WLKP vs EPD vs ET vs MPLX

For growth investors, MPLX Lp (MPLX) is the stronger pick with 8.

4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 4% for Enterprise Products Partners L. P. (EPD). Westlake Chemical Partners LP (WLKP) offers the better valuation at 2. 7x trailing P/E (12. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Enterprise Products Partners L. P. (EPD) a "Buy" — based on 45 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, Westlake Chemical Partners LP (WLKP) is the cheapest at 2.

7x versus Energy Transfer LP at 14. 8x. On forward P/E, Energy Transfer LP is actually cheaper at 12. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Westlake Chemical Partners LP wins at 0. 35x versus Enterprise Products Partners L. P. 's 1. 42x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Energy Transfer LP (ET) delivered a total return of +158.

2%, compared to +20. 4% for Westlake Chemical Partners LP (WLKP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MPLX returned +184. 4% versus WLKP's +94. 3%. 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), Enterprise Products Partners L.

P. (EPD) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 06β versus Westlake Chemical Partners LP's 0. 26β — meaning WLKP is approximately 313% more volatile than EPD relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Westlake Chemical Partners LP (WLKP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 50% versus 180% for MPLX Lp — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), MPLX Lp (MPLX) is pulling ahead at 8.

4% versus -6. 4% for Enterprise Products Partners L. P. (EPD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Westlake Chemical Partners LP grew EPS 378. 5% year-over-year, compared to -1. 1% for Enterprise Products Partners L. P.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MPLX leads at 3. 9% 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.

MPLX Lp (MPLX) is the more profitable company, earning 41.

6% net margin versus 5. 9% for Energy Transfer LP — meaning it keeps 41. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MPLX leads at 40. 3% versus 11. 4% for ET. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MPLX leads at 45. 2%, 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Westlake Chemical Partners LP (WLKP) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Enterprise Products Partners L. P. 's 1. 42x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Energy Transfer LP (ET) trades at 12. 3x forward P/E versus 13. 1x for Enterprise Products Partners L. P. — 0. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WLKP: 25. 0% to $29. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Westlake Chemical Partners LP (WLKP) offers the highest yield at 8. 1%, versus 5. 7% for Enterprise Products Partners L. P. (EPD).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Enterprise Products Partners L.

P. (EPD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 06), 5. 7% yield, +119. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (EPD: +119. 8%, WLKP: +94. 3%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (WLKP (Basic Materials) and EPD (Energy) and ET (Energy) and MPLX (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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.