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

Performance

ET vs. MU - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ET achieves a 19.85% return, which is significantly lower than MU's 244.07% return. Over the past 10 years, ET has underperformed MU with an annualized return of 13.14%, while MU has yielded a comparatively higher 55.83% annualized return.


ET

1D
1.65%
1M
-6.34%
YTD
19.85%
6M
19.34%
1Y
12.14%
3Y*
24.04%
5Y*
20.15%
10Y*
13.14%

MU

1D
-1.43%
1M
26.49%
YTD
244.07%
6M
307.41%
1Y
751.18%
3Y*
144.69%
5Y*
66.21%
10Y*
55.83%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ET vs. MU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ET
Energy Transfer LP
19.85%-9.37%53.87%27.87%55.74%42.96%-44.92%5.88%-17.74%-4.66%
MU
Micron Technology, Inc.
244.07%240.24%-0.96%71.93%-45.93%24.21%39.79%69.49%-22.84%87.59%

Correlation

The correlation between ET and MU is -0.05, 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

-0.05

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

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2006

0.27

The correlation between ET and MU shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.27 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

ET:

$65.93B

MU:

$1.12T

EPS

ET:

$1.36

MU:

$21.26

PE Ratio

ET:

14.01

MU:

46.18

PS Ratio

ET:

0.76

MU:

19.16

PB Ratio

ET:

1.33

MU:

15.44

Total Revenue (TTM)

ET:

$89.38B

MU:

$58.12B

Gross Profit (TTM)

ET:

$20.48B

MU:

$33.96B

EBITDA (TTM)

ET:

$13.02B

MU:

$25.99B

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

ET vs. MU — Risk / Return Rank

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

ET
ET Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
ET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ET Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
ET Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
ET Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
ET Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

MU
MU Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
MU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
MU Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
MU Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
MU Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
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.

ET vs. MU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Energy Transfer LP (ET) and Micron Technology, Inc. (MU). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


ETMUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-10.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.99

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.78

-0.66

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.22

24.91

-23.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.70

94.64

-91.94

ET vs. MU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ET Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the MU Sharpe Ratio of 10.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ET and MU, 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...

Drawdowns

ET vs. MU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ET drawdown since its inception was -87.81%, smaller than the maximum MU drawdown of -98.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ET and MU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ETMUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-87.81%

-98.25%

+10.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.38%

-30.28%

+20.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.56%

-57.63%

+33.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.82%

-57.63%

+31.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-72.82%

-57.63%

-15.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.47%

-9.07%

+2.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.72%

-58.16%

+32.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.65%

7.95%

-3.30%

Volatility

ET vs. MU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Energy Transfer LP (ET) is 5.08%, while Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) has a volatility of 32.86%. This indicates that ET experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ETMUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.08%

32.86%

-27.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.03%

57.74%

-45.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.13%

69.66%

-53.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.86%

53.18%

-28.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.99%

50.12%

-15.13%

Dividends

ET vs. MU - Dividend Comparison

ET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.00%, more than MU's 0.05% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ET
Energy Transfer LP
7.00%7.97%6.51%8.95%7.33%7.41%17.27%9.51%9.24%6.66%5.90%7.42%
MU
Micron Technology, Inc.
0.05%0.16%0.55%0.54%0.89%0.21%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

ET vs. MU - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Energy Transfer LP and Micron Technology, Inc.. 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


5.00B10.00B15.00B20.00B25.00B20222023202420252026
27.77B
23.86B
(ET) Total Revenue
(MU) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

ET vs. MU - Profitability Comparison

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

Gross Margin
Operating Margin
Net Margin
Quarterly
Annual

-40.0%-20.0%0.0%20.0%40.0%60.0%80.0%20222023202420252026
23.9%
74.4%
Portfolio components
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%.

MU - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Micron Technology, Inc. reported a gross profit of 17.75B and revenue of 23.86B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 74.4%.

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%.

MU - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Micron Technology, Inc. reported an operating income of 16.13B and revenue of 23.86B, resulting in an operating margin of 67.6%.

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%.

MU - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Micron Technology, Inc. reported a net income of 13.79B and revenue of 23.86B, resulting in a net margin of 57.8%.


Frequently Asked Questions


ET and MU have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MU has higher volatility (32.86%) compared to ET (5.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ET dropped -87.81% vs MU's -98.25%.

MU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (10.83 vs 0.71), 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 ET and MU

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