Kinder Morgan vs TC Energy
KMI and TRP 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 KMI and TRP compare
Kinder Morgan grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus 10.7% for TC Energy).
TC Energy keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 23.1% compared with 19.3% at Kinder Morgan.
Kinder Morgan pays a dividend yielding 3.5%; TC Energy does not pay one.
Kinder Morgan scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 9 for TC Energy), 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 | KMI | TRP |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $75.4B | – |
| Share price | $33.87 | $64.33 |
| Change, 1 year | 30.8% | 26.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 99.8% | 25.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.47 | 0.38 |
| Employees | 11K | 6,059 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.7× | – |
| P/S | 4.2× | – |
| P/B | 2.4× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.1× | – |
| P/FCF | 23.9× | – |
| PEG | 3.13 | – |
| FCF yield | 4.2% | – |
| Fair value | $29.54 | – |
| Margin of safety | −14.7% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.5% (better) | 10.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% (better) | 3.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 27.3% (better) | −25.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 26.8% (better) | −26.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 93.9% (better) | −7.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 66.6% | 98.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 29.0% | 52.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 19.3% | 23.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 17.6% | – |
| Return on equity | 11.1% | 12.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.4% | 21.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.02 | 0.06 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.18 | 0.13 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 2.4× |
| Current ratio | 0.46 | 0.63 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.34 | – |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.5% | – |
| Payout ratio | 75.8% | 99.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 8 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.3% (better) | 0.97% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.5% | – |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 69.7% | 65.7% |
| Held by insiders | 12.1% | 0.00% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.8M | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | – |
Go deeper
- KMI stock overview
- KMI income statement
- KMI valuation and score
- TRP stock overview
- TRP income statement
- TRP valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.