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

Performance

HAL vs. ET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Halliburton Company (HAL) 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, HAL achieves a 42.69% return, which is significantly higher than ET's 22.80% return. Over the past 10 years, HAL has underperformed ET with an annualized return of 1.24%, while ET has yielded a comparatively higher 12.65% annualized return.


HAL

1D
1.98%
1M
-3.67%
YTD
42.69%
6M
50.80%
1Y
106.05%
3Y*
10.75%
5Y*
12.22%
10Y*
1.24%

ET

1D
1.40%
1M
-0.32%
YTD
22.80%
6M
22.06%
1Y
20.43%
3Y*
24.37%
5Y*
22.55%
10Y*
12.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HAL vs. ET - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HAL
Halliburton Company
42.69%7.02%-23.19%-6.47%74.45%21.99%-21.23%-4.90%-44.63%-8.18%
ET
Energy Transfer LP
22.80%-9.37%53.87%27.87%55.74%42.96%-44.92%5.88%-17.74%-4.66%

Correlation

The correlation between HAL and ET is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.38

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

0.44

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

0.54

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2006

0.45

The correlation between HAL and ET shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.54 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Fundamentals

Market Cap

HAL:

$33.67B

ET:

$67.56B

EPS

HAL:

$1.82

ET:

$1.36

PE Ratio

HAL:

22.09

ET:

14.36

PS Ratio

HAL:

1.53

ET:

0.78

PB Ratio

HAL:

3.11

ET:

1.36

Total Revenue (TTM)

HAL:

$22.17B

ET:

$89.38B

Gross Profit (TTM)

HAL:

$3.40B

ET:

$20.48B

EBITDA (TTM)

HAL:

$3.83B

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

HAL vs. ET — Risk / Return Rank

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

HAL
HAL Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
HAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
HAL Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
HAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
HAL Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

ET
ET Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
ET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ET Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
ET Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ET Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
ET Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

HAL vs. ET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Halliburton Company (HAL) 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.


HALETDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.92

1.25

+1.67

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.65

1.91

+1.73

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.21

+0.22

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

8.43

2.04

+6.39

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

22.07

4.50

+17.57

HAL vs. ET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HAL Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is higher than the ET Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HAL 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


HALETDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.92

1.25

+1.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.91

-0.60

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.03

0.36

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.14

0.36

-0.22

Drawdowns

HAL vs. ET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HAL drawdown since its inception was -92.99%, which is greater than ET's maximum drawdown of -87.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAL and ET.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HALETDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-92.99%

-87.81%

-5.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.10%

-10.02%

-3.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-54.01%

-24.56%

-29.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-54.01%

-25.82%

-28.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-91.45%

-72.82%

-18.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.28%

-4.17%

-28.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-39.13%

-25.75%

-13.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.01%

4.54%

+0.47%

Volatility

HAL vs. ET - Volatility Comparison

Halliburton Company (HAL) has a higher volatility of 8.85% compared to Energy Transfer LP (ET) at 6.02%. This indicates that HAL'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


HALETDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.85%

6.02%

+2.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.45%

11.90%

+11.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

36.54%

16.42%

+20.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

40.10%

24.90%

+15.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

45.97%

35.05%

+10.92%

Dividends

HAL vs. ET - Dividend Comparison

HAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, less than ET's 6.83% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ET
Energy Transfer LP
6.83%7.97%6.51%8.95%7.33%7.41%17.27%9.51%9.24%6.66%5.90%7.42%
HAL
Halliburton Company
1.69%2.41%2.50%1.77%1.22%0.79%1.67%2.94%2.71%1.47%1.33%2.12%

Financials

HAL vs. ET - Financials Comparison

This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Halliburton Company 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


5.00B10.00B15.00B20.00B25.00B20222023202420252026
5.40B
27.77B
(HAL) Total Revenue
(ET) Total Revenue
Values in USD except per share items

HAL vs. ET - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between Halliburton Company 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

15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%20222023202420252026
14.6%
23.9%
Portfolio components
HAL - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Halliburton Company reported a gross profit of 790.00M and revenue of 5.40B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 14.6%.

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%.

HAL - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Halliburton Company reported an operating income of 679.00M and revenue of 5.40B, resulting in an operating margin of 12.6%.

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%.

HAL - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Halliburton Company reported a net income of 461.00M and revenue of 5.40B, resulting in a net margin of 8.5%.

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


HAL and ET have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HAL has higher volatility (8.85%) compared to ET (6.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HAL dropped -92.99% vs ET's -87.81%.

HAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 1.25), 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 HAL 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