ET Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

New Fortress Energy, Inc. has a net margin of 6.48% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of -89.61%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 12.72% beat New Fortress Energy, Inc.'s return on equity of -77.36%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $21.62, signalling upside risk potential of 31.9%. On the other hand New Fortress Energy, Inc. has an analysts' consensus of $3.50 which suggests that it could grow by 204.35%. Given that New Fortress Energy, Inc. has higher upside potential than Energy Transfer LP, analysts believe New Fortress Energy, Inc. is more attractive than Energy Transfer LP.

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.650, which suggesting that the stock is 35.007% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison New Fortress Energy, Inc. has a beta of 1.116, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 11.632%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 8.02%. New Fortress Energy, Inc. offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 99.28% of its earnings as a dividend. New Fortress Energy, Inc. pays out 26.95% 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 $20B, which are larger than New Fortress Energy, Inc. quarterly revenues of $327.4M. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than New Fortress Energy, Inc.'s net income of -$293.4M. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.12x while New Fortress Energy, Inc.'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 0.71x versus 0.17x for New Fortress Energy, Inc.. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Plains All American Pipeline LP has a net margin of 6.48% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of 3.92%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 12.72% beat Plains All American Pipeline LP's return on equity of 10%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $21.62, signalling upside risk potential of 31.9%. On the other hand Plains All American Pipeline LP has an analysts' consensus of $20.44 which suggests that it could grow by 15.23%. Given that Energy Transfer LP has higher upside potential than Plains All American Pipeline LP, analysts believe Energy Transfer LP is more attractive than Plains All American Pipeline LP.

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.650, which suggesting that the stock is 35.007% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Plains All American Pipeline LP has a beta of 0.591, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 40.927%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 8.02%. Plains All American Pipeline LP offers a yield of 8.57% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.38 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 99.28% of its earnings as a dividend. Plains All American Pipeline LP pays out 173.45% 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 Plains All American Pipeline LP's is not.

Energy Transfer LP quarterly revenues are $20B, which are larger than Plains All American Pipeline LP quarterly revenues of $11.6B. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than Plains All American Pipeline LP's net income of $453M. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.12x while Plains All American Pipeline LP's PE ratio is 14.38x. 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 0.71x versus 0.27x for Plains All American Pipeline LP. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Vonage Holdings has a net margin of 6.48% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of --. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 12.72% beat Vonage Holdings's return on equity of --.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $21.62, signalling upside risk potential of 31.9%. On the other hand Vonage Holdings has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Energy Transfer LP has higher upside potential than Vonage Holdings, analysts believe Energy Transfer LP is more attractive than Vonage Holdings.

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.650, which suggesting that the stock is 35.007% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Vonage Holdings has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 8.02%. Vonage Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 99.28% of its earnings as a dividend. Vonage Holdings pays out -- 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 $20B, which are larger than Vonage Holdings quarterly revenues of --. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than Vonage Holdings's net income of --. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.12x while Vonage Holdings's PE ratio is --. 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 0.71x versus -- for Vonage Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

The Williams Cos., Inc. has a net margin of 6.48% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of 23.82%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 12.72% beat The Williams Cos., Inc.'s return on equity of 16.92%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $21.62, signalling upside risk potential of 31.9%. On the other hand The Williams Cos., Inc. has an analysts' consensus of $67.75 which suggests that it could grow by 13.38%. Given that Energy Transfer LP has higher upside potential than The Williams Cos., Inc., analysts believe Energy Transfer LP is more attractive than The Williams Cos., Inc..

Energy Transfer LP has a beta of 0.650, which suggesting that the stock is 35.007% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison The Williams Cos., Inc. has a beta of 0.627, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 37.293%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 8.02%. The Williams Cos., Inc. offers a yield of 3.35% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 99.28% of its earnings as a dividend. The Williams Cos., Inc. pays out 104.57% 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 The Williams Cos., Inc.'s is not.

Energy Transfer LP quarterly revenues are $20B, which are larger than The Williams Cos., Inc. quarterly revenues of $2.9B. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than The Williams Cos., Inc.'s net income of $683M. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.12x while The Williams Cos., Inc.'s PE ratio is 30.91x. 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 0.71x versus 6.33x for The Williams Cos., Inc.. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.