Enterprise Products Partners L.P. vs Williams Companies
EPD and WMB 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 WMB compare
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and Williams Companies are about the same size, with market caps of $82.4B and $90.9B.
On earnings, Enterprise Products Partners L.P. is cheaper: it trades at 13.3× trailing earnings, against 29.6× for Williams Companies.
Williams Companies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.7% versus 6.8% for Enterprise Products Partners L.P.).
Williams Companies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.2% compared with 10.8% at Enterprise Products Partners L.P..
Both pay dividends: Enterprise Products Partners L.P. yields 5.8% and Williams Companies 2.8%.
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Williams Companies), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | EPD | WMB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $82.4B | $90.9B |
| Share price | $38.15 | $74.35 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.6% | 30.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 69.0% | 160% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.30 | 0.53 |
| Employees | – | 5,987 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.3× (better) | 29.6× |
| P/S | 1.4× (better) | 7.5× |
| P/B | – | 6.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.7× (better) | 17.7× |
| P/FCF | 23.8× | – |
| PEG | – | 3.44 |
| FCF yield | 4.2% (better) | −0.12% |
| Fair value | $36.83 | $50.67 |
| Margin of safety | −3.6% (better) | −46.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.8% | 8.7% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.1% (better) | 9.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 7.5% | 26.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 7.9% | 26.1% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 66.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 25.6% | – |
| Operating margin | 13.4% | 38.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 10.8% | 25.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | 5.9% (better) | −0.88% |
| Return on equity | – | 24.0% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 8.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 2.33 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.20 (better) | 4.37 |
| Interest coverage | 5.2× (better) | 3.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.93 (better) | 0.48 |
| Altman Z-score | – | 1.32 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 5.8% (better) | 2.8% |
| Payout ratio | – | 81.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 8 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 4.6% |
| Buyback yield | 0.49% (better) | −0.01% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.3% (better) | 2.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 25.2% | 89.8% |
| Held by insiders | 33.0% | 0.49% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $581K (better) | −$11.0M |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 2.2% |
Go deeper
- EPD stock overview
- EPD income statement
- EPD valuation and score
- WMB stock overview
- WMB income statement
- WMB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.