If you're choosing between invest-like and Simply Wall St for value-investing analysis, the cleanest comparison is to look at how each tool analyses the same stock. Apple (AAPL) is the obvious pick - it's the most-searched ticker in both platforms, and it sits in the borderline zone where good tools should produce nuanced verdicts and weak tools should produce templated ones.
Here is the side-by-side. Spoiler: the two tools agree on 60% of the analysis and disagree on the 40% that matters most. Both have legitimate strengths.
The verdicts at a glance
| Tool | Headline verdict on AAPL | Cited as evidence | Free? |
|---|
| invest-like | "6 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit; Graham fails on P/B" | A+ to D letter grade with per-framework breakdown | Yes, free tier |
| Simply Wall St | "Snowflake graphic: fair value / risk / future / past / health" | Five overall traffic-light scores | Yes, limited |
Both tools agree Apple is a high-quality business. Both have AAPL in their fair-value-OR-undervalued bucket. The difference is in how they tell you why.
Where invest-like wins
1. Per-framework breakdown
invest-like runs Apple against the published rules of seven legendary investors separately. Each one returns a verdict with the underlying number:
- Buffett (Strong Fit): ROE 175%+, owner-earnings yield 4.2%, durable moat ✓
- Graham (Weak Fit): P/E 33 (defensive max 15) - fails
- Fisher (Strong Fit): gross margin 46%, R&D / revenue 7.4%
- Lynch (Partial Fit): PEG 1.8 - above 1.0 floor
- Greenblatt (Strong Fit): ROIC 49%, top decile on combined rank
- Munger (Strong Fit): ROIC sustained > 18% for 10 years, balance sheet pristine
- Smith (Strong Fit): FCF / NI 98%, ROCE > 50%, no banks/cyclicals
This level of granularity is what "value investing" actually means. A "buy" rating that doesn't tell you which framework underpins it isn't useful. Simply Wall St shows you their five aggregated scores (fair value / risk / future / past / health), but the underlying breakdown - which rules did this stock pass - isn't visible at the same depth.
2. The Boardroom - multi-investor debate
Open /boardroom/aapl/ on invest-like and four legendary investor AIs debate Apple in real time, each grounded in their own published frameworks, with a skeptic challenging every bullish claim. Citations included.
Nothing in Simply Wall St does this. The closest equivalent in the broader market is reading separate analyst reports from different firms - but those don't actually engage with each other.
3. Ask Buffett
invest-like indexes every Berkshire Hathaway shareholder letter from 1977 to 2025. Ask Buffett any question about Apple, and the answer cites the specific letter year and section. Real quotes, no hallucinations.
Simply Wall St doesn't have this feature. The Buffett-quote angle is unique to invest-like.
4. Published track record
invest-like publishes its own verdict accuracy with the methodology open. The 7-of-7 framework consensus cohort returned +73.8% above the S&P 500 over a rolling 5-year window (median), with 81% of the cohort beating the index. Live model portfolio with locked entry timestamps tracks the screen forward against SPY daily.
Simply Wall St does not publish a comparable verdict-accuracy track record. (To be fair, very few stock-analysis platforms do.)
5. Halal Mode
invest-like applies the AAOIFI Standard 21 halal screen on every stock and combines it with the 7-framework consensus. Apple passes both screens. Simply Wall St does not have a halal filter.
Where Simply Wall St wins
1. Visual polish on the snowflake / discounted-cash-flow graphics
Simply Wall St's snowflake graphic is genuinely well-designed. The five-pillar polar chart communicates a lot of information at a glance. invest-like's PillarRadar component is structurally similar but Simply Wall St has had longer to iterate the visual.
2. Broader retail-investor brand
Simply Wall St has been around since 2014 and has more brand recognition. If you're a casual investor and you've heard of one of the two, it's probably Simply Wall St.
3. Excel-like portfolio analytics
Simply Wall St's portfolio import / tracking is more mature. invest-like has a portfolio tracker but it's newer (shipped 2026) and doesn't have the same depth of "what if I rebalance to these weights" tooling yet.
When each tool is the right choice
Pick invest-like if you want:
- Multiple value-investing frameworks scored separately, not aggregated into one number
- Multi-investor debate (Boardroom) on the stocks you're considering
- Ask Buffett with real Berkshire letter citations
- Open backtest methodology + published track record
- Halal investing screen layered on top of value criteria
- Multi-language UI (EN, DE, FR, ES, PT)
- Educational stock analysis at €12/month (or €299 lifetime)
Pick Simply Wall St if you want:
- The snowflake visual / mature retail-investor UX
- Portfolio import + analytics depth
- A broader brand and longer track record as a company
- Their discounted-cash-flow valuation approach
Pick both if you can - they're not really substitutes. invest-like is the framework-by-framework analytical tool; Simply Wall St is the visual / portfolio dashboard. They answer different questions.
How to verify this comparison yourself
The honest invitation: open Apple's page on both tools. Compare them. Look at what each shows you. The argument I'm making above is testable.
Specifically:
- Open /buffett/aapl/ on invest-like (free, no signup). Read the per-framework breakdown. Then run the Boardroom on AAPL (free up to 3x/week). Then open Ask Buffett and ask "What did Buffett say about Apple in his 2025 letter?"
- Open Apple's page on Simply Wall St (free, signup required for full features). Read the snowflake. Compare what each tool prioritises.
- Decide which one's framing actually helps you decide whether you'd own Apple at the current price.
I built invest-like because the existing tools (Simply Wall St included) showed me aggregated scores without telling me which investor's framework was driving the aggregation. The full /vs/ comparison page is at /vs/simply-wall-st/ with feature-by-feature parity tables.
Disclosure
This is an opinionated comparison written by the founder of invest-like. I've tried to be specific about both tools' strengths. If you think I've mischaracterised Simply Wall St, please email me (zaid@invest-like.com) and I'll update the post.
Both invest-like and Simply Wall St are educational tools, not investment advisers. Apple, like every stock, is a real decision that requires your own research.