ET Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

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 $22.59, signalling upside risk potential of 29.54%. On the other hand New Fortress Energy has an analysts' consensus of $5.42 which suggests that it could grow by 35.08%. 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 0.790, which suggesting that the stock is 21.035% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison New Fortress Energy has a beta of 1.302, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 30.157%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 7.43%. New Fortress Energy offers a yield of 0% 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 13.21x 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 0.73x versus 0.44x for New Fortress Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Plains All American Pipeline LP has a net margin of 6.29% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of 3.69%. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 10.65% beat Plains All American Pipeline LP's return on equity of 7.11%.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $22.59, signalling upside risk potential of 29.54%. On the other hand Plains All American Pipeline LP has an analysts' consensus of $20.90 which suggests that it could grow by 11.59%. 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 0.790, which suggesting that the stock is 21.035% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Plains All American Pipeline LP has a beta of 0.679, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 32.096%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 7.43%. Plains All American Pipeline LP offers a yield of 7.47% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.38 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 96.03% of its earnings as a dividend. Plains All American Pipeline LP pays out 148.32% 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 $21B, which are larger than Plains All American Pipeline LP quarterly revenues of $12B. Energy Transfer LP's net income of $1.3B is higher than Plains All American Pipeline LP's net income of $443M. Notably, Energy Transfer LP's price-to-earnings ratio is 13.21x while Plains All American Pipeline LP's PE ratio is 20.08x. 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 0.73x versus 0.26x for Plains All American Pipeline LP. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Vonage Holdings has a net margin of 6.29% compared to Energy Transfer LP's net margin of --. Energy Transfer LP's return on equity of 10.65% beat Vonage Holdings's return on equity of --.

Energy Transfer LP has a consensus price target of $22.59, signalling upside risk potential of 29.54%. 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 0.790, which suggesting that the stock is 21.035% 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 7.43%. Vonage Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Energy Transfer LP pays 96.03% 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 $21B, 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 13.21x 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 0.73x versus -- for Vonage Holdings. 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 $22.59, signalling upside risk potential of 29.54%. On the other hand Williams Companies has an analysts' consensus of $62.15 which suggests that it could grow by 6.27%. 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 0.790, which suggesting that the stock is 21.035% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Williams Companies has a beta of 0.655, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 34.482%.

Energy Transfer LP has a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share corresponding to a yield of 7.43%. Williams Companies offers a yield of 3.34% 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 13.21x while Williams Companies's PE ratio is 31.44x. 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 0.73x versus 6.64x for Williams Companies. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.