PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BTG vs. ET
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends
Financials

Performance

BTG vs. ET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in B2Gold Corp. (BTG) and Energy Transfer LP (ET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BTG achieves a -7.85% return, which is significantly lower than ET's 21.54% return. Over the past 10 years, BTG has underperformed ET with an annualized return of 9.81%, while ET has yielded a comparatively higher 13.08% annualized return.


BTG

1D
-0.96%
1M
-21.89%
YTD
-7.85%
6M
-7.23%
1Y
14.91%
3Y*
6.93%
5Y*
0.85%
10Y*
9.81%

ET

1D
-0.26%
1M
-0.00%
YTD
21.54%
6M
19.30%
1Y
16.21%
3Y*
24.40%
5Y*
21.43%
10Y*
13.08%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BTG vs. ET - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BTG
B2Gold Corp.
-7.85%88.95%-18.07%-7.22%-5.13%-26.97%42.35%37.72%-5.81%30.80%
ET
Energy Transfer LP
21.54%-9.37%53.87%27.87%55.74%42.96%-44.92%5.88%-17.74%-4.66%

Correlation

The correlation between BTG and ET is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.04

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.15

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.22

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2008

0.14

The correlation between BTG and ET shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (1 year) to 0.22 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

BTG:

$6.22B

ET:

$66.87B

EPS

BTG:

$0.36

ET:

$1.36

PE Ratio

BTG:

11.62

ET:

14.21

PS Ratio

BTG:

1.71

ET:

0.77

PB Ratio

BTG:

1.69

ET:

1.34

Total Revenue (TTM)

BTG:

$3.67B

ET:

$89.38B

Gross Profit (TTM)

BTG:

$1.89B

ET:

$20.48B

EBITDA (TTM)

BTG:

$1.96B

ET:

$13.02B

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

BTG vs. ET — Risk / Return Rank

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

BTG
BTG Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
BTG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BTG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
BTG Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
BTG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
BTG Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank

ET
ET Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
ET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ET Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
ET Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
ET Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
ET Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BTG vs. ET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for B2Gold Corp. (BTG) 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.


BTGETDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.18

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.41

1.62

-1.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.82

3.55

-2.73

BTG vs. ET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BTG Sharpe Ratio is 0.27, which is lower than the ET Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BTG and ET, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BTGETDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

1.01

-0.74

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.02

0.87

-0.85

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

0.38

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.13

0.36

-0.23

Drawdowns

BTG vs. ET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BTG drawdown since its inception was -85.97%, roughly equal to the maximum ET drawdown of -87.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BTG and ET.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BTGETDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-85.97%

-87.81%

+1.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-36.63%

-10.02%

-26.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-36.72%

-24.56%

-12.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-48.92%

-25.82%

-23.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.35%

-72.82%

+9.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.08%

-5.15%

-27.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-38.36%

-25.74%

-12.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

18.20%

4.57%

+13.63%

Volatility

BTG vs. ET - Volatility Comparison

B2Gold Corp. (BTG) has a higher volatility of 15.99% compared to Energy Transfer LP (ET) at 5.27%. This indicates that BTG'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BTGETDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.99%

5.27%

+10.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

44.03%

11.84%

+32.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

55.17%

16.12%

+39.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

44.73%

24.87%

+19.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

48.23%

35.02%

+13.21%

Dividends

BTG vs. ET - Dividend Comparison

BTG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.93%, less than ET's 6.90% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BTG
B2Gold Corp.
1.93%1.77%6.56%5.06%4.48%4.07%1.96%0.25%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ET
Energy Transfer LP
6.90%7.97%6.51%8.95%7.33%7.41%17.27%9.51%9.24%6.66%5.90%7.42%

Financials

BTG vs. ET - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between B2Gold Corp. and Energy Transfer LP. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.


Quarterly
Annual

Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities


0.005.00B10.00B15.00B20.00B25.00B20222023202420252026
1.14B
27.77B
(BTG) Total Revenue
(ET) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

BTG vs. ET - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between B2Gold Corp. and Energy Transfer LP over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%20222023202420252026
52.6%
23.9%
Portfolio components
BTG - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, B2Gold Corp. reported a gross profit of 601.32M and revenue of 1.14B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 52.6%.

ET - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Energy Transfer LP reported a gross profit of 6.62B and revenue of 27.77B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 23.9%.

BTG - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, B2Gold Corp. reported an operating income of 572.52M and revenue of 1.14B, resulting in an operating margin of 50.1%.

ET - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Energy Transfer LP reported an operating income of 2.98B and revenue of 27.77B, resulting in an operating margin of 10.7%.

BTG - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, B2Gold Corp. reported a net income of 197.17M and revenue of 1.14B, resulting in a net margin of 17.3%.

ET - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Energy Transfer LP reported a net income of 1.25B and revenue of 27.77B, resulting in a net margin of 4.5%.


Frequently Asked Questions


BTG and ET have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BTG has higher volatility (15.99%) compared to ET (5.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BTG dropped -85.97% vs ET's -87.81%.

ET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs 0.27), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BTG and ET

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer