Enterprise Products Partners L.P. vs Targa Resources
EPD and TRGP 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 TRGP compare
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Targa Resources ($80.2B against $62.6B).
On earnings, Enterprise Products Partners L.P. is cheaper: it trades at 12.4× trailing earnings, against 25.8× for Targa Resources.
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (21.5% versus 4.7% for Targa Resources).
Targa Resources keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.5% compared with 10.2% at Enterprise Products Partners L.P..
Both pay dividends: Enterprise Products Partners L.P. yields 4.5% and Targa Resources 1.2%.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | EPD | TRGP |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $80.2B | $62.6B |
| Share price | $37.16 | $291.78 |
| Change, 1 year | 18.8% | 72.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 71.2% | 445% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.30 | 0.65 |
| Employees | – | 3,570 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 10 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 12.4× (better) | 25.8× |
| P/S | 1.2× (better) | 3.4× |
| P/B | – | 16.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.9× (better) | 14.1× |
| P/FCF | 16.7× (better) | 67.0× |
| PEG | – | 0.86 |
| FCF yield | 6.0% (better) | 1.5% |
| Fair value | $36.05 | $230.16 |
| Margin of safety | −3.1% (better) | −26.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 21.5% (better) | 4.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.1% | 15.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 13.9% | 41.5% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 14.1% | 52.4% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 24.1% | 41.8% (better) |
| Operating margin | 12.7% | 22.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 10.2% | 13.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 7.5% (better) | 5.1% |
| Return on equity | – | 75.0% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 15.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 5.05 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.07 | 3.29 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 5.3× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.93 (better) | 0.74 |
| Altman Z-score | – | 2.66 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.5% (better) | 1.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 25.4% |
| Buyback yield | 0.54% (better) | 0.36% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.0% (better) | 1.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 25.2% | 95.1% |
| Held by insiders | 33.0% | 1.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $581K (better) | −$30.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 3.1% |
Go deeper
- EPD stock overview
- EPD income statement
- EPD valuation and score
- TRGP stock overview
- TRGP income statement
- TRGP valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.