BE vs. ET

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Bloom Energy Corporation (BE) and Energy Transfer LP (ET).

Performance

BE vs. ET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bloom Energy Corporation (BE) and Energy Transfer LP (ET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BE vs. ET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BE Bloom Energy Corporation	55.93%	291.22%	50.07%	-22.59%	-12.81%	-23.48%	283.67%	-25.15%	-60.08%
ET Energy Transfer LP	19.24%	-9.37%	53.87%	27.87%	55.74%	42.96%	-44.92%	5.88%	-23.87%

Fundamentals

Market Cap BE : $35.72B ET : $70.45B
EPS BE : -$0.36 ET : $1.37
PS Ratio BE : 16.31 ET : 0.84
PB Ratio BE : 46.47 ET : 1.44
Total Revenue (TTM) BE : $2.02B ET : $82.63B
Gross Profit (TTM) BE : $625.18M ET : $18.01B
EBITDA (TTM) BE : $20.05M ET : $14.93B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BE achieves a 55.93% return, which is significantly higher than ET's 19.24% return.

BE

• 1D: 13.37%
• 1M: -12.96%
• YTD: 55.93%
• 6M: 60.21%
• 1Y: 589.17%
• 3Y*: 89.44%
• 5Y*: 38.75%
• 10Y*: —

ET

• 1D: -1.48%
• 1M: 2.44%
• YTD: 19.24%
• 6M: 16.88%
• 1Y: 12.07%
• 3Y*: 25.52%
• 5Y*: 29.51%
• 10Y*: 20.51%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

BE vs. ET — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BE

BE Risk / Return Rank: 98
BE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BE Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
BE Omega Ratio Rank: 95
BE Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BE Martin Ratio Rank: 99

ET

ET Risk / Return Rank: 57
ET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
ET Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
ET Omega Ratio Rank: 54
ET Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
ET Martin Ratio Rank: 61

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BE vs. ET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bloom Energy Corporation (BE) and Energy Transfer LP (ET). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	BE	ET	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	5.88	0.51	+5.37
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.94	0.86	+3.09
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.12	+0.38
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	12.33	0.65	+11.68
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	36.85	1.82	+35.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BE vs. ET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BE Sharpe Ratio is 5.88, which is higher than the ET Sharpe Ratio of 0.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BE and ET, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BE	ET	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.88	0.51	+5.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	1.17	-0.70
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.56	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	0.36	-0.10

Correlation

The correlation between BE and ET is 0.28, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

BE vs. ET - Dividend Comparison

BE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.87%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BE Bloom Energy Corporation	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ET Energy Transfer LP	6.87%	7.97%	6.51%	8.95%	7.33%	7.41%	17.27%	9.51%	9.24%	6.66%	5.90%	7.42%

Drawdowns

BE vs. ET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BE drawdown since its inception was -92.54%, which is greater than ET's maximum drawdown of -87.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BE and ET.

Drawdown Indicators

	BE	ET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-92.54%	-87.81%	-4.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-45.94%	-17.33%	-28.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-75.87%	-25.82%	-50.05%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-72.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.48%	-1.88%	-20.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-53.11%	-25.95%	-27.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.37%	6.24%	+9.13%

Volatility

BE vs. ET - Volatility Comparison

Bloom Energy Corporation (BE) has a higher volatility of 35.20% compared to Energy Transfer LP (ET) at 4.96%. This indicates that BE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BE	ET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	35.20%	4.96%	+30.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	81.36%	11.68%	+69.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	101.15%	23.80%	+77.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	84.20%	25.48%	+58.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	94.48%	36.63%	+57.85%

Financials

BE vs. ET - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Bloom Energy Corporation and Energy Transfer LP over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

BE - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Bloom Energy Corporation reported a gross profit of 239.90M and revenue of 777.68M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 30.9%.

ET - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Energy Transfer LP reported a gross profit of 5.78B and revenue of 22.41B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 25.8%.

BE - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Bloom Energy Corporation reported an operating income of 87.53M and revenue of 777.68M, resulting in an operating margin of 11.3%.

ET - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Energy Transfer LP reported an operating income of 2.37B and revenue of 22.41B, resulting in an operating margin of 10.6%.

BE - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Bloom Energy Corporation reported a net income of 1.09M and revenue of 777.68M, resulting in a net margin of 0.1%.

ET - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Energy Transfer LP reported a net income of 1.46B and revenue of 22.41B, resulting in a net margin of 6.5%.