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

Performance

ET vs. UBER - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Energy Transfer LP (ET) and Uber Technologies, Inc. (UBER). 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 higher than UBER's -15.74% 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%

UBER

1D
-1.01%
1M
-7.82%
YTD
-15.74%
6M
-19.10%
1Y
-17.97%
3Y*
18.47%
5Y*
6.60%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ET vs. UBER - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
ET
Energy Transfer LP
19.85%-9.37%53.87%27.87%55.74%42.96%-44.92%-9.74%
UBER
Uber Technologies, Inc.
-15.74%35.46%-2.03%148.97%-41.02%-17.78%71.49%-29.19%

Correlation

The correlation between ET and UBER is -0.03, 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

-0.03

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

0.09

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

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2019

0.21

The correlation between ET and UBER shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

ET:

$65.93B

UBER:

$142.62B

EPS

ET:

$1.36

UBER:

$4.05

PE Ratio

ET:

14.01

UBER:

16.98

PS Ratio

ET:

0.76

UBER:

2.70

PB Ratio

ET:

1.33

UBER:

5.76

Total Revenue (TTM)

ET:

$89.38B

UBER:

$53.69B

Gross Profit (TTM)

ET:

$20.48B

UBER:

$22.03B

EBITDA (TTM)

ET:

$13.02B

UBER:

$5.85B

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. UBER — 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

UBER
UBER Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
UBER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UBER Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
UBER Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
UBER Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
UBER Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
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. UBER - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Energy Transfer LP (ET) and Uber Technologies, Inc. (UBER). 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.


ETUBERDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

0.92

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.22

-0.62

+1.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.70

-1.09

+3.79

ET vs. UBER - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ET Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is higher than the UBER Sharpe Ratio of -0.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ET and UBER, 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. UBER - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ET drawdown since its inception was -87.81%, which is greater than UBER's maximum drawdown of -68.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ET and UBER.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ETUBERDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-87.81%

-68.05%

-19.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.38%

-31.46%

+22.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.56%

-31.46%

+6.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.82%

-60.45%

+34.63%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-72.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.47%

-31.22%

+24.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.72%

-25.67%

-0.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.65%

17.93%

-13.28%

Volatility

ET vs. UBER - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Energy Transfer LP (ET) is 5.08%, while Uber Technologies, Inc. (UBER) has a volatility of 7.96%. This indicates that ET experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UBER based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ETUBERDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.08%

7.96%

-2.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.03%

23.21%

-11.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.13%

32.66%

-16.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.86%

44.82%

-19.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.99%

50.61%

-15.62%

Dividends

ET vs. UBER - Dividend Comparison

ET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.00%, while UBER has not paid dividends to shareholders.


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%
UBER
Uber Technologies, Inc.
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Financials

ET vs. UBER - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Energy Transfer LP and Uber Technologies, 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
13.20B
(ET) Total Revenue
(UBER) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

ET vs. UBER - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Energy Transfer LP and Uber Technologies, Inc. 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
23.9%
45.0%
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%.

UBER - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Uber Technologies, Inc. reported a gross profit of 5.95B and revenue of 13.20B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 45.0%.

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%.

UBER - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Uber Technologies, Inc. reported an operating income of 1.92B and revenue of 13.20B, resulting in an operating margin of 14.6%.

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%.

UBER - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Uber Technologies, Inc. reported a net income of 263.00M and revenue of 13.20B, resulting in a net margin of 2.0%.


Frequently Asked Questions


ET and UBER have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UBER has higher volatility (7.96%) compared to ET (5.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ET dropped -87.81% vs UBER's -68.05%.

ET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.71 vs -0.60), 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 UBER

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