By Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panelists generally agreed that Berkshire's portfolio rebalancing reflects a shift towards growth tech and AI exposure, with Abel's moves signaling a departure from Buffett's traditional investment style. However, they also highlighted significant risks, including regulatory threats to Alphabet's search monopoly, potential margin compression for Apple due to rising memory costs, and the impact of a leadership transition at Apple.
Risk: Regulatory threats to Alphabet's search monopoly and potential margin compression for Apple due to rising memory costs
Opportunity: Potential growth and AI exposure from Alphabet and Delta additions
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
Berkshire didn't sell a single Apple share during the first quarter -- a shift from a multi-quarter trend.
The conglomerate more than tripled its stake in Alphabet during the period.
Apple's revenue grew 17%, and earnings per share jumped 22% in its most recent quarter.
Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRKA)(NYSE: BRKB) released its first 13-F filing under new CEO Greg Abel late on Friday, and it included two of the most striking equity moves the conglomerate has made in years. Most notably, Abel and his team chose not to trim Berkshire's massive stake in Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) -- halting a multi-quarter selling trend that former CEO Warren Buffett had presided over for nearly two years. Equally telling, Berkshire more than tripled its position in Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG)(NASDAQ: GOOGL), a position the Buffett-era team had only initiated months earlier.
These moves signal a vote of confidence in big tech from a CEO previously known for his operating work running Berkshire's collection of utilities. They may also confirm something many longtime Berkshire shareholders had suspected: that the prior selling of Apple was less about a souring view on the iPhone maker and more about right-sizing a position that had grown enormous through years of compounding. I predicted in that Abel would put an end to the trimming -- and so far, that is exactly what is happening.
Will AI create the world's first trillionaire? Our team just released a report on the one little-known company, called an "Indispensable Monopoly" providing the critical technology Nvidia and Intel both need. Continue »
But there is more to this filing than just Apple and Alphabet. The cleanup of several other positions reveals how Abel may run the portfolio going forward.
The 13-F revealed that Berkshire held its Apple position steady at roughly 228 million shares. While that stake is well below Berkshire's all-time peak of more than 900 million shares, it still represents about 22% of the conglomerate's equity portfolio, and it remains Berkshire's largest position. American Express and Coca-Cola followed at about 17% and 12% of the portfolio, respectively.
The more dramatic move was in Alphabet. Berkshire's share count in the search giant rose from about 17.85 million at the end of 2025 to roughly 58 million by the end of March -- pushing the position's value to nearly $17 billion. That is a sizable bet, particularly considering Buffett's historical reluctance to invest heavily in technology.
The buying didn't stop there. Berkshire disclosed a new $2.65 billion stake in Delta Air Lines (NYSE: DAL) and a small position in Macy's (though this position was so small that it was immaterial) -- both signals of a willingness to enter spaces Buffett had avoided in recent years.
The selling was even more aggressive.
Berkshire exited Amazon, Visa, Mastercard, Domino's Pizza, and UnitedHealth Group during the quarter, and slashed its Constellation Brands stake by 95%. Chevron was cut significantly as well. Many of these positions were previously associated with departed investment manager Todd Combs, suggesting Abel is putting his own stamp on the equity book.
Beyond the portfolio mechanics, Apple's underlying fundamentals make Berkshire's decision to leave the largest position alone look easy.
When Apple reported its fiscal second quarter of 2026 results (the period ended March 28, 2026) at the end of April, the tech company posted its best March quarter ever. Revenue rose 17% year over year to $111.2 billion, with double-digit growth across every geographic segment. Earnings per share grew 22%. Even better, these growth rates marked an acceleration from the company's prior quarter, when revenue and earnings per share rose 16% and 19%, respectively.
Further, Apple's strength was broad-based. iPhone revenue jumped 22% year over year to $57 billion, while services revenue set yet another all-time record at $31 billion -- up 16%. And the services business may matter even more than the top-line numbers suggest; the segment's gross margin in fiscal Q2 came in at 76.7%, far above the 38.7% products gross margin.
Apple CEO Tim Cook's commentary on the company's fiscal Q2earnings callwas equally upbeat.
"The iPhone 17 family is now the most popular lineup in our history when looking at the launch through March," Cook said. "And according to IDC, we gained market share during the quarter."
Management's guidance for the fiscal third quarter (the period ending in late June) also impressed. Apple expects revenue to grow 14% to 17% year over year, suggesting the iPhone 17 cycle still has runway.
Further, the tech giant also raised its dividend by 4% to $0.27 per share and added $100 billion to its share-buyback authorization.
There are, however, some risks worth flagging. Cook noted on the call that the company expects "significantly higher memory costs" in the June quarter. And that the impact could grow over time as memory manufacturers prioritize artificial intelligence (AI) chips. The pending leadership transition is also worth watching; Cook will step down as CEO on Sept. 1, with senior vice president John Ternus taking over.
Still, neither risk seems severe enough to disrupt the longer-term thesis for Apple (or for Berkshire as a major shareholder).
And ultimately, the way Abel handled Berkshire's biggest positions in his first quarter as CEO arguably makes the conglomerate's stock more attractive. By stepping away from Buffett's late-cycle Apple selling and dramatically expanding the firm's stake in a market-leading tech company at a reasonable valuation, Abel signaled a willingness to chart his own course for the equity book.
Before you buy stock in Berkshire Hathaway, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Berkshire Hathaway wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $469,293! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,381,332!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 993% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 207% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
**Stock Advisor returns as of May 16, 2026. *
American Express is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Daniel Sparks and his clients have positions in Apple and Berkshire Hathaway. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, American Express, Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, Chevron, Domino's Pizza, Mastercard, and Visa. The Motley Fool recommends Constellation Brands, Delta Air Lines, and UnitedHealth Group. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The portfolio reshuffling reflects a reactive search for growth in a high-multiple environment rather than a strategic departure from Buffett-era value principles."
The market is misinterpreting this 13-F as a 'Greg Abel' pivot. The reality is that Berkshire’s portfolio management is still likely dictated by the institutional inertia of the investment committee. The massive rotation—tripling Alphabet while dumping Visa, Mastercard, and Amazon—suggests a desperate search for alpha in a high-multiple environment, not a coherent new strategy. While Apple's 22% EPS growth is impressive, the reliance on a 76.7% margin services business is a double-edged sword; any regulatory crackdown on App Store fees would be catastrophic. By doubling down on Alphabet, Berkshire is essentially betting on a search monopoly that is currently under existential threat from AI-driven query shifts.
If Apple’s services growth is truly durable and Alphabet’s AI integration successfully defends its search moat, this portfolio realignment could represent a masterclass in capturing the next leg of tech-driven cash flow expansion.
"Apple's hold is portfolio mechanics, not a vote of confidence; the real story is Abel rotating Berkshire into AI exposure (Alphabet) and cyclical recovery (Delta), which carries execution risk under new leadership."
The article frames Abel's Apple hold as confidence in the company's fundamentals, but conflates two separate stories: Apple's strong Q2 (17% revenue growth, 22% EPS growth) versus Berkshire's portfolio rebalancing. The Apple hold likely reflects position-sizing discipline—at 22% of equity, it's already massive. More telling is the Alphabet tripling and Delta entry: Abel is rotating toward AI exposure and cyclical recovery plays, not necessarily validating Apple's long-term thesis. The memory cost headwind Cook mentioned deserves more scrutiny; if AI chip demand crushes margins across the supply chain, Apple's 76.7% services margin could compress. The leadership transition (Cook exits Sept 1) is also glossed over—Ternus is untested in a potential macro slowdown.
If Abel's moves signal a genuine shift toward growth-stage tech and away from mature blue chips, holding Apple flat while tripling Alphabet suggests he views Apple as a defensive cash cow, not a growth engine—which contradicts the article's bullish framing.
"N/A"
[Unavailable]
"Abel's 1Q moves imply a deliberate tilt toward growth tech and AI-enabled franchises that could lift Berkshire's returns if the cycle proves durable."
Abel's first-quarter moves put Berkshire at a crossroads: reaffirming Apple as a large, steady core while doubling down on Alphabet and adding Delta exposure signals a tilt toward growth tech and operationally managed bets rather than Buffett's older 'buy great companies at fair prices' ethos. The headline 'no Apple trim' reads as conviction, but the real story could be portfolio balance: Alphabet's heft and Delta's exposure diversify away from pure consumer hardware. The risk is concentration in a single tech ecosystem during a potential AI-driven drawdown, plus Apple's high multiple, rising memory costs, and a leadership transition that could impair execution. Still, Abel's actions may reflect a plan, not a trend.
The strong reading hinges on interpretation; it could just be tactical rebalancing, not genuine conviction in Apple. If the AI cycle cools or execution falters, Berkshire’s tech bets (Alphabet, Delta) could disappoint despite the optics.
"The Delta position is a defensive beta-hedge against tech concentration, not a cyclical growth play."
Claude, you’re missing the forest for the trees regarding the Delta entry. It’s not a cyclical recovery play; it’s a hedge against the very tech-heavy concentration risk you and Gemini highlighted. By adding a capital-intensive, low-multiple carrier, Abel is anchoring Berkshire’s beta. If the AI-driven tech rally hits a regulatory or margin wall, that Delta position provides a value-oriented floor that Alphabet and Apple simply cannot offer in a high-rate environment.
"Delta's low multiple reflects structural weakness, not opportunity; it amplifies rather than hedges tech concentration risk in a downturn."
Gemini's Delta-as-hedge thesis is elegant but untested. Delta trades at 0.8x book with 8-10% ROE—it's a value trap, not a beta anchor. In a tech drawdown, airlines compress multiples *faster* than tech on margin fears and demand destruction. Berkshire adding Delta now, post-fuel-cost normalization, looks like value-chasing into cyclical headwinds, not portfolio insurance. The real hedge would be treasuries or cash.
[Unavailable]
"Delta is not a hedge; it adds beta and risk in a tech drawdown."
Delta as the hedge is unconvincing. Airlines are highly cyclical, with fuel-price sensitivity and margin volatility; in a tech-led risk-off, Delta tends to underperform. 0.8x book, 8-10% ROE feels like a value trap, not ballast. Berkshire adding Delta may amplify beta, not dampen tech risk. If the concern is protecting against AI-driven tech drawdowns, cash or Treasuries are a more credible hedge.
The panelists generally agreed that Berkshire's portfolio rebalancing reflects a shift towards growth tech and AI exposure, with Abel's moves signaling a departure from Buffett's traditional investment style. However, they also highlighted significant risks, including regulatory threats to Alphabet's search monopoly, potential margin compression for Apple due to rising memory costs, and the impact of a leadership transition at Apple.
Potential growth and AI exposure from Alphabet and Delta additions
Regulatory threats to Alphabet's search monopoly and potential margin compression for Apple due to rising memory costs