ET Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Enterprise Products Partners LP has a net margin of 6.29% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of 9.04%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 10.65% beat Enterprise Products Partners LP's return on equity of 20.02%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $22.60, signalling upside risk potential of 27.23%. On the other hand Enterprise Products Partners LP has an analysts' consensus of $36.41 which suggests that it could grow by 15.83%. Given that Energy Transfer LP has higher upside potential than Enterprise Products Partners LP, analysts believe Energy Transfer LP is more attractive than Enterprise Products Partners LP.

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.771, which suggesting that the stock is 22.928% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Enterprise Products Partners LP has a beta of 0.669, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 33.093%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 7.29%. Enterprise Products Partners LP offers a yield of 6.75% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.54 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 96.03% of its earnings as a dividend. Enterprise Products Partners LP pays out 76.46% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Energy Transfer LP quarterly revenues are $21B, which are larger than Enterprise Products Partners LP quarterly revenues of $15.4B. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is lower than Enterprise Products Partners LP's net income of $1.4B. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.45x while Enterprise Products Partners LP's PE ratio is 11.77x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Energy Transfer LP is 0.74x versus 1.21x for Enterprise Products Partners LP. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Cheniere Energy has a net margin of 6.29% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of 6.48%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 10.65% beat Cheniere Energy's return on equity of 33.43%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $22.60, signalling upside risk potential of 27.23%. On the other hand Cheniere Energy has an analysts' consensus of $256.86 which suggests that it could grow by 9.95%. Given that Energy Transfer LP has higher upside potential than Cheniere Energy, analysts believe Energy Transfer LP is more attractive than Cheniere Energy.

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.771, which suggesting that the stock is 22.928% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Cheniere Energy has a beta of 0.415, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 58.511%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 7.29%. Cheniere Energy offers a yield of 0.83% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 96.03% of its earnings as a dividend. Cheniere Energy pays out 12.67% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Energy Transfer LP quarterly revenues are $21B, which are larger than Cheniere Energy quarterly revenues of $5.4B. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than Cheniere Energy's net income of $353M. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.45x while Cheniere Energy's PE ratio is 17.09x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Energy Transfer LP is 0.74x versus 3.13x for Cheniere Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

New Fortress Energy has a net margin of 6.29% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of -41.95%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 10.65% beat New Fortress Energy's return on equity of -27.66%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $22.60, signalling upside risk potential of 27.23%. On the other hand New Fortress Energy has an analysts' consensus of $8.83 which suggests that it could grow by 212.13%. Given that New Fortress Energy has higher upside potential than Energy Transfer LP, analysts believe New Fortress Energy is more attractive than Energy Transfer LP.

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.771, which suggesting that the stock is 22.928% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison New Fortress Energy has a beta of 1.459, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 45.875%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 7.29%. New Fortress Energy offers a yield of 14.13% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 96.03% of its earnings as a dividend. New Fortress Energy pays out -26.23% of its earnings as a dividend. Energy Transfer LP's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Energy Transfer LP quarterly revenues are $21B, which are larger than New Fortress Energy quarterly revenues of $470.5M. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than New Fortress Energy's net income of -$197.4M. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.45x while New Fortress Energy's PE ratio is 9.93x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Energy Transfer LP is 0.74x versus 0.31x for New Fortress Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Williams Companies has a net margin of 6.29% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of 22.67%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 10.65% beat Williams Companies's return on equity of 15.38%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $22.60, signalling upside risk potential of 27.23%. On the other hand Williams Companies has an analysts' consensus of $60.50 which suggests that it could fall by -0.21%. Given that Energy Transfer LP has higher upside potential than Williams Companies, analysts believe Energy Transfer LP is more attractive than Williams Companies.

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.771, which suggesting that the stock is 22.928% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Williams Companies has a beta of 0.664, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 33.614%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 7.29%. Williams Companies offers a yield of 3.18% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 96.03% of its earnings as a dividend. Williams Companies pays out 104.09% of its earnings as a dividend. Energy Transfer LP's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but Williams Companies's is not.

Energy Transfer LP quarterly revenues are $21B, which are larger than Williams Companies quarterly revenues of $3B. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than Williams Companies's net income of $691M. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.45x while Williams Companies's PE ratio is 32.59x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Energy Transfer LP is 0.74x versus 6.88x for Williams Companies. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.