Apples and oranges

In Chinese, a similar phrase is used: 风马牛不相及 (fēng mǎ niú bù xiāng jí) (horses and cattle won't mate with each other).

The idea is that although dissimilar, apples and oranges are at least fruits and at least share rudimentary similarities, whereas comparing them to something entirely different, such as pine cones or light bulbs, highlights how patently absurd making a comparison between the two is.

For example, same-store sales is widely used as measurement because it allows a direct comparison of how the business is doing ignoring growth, which can be a significant complicating factor.

[4] At least two tongue-in-cheek scientific studies have been conducted on the subject, each of which concluded that apples can be compared with oranges reasonably easily and on a low budget, and the two fruits are quite similar.

The first study, conducted by Scott Sandford of the NASA Ames Research Center, used infrared spectroscopy to analyze both apples and oranges.

The study, which was published in the satirical science magazine Annals of Improbable Research, concluded: "... the comparing apples and oranges defense should no longer be considered valid.

The study also found that both apples and oranges were sweet, similar in size, weight, and shape, that both are grown in orchards, and both may be eaten, juiced, and so on.

[6] The Annals of Improbable Research subsequently noted that the "earlier investigation was done with more depth, more rigour, and, most importantly, more expensive equipment" than the British Medical Journal study.