Enterprise Products Partners L.P. vs Kinder Morgan
EPD and KMI side by side, both in gas production and distribution. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EPD and KMI compare
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and Kinder Morgan are about the same size, with market caps of $82.4B and $75.4B.
On earnings, Enterprise Products Partners L.P. is cheaper: it trades at 13.3× trailing earnings, against 21.7× for Kinder Morgan.
Kinder Morgan grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus 6.8% for Enterprise Products Partners L.P.).
Kinder Morgan keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.3% compared with 10.8% at Enterprise Products Partners L.P..
Both pay dividends: Enterprise Products Partners L.P. yields 5.8% and Kinder Morgan 3.5%.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | EPD | KMI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $82.4B | $75.4B |
| Share price | $38.15 | $33.87 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.6% | 30.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 69.0% | 99.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.30 | 0.47 |
| Employees | – | 11K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 10 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.3× (better) | 21.7× |
| P/S | 1.4× (better) | 4.2× |
| P/B | – | 2.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.7× | 14.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | 23.8× (better) | 23.9× |
| PEG | – | 3.13 |
| FCF yield | 4.2% (better) | 4.2% |
| Fair value | $36.83 | $29.54 |
| Margin of safety | −3.6% (better) | −14.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.8% | 12.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.1% (better) | 7.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 7.5% | 27.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 7.9% | 26.8% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 93.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 25.6% | 66.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 13.4% | 29.0% (better) |
| Net margin | 10.8% | 19.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 5.9% | 17.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 11.1% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 6.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 1.02 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.20 | 4.18 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 5.2× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.93 (better) | 0.46 |
| Altman Z-score | – | 1.34 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 5.8% (better) | 3.5% |
| Payout ratio | – | 75.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 8 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 2.3% |
| Buyback yield | 0.49% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 6.3% (better) | 3.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 25.2% | 69.7% |
| Held by insiders | 33.0% | 12.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $581K (better) | −$2.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 2.4% |
Go deeper
- EPD stock overview
- EPD income statement
- EPD valuation and score
- KMI stock overview
- KMI income statement
- KMI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.