X
Business

Samsung, Apple top tech list in Fortune Global 500

Mixed results in the Fortune 500's technology sector, as mobile is up year-over-year, cellular is about flat, but the biggest losses in the PC market, as desktops and laptops are taking a backseat for smartphones.
Written by Zack Whittaker, Contributor

Fortune on Monday released its annual ranking of the world's largest companies, the Fortune 500 list.

Mobile dominated the tech portion of the top 100 companies. Both Samsung and Apple ranked in the top 20, generating $178.6 billion and $156.5 billion in revenues last year respectively. But, Samsung's position rose by six points year-over-year, while Apple's jumped 36 percentage points to take slot 19.

While two ranked the highest in tech, it's still far cry away from the oil and petroleum industry. Royal Dutch Shell topped the list with a staggering $481.7 billion in revenue.

2012 Change 2013 Company name
20 up 14 Samsung
55 up 19 Apple
43 up 30 Hon Hai (Foxconn)
32 down 34 AT&T
31 down 43 Hewlett-Packard
50 up 48 Verizon
47 down 53 Siemens
57 down 62 IBM

Hon Hai (Foxconn), Apple's main manufacturing contractor, also jumped 13 points to slot 30 thanks to its contracts with the iPhone and iPad maker. There have been reports that Apple is moving away from Foxconn, which may see the company slip in next year's tally.

Meanwhile, AT&T and Verizon, the largest U.S. cell carriers, remained in the top 100 list. Year-over-year, however, their rankings remained roughly the same, hovevering around the same points as last year. AT&T fell down two points to 34 in 2013, while Verizon rose by two points to 48.

The greatest technology loss in the top 100 companies in the Fortune 500 is Hewlett-Packard, which has suffered as a result of the PC market downturn and poor economic climate. The only PC maker in the top 100 slipped 12 points on the year prior.

IBM also suffered marginally, dropping five points to 62, but still generated $104.5 million in revenue, with just shy of one-fifth of that stored as profit.

Editorial standards