ET · Energy(natural gas transmission) · 10 years of annual accounts filed with the SEC · latest fiscal year ended 2025-12-31
Energy Transfer LP reported revenue of $85.5 billion in fiscal 2025. Of the $74.3 billion its operations generated over 10 years, 51.5% went back into the business. On the accounting screens, it passes 5 of 8 Piotroski tests and its Beneish M-score is below the -1.78 line; 2 of the six cross-checks between its statements fire.
Revenue, fiscal 202585.5B
Operating margin10.6%gross margin 25.8%
Return on invested capital—9.6% on average over 1 years
Free cash flow after stock pay3.7B4.3% of revenue
Net debt ÷ EBITDA4.6×net debt 67.1B
Piotroski F-score5/8tests of improvement passed
Is it growing?
Revenue and the operating income it turns into. Growth that does not reach operating income is growth bought with margin.
RevenueOperating income
025.0B50.0B75.0B100.0B
2018
2018Revenue 54.1BOperating income 5.4B
2019
2019Revenue 54.2BOperating income 7.2B
2020Revenue 39.0BOperating income 3.0B
2021Revenue 67.4BOperating income 8.8B
2022Revenue 89.9BOperating income 7.7B
2023Revenue 78.6BOperating income 8.3B
2024Revenue 82.7BOperating income 9.1B
2025Revenue 85.5BOperating income 9.0B
2018201820192019202020212022202320242025
Compound growth a year
3 yrs
5 yrs
9 yrs
Revenue
-1.6%
+17.0%
—
Operating income
+5.3%
+24.8%
—
Net income
-2.3%
—
—
Falling shares are buybacks: each remaining share owns more of the company.
Does it earn more than its capital costs?
Margins say how much of each sale is kept; return on invested capital says how much the business earns on the money it needs to operate. Growth only creates value when that return is above the cost of the capital.
Needs a cost of capital, which comes from the valuation below.
Return on equity
9.0%
Return on assets
3.1%
Asset turnover
0.61×
Overheads (SG&A)
1.4% of revenue
Is the profit cash, and where does the cash go?
Net income is an accounting opinion; free cash flow is what was left in the bank after investing. Stock-based pay does not leave the bank — shareholders pay it through dilution — so it is shown taken off as well.
Net incomeFree cash flowAfter stock-based pay
-2.5B02.5B5.0B7.5B10.0B
2018
2018Net income 1.7BFree cash flow 99.0MAfter stock-based pay -6.0M
2019
2019Net income 3.5BFree cash flow 2.1BAfter stock-based pay 2.0B
2020Net income -648.0MFree cash flow 2.2BAfter stock-based pay 2.1B
2021Net income 5.5BFree cash flow 8.3BAfter stock-based pay 8.2B
2022Net income 4.8BFree cash flow 5.7BAfter stock-based pay 5.6B
2023Net income 3.9BFree cash flow 6.4BAfter stock-based pay 6.3B
2024Net income 4.8BFree cash flow 7.3BAfter stock-based pay 7.2B
2025Net income 4.4BFree cash flow 3.8BAfter stock-based pay 3.7B
2018201820192019202020212022202320242025
Where 10 years of operating cash went, 2018–2025
74.3B generated by the business. Each band is its share of that total.
Reinvested in the business 52%38.3B
Acquisitions 3%2.1B
Dividends 0%0
Share buybacks 0%56.0M
Kept, or used to pay down debt 46%33.8B
Over the same years it paid 994.0M in stock. The buybacks did not even cover what was handed out in stock.
Per share
Shares outstanding
How strong is the balance sheet?
Debt is not bad in itself; debt the business cannot service in a bad year is. Net debt is debt minus cash, and below zero the company holds more cash than it owes.
Net debt
020.0B40.0B60.0B80.0B
2018
2018Net debt 45.6B
2019Net debt 46.0B
2019Net debt 50.8B
2020Net debt 51.1B
2021Net debt 49.4B
2022Net debt 48.0B
2023Net debt 52.2B
2024Net debt 59.4B
2025Net debt 67.1B
2018201820192019202020212022202320242025
Net debt ÷ EBITDA
4.6×
Interest coverage
3× operating income ÷ interest
Current ratio
1.22 current assets ÷ current liabilities
Cash conversion cycle
—
Three classic screens of the accounts
Each asks a different question of the same statements — is it improving, does it look like a company heading for distress, do the accounts resemble ones that were manipulated. None is a verdict; each shows what moves it.
Piotroski F-score
Is the business improving? Nine yes-or-no tests, this year against last.
5of 8 tests passed
✓ProfitableReturn on assets above zeropassed
✓Cash from operationsOperating cash flow above zeropassed
✕Profitability improvedReturn on assets higher than a year beforefailed
✓Profit backed by cashOperating cash flow above net income (low accruals)passed
✕Less long-term debtLong-term debt as a share of assets fellfailed
✓More liquidCurrent ratio higher than a year beforepassed
–No new sharesShare count did not grow — not reportedno data
✓Better gross marginGross margin higher than a year beforepassed
✕Sells more per assetAsset turnover higher than a year beforefailed
Where it misleads: it measures change, not level. An excellent business that stood still for a year scores low; a poor one recovering from a disaster scores high.
Altman Z''-score
Does the balance sheet look like those of companies that went bankrupt?
The accounts lack a line it needs (retained earnings, current assets or liabilities).
Beneish M-score
Do the accounts resemble those of companies that manipulated their earnings?
-2.59below the -1.78 line
-1.78
Receivables vs sales 1.00 (not reported, set to 1)+0.92
Gross margin slipping 0.97+0.51
Soft assets 1.16+0.47
Sales growth 1.03+0.92
Slower depreciation 0.98+0.11
Overheads vs sales 0.97-0.17
Profit not in cash -0.04-0.19
Leverage rising 1.02-0.33
Where it misleads: fast growth and acquisitions. Sales growth carries a heavy weight, so a company growing 50% a year scores like a suspect without having done anything. It is a screen from a 1999 study, not an accusation.
Where the statements disagree
Cross-checks between the income statement, the balance sheet and the cash flow for the latest year, each with the benign reading and the worrying one.
Inventory is growing 55% against revenue growing 3%.
Benign
Stocking up for a launch, or securing supply.
Worrying
Demand is softening; discounts or write-downs tend to follow.
Net debt is 4.6 times EBITDA.
Benign
A stable sector with predictable cash flows and comfortable maturities.
Worrying
Little room if earnings fall; the maturity schedule is what to check.
What is it worth, under which assumptions?
A company is worth the cash it will generate, brought back to today. This model projects revenue with growth that fades over the years, applies a free cash flow margin, and discounts the result at the cost of capital. Every assumption says where it came from, and all of them can be changed.
The SEC accounts lack the lines needed for revenue, free cash flow or the share count, so there is no DCF for this company.
What it has filed lately
The last twelve months at the SEC, most important first: annual and quarterly reports, events, large holders and insiders.
Accounts from the company's own SEC filings; lines some companies do not report are shown as a dash rather than estimated. The risk-free rate is the 10-year US Treasury yield. A DCF is a way of making assumptions explicit, not a forecast: it states what the company would be worth if the assumptions held. The scores are screens that point where to look, not verdicts. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell.
