Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Enable Midstream Partners Lp (ENBL) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Enable Midstream Partners Lp vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 3,417M vs 132M combined for tracked competitors (96.3% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-7.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs holding steady (-1.8%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Enable Midstream Partners Lp generated 52.8% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2021, vs 224.0% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 11.2% net margin compares with 4.4% for the peer group.
- Peer revenue share: Enable Midstream Partners Lp accounted for 96.1% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 98.1% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $2.44M compares with $2.23M for the peer group (1.1x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
ENBL Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2021
Enable Midstream Partners Lp reported revenue growth of 52.82 % year on year in Q2 2021, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 224.04 %.
With a net margin of 11.18 %, Enable Midstream Partners Lp achieved higher profitability than its competitors (4.39 %).
Enable Midstream Partners Lp generated 96.06 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 98.10 % a year earlier.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp vs. its Competitors, Q2 2021
Revenue growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Enable Midstream Partners Lp and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Enable Midstream Partners Lp's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Natural Gas Utilities industry grew revenue 24.5% year over year, combined, vs 52.8% for Enable Midstream Partners Lp. Enable Midstream Partners Lp's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.22% to 0.27%, a gain of 0.05 percentage points.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
| Competitors combined (2) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
ENBL Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
ENBL Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Txo Partners L p | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Enable Midstream Partners Lp's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Publicly Traded Peers of Enable Midstream Partners Lp
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | - | 3,417.00 |
| Txo Partners L p | 812.25 | 405.96 |
| Corenergy Infrastructure Trust Inc | 0.24 | 131.57 |
| SUBTOTAL | 812.50 | 3,954.52 |
Sources: Enable Midstream Partners Lp's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Enable Midstream Partners Lp versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Odysight ai Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| INLL | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Enable Midstream Partners Lp's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | Gathering and Processing 87.76 % |
| Txo Partners L p | Reportable Segment 100.00 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | - | 2,440,714 | 332,857 |
| Txo Partners L p | 812 | 1,757,385 | -162,186 |
| Corenergy Infrastructure Trust Inc | 0 | 13,156,791 | -27,283,009 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 812 | 2,230,390 | -1,287,531 |
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Natural Gas Utilities industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (81 companies). See the full Natural Gas Utilities industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | - | 58.03 % (avg) | - |
| Operating Margin | 18.17 % | industry median | +0.0 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 29.73 % | 31.10 % (avg) | -1.4 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 7.81 % | 20.19 % (avg) | -12.4 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2015 | 2016 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -64.18 % | -100.00 % | 22.40 % | -13.73 % | -16.79 % |
| Operating Margin | -59.04 % | - | 18.89 % | 19.22 % | 18.88 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -2.86 % | 1.42 % | 2.46 % | 2.12 % | 1.76 % |
| P/E | - | 22.9x | 12.8x | 11.8x | 44.7x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 7.81 % vs industry average 20.19 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Enable Midstream Partners Lp's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Enable Midstream Partners Lp's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp falls in the High attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Invest / Grow.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
No rule matched.
Weaknesses
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-7.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Opportunities
- A meaningful share of tracked competitors (100.00 %) show financial-distress signals, a possible opening to gain share.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | 0.02 | 0.41 | 0.55 |
| Txo Partners L p | 0.19 | 0.64 | - |
| Corenergy Infrastructure Trust Inc | - | - | 1.32 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | Q2 2021 | +60.4 % | - |
| Txo Partners L p | Q2 2026 | +67.9 % | - |
| Corenergy Infrastructure Trust Inc | Q4 2023 | -7.6 % | - |
| PEERS TOTAL | +57.9 % | - |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | Q2 2021 | +126.0 % | +6.0 % |
| Txo Partners L p | Q2 2026 | - | +131.5 % |
| Corenergy Infrastructure Trust Inc | Q4 2023 | +16.6 % | -80.9 % |
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | 3.96% | 2.88% | 6.21% |
| Txo Partners L p | - | - | - |
| Corenergy Infrastructure Trust Inc | - | - | - |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Enable Midstream Partners Lp's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Enable Midstream Partners Lp | 21.34 | - |
| Txo Partners L p | - | 2.00 |
| Corenergy Infrastructure Trust Inc | - | 0.00 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 5.22 | 0.21 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.