acknowledging that traditional print media faced secular decline and uncertain economics. At the time, he was blunt: the future of newspapers was too unpredictable.
So why come back now?
The Key Insight: This Is Not a Print Bet
Berkshire is not buying The New York Times as a newspaper.
It is buying:
- A global digital subscription platform
- A trusted brand with pricing power
- A business that has already executed its transition to recurring digital revenue
The Times today is fundamentally different from the newspaper businesses Buffett abandoned years ago.
The Digital Transformation That Changed the Equation
Over the past decade, The New York Times has:
- Built millions of digital-only subscribers
- Reduced dependence on volatile advertising cycles
- Expanded into adjacent subscription products (cooking, games, audio, podcasts)
The result is a media company that increasingly resembles a subscription-based consumer service, not a legacy publisher.
For Berkshire, this matters enormously. Buffett has always favored businesses with:
- Recurring revenue
- High customer retention
- Brand trust
- Pricing power
By those standards, The New York Times has quietly become one of the strongest media franchises in the world.
Why Buy NYT Now? The Berkshire Logic
1. Brand as Economic Moat
Berkshire’s investment history is filled with brands that command trust: Coca-Cola, See’s Candies, American Express.
The New York Times occupies a similar position in journalism. In an era of misinformation, polarization, and AI-generated content, trusted editorial brands may actually become more valuable, not less.
That trust allows:
- Subscription price increases
- Expansion into new digital formats
- Long-term customer relationships
This is not growth at any cost—it is durable relevance.
2. Cash Flow Visibility
Unlike many media companies, the Times generates predictable, subscription-driven cash flow. That aligns closely with Berkshire’s preference for businesses that can self-fund growth without constant capital injections.
In a world where advertising revenue is cyclical and algorithm-dependent, subscription revenue offers stability—something Berkshire values deeply.
3. Valuation Discipline
Just as Apple’s valuation prompted trimming, the Times’ valuation likely created an opportunity.
Media stocks have lagged broader markets for years. Many investors remain skeptical of the sector as a whole, applying blanket discounts regardless of individual execution quality.
Berkshire has often stepped into such environments—buying best-in-class businesses in out-of-favor sectors.
Apple vs. NYT: What This Rotation Really Signals
At first glance, trimming Apple and buying The New York Times looks like a dramatic pivot. In reality, it reflects a consistent framework applied to two very different businesses.
| Apple | The New York Times |
|---|---|
| Exceptional business | Exceptional brand |
| Fully recognized by markets | Still discounted by skepticism |
| Massive scale | Focused, niche dominance |
| Slower future growth | Moderate, durable growth |
| High valuation | Reasonable valuation |
Berkshire is not abandoning growth. It is rebalancing growth with valuation discipline.
This is particularly important in 2026, as markets grapple with:
- AI-driven capital spending cycles
- Elevated equity multiples
- Macro uncertainty around rates and geopolitics
In that context, Berkshire is signaling that selectivity matters more than ever.
The Bigger Picture: Berkshire’s 2026 Strategy
These moves fit into a broader set of trends at Berkshire Hathaway in 2026:
1. Cash Is a Feature, Not a Bug
Berkshire is sitting on hundreds of billions in cash and Treasuries. Trimming Apple adds to that optionality.
Rather than forcing capital into overpriced opportunities, Berkshire is content to wait—knowing that volatility eventually creates opportunity.
2. Fewer, Better Bets
Berkshire is not becoming more active—it is becoming more precise. Each equity position is increasingly expected to meet a high bar for:
- Durability
- Return potential
- Strategic relevance
3. Preparing for a Post-Buffett Era
Greg Abel’s early tenure is not about radical change. It is about continuity with resilience.
Reducing concentration risk, refreshing the portfolio, and reinforcing Berkshire’s identity as a long-term capital steward are all part of that transition.
What This Means for Investors
For Berkshire shareholders, the takeaway is not to mimic these trades—but to understand the philosophy behind them.
- Great businesses are not always great investments at any price
- Legacy skepticism can create opportunity when fundamentals improve
- Capital allocation discipline matters more as portfolios grow
Berkshire trimming Apple does not imply Apple is broken. Berkshire buying The New York Times does not mean newspapers are back.
It means Berkshire is doing what it has always done at its best moments: adapting without abandoning its principles.
Final Thought: Evolution Without Revolution
Berkshire Hathaway’s decision to trim Apple and buy The New York Times is not a contradiction. It is a case study in long-term investing at scale.
Apple remains a cornerstone. The Times is a calculated addition. Cash remains king. Discipline remains intact.
In 2026, as markets debate AI valuations, media relevance, and the future of conglomerates, Berkshire is quietly reminding investors of a timeless truth:
Investment success is not about loving businesses—it’s about respecting price, durability, and time.
And that lesson, more than any individual trade, is what continues to define Berkshire Hathaway’s relevance in a rapidly changing financial world.