GLP vs SUN vs CAPL vs NGL

For growth investors, Sunoco LP (SUN) is the stronger pick with 11.

1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -16. 5% for NGL Energy Partners LP (NGL). Sunoco LP (SUN) offers the better valuation at 18. 5x trailing P/E (9. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Sunoco LP (SUN) a "Hold" — based on 24 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, Sunoco LP (SUN) is the cheapest at 18.

5x versus Global Partners LP at 22. 6x. On forward P/E, Sunoco LP is actually cheaper at 9. 4x.

Over the past 5 years, NGL Energy Partners LP (NGL) delivered a total return of +626.

6%, compared to +56. 1% for CrossAmerica Partners LP (CAPL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GLP returned +455. 9% versus NGL's +78. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), CrossAmerica Partners LP (CAPL) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

06β versus NGL Energy Partners LP's 0. 67β — meaning NGL is approximately 1105% more volatile than CAPL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Sunoco LP (SUN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 4% for NGL Energy Partners LP — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Sunoco LP (SUN) is pulling ahead at 11.

1% versus -16. 5% for NGL Energy Partners LP (NGL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CrossAmerica Partners LP grew EPS 109. 6% year-over-year, compared to -39. 0% for Sunoco LP. Over a 3-year CAGR, GLP leads at -0. 6% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Sunoco LP (SUN) is the more profitable company, earning 2.

1% net margin versus 0. 4% for Global Partners LP — meaning it keeps 2. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NGL leads at 9. 5% versus 1. 3% for GLP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NGL leads at 20. 4%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

On forward earnings alone, Sunoco LP (SUN) trades at 9.

4x forward P/E versus 49. 5x for CrossAmerica Partners LP — 40. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SUN: 0. 3% to $68. 00.

In this comparison, NGL (14.

3% yield), CAPL (9. 9% yield), SUN (7. 1% yield) pay a dividend. GLP does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Sunoco LP (SUN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

13), 7. 1% yield, +209. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SUN: +209. 2%, NGL: +78. 8%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Energy sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: GLP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SUN is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CAPL is a small-cap income-oriented stock; NGL is a small-cap income-oriented stock. SUN, CAPL, NGL pay a dividend while GLP does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.