Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp (KRP) 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: Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 341M vs 2,693M combined for tracked competitors (11.2% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+31.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+31.0%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp generated 30.0% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 80.4% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 42.1% net margin compares with 53.2% for the peer group.
- Scale: Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp ranks #51 of 134 companies by market capitalization in the Oil And Gas Production industry, holding 0.1% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp accounted for 11.3% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 15.0% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $11.76M compares with $16.96M for the peer group (0.7x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
KRP Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp reported revenue growth of 29.96 % year on year in Q2 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 80.42 %.
With a net margin of 42.05 %, Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp reported lower profitability than its competitors (53.20 %).
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp generated 11.31 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 15.04 % a year earlier.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income 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 Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (4) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Oil And Gas Production industry grew revenue 4.6% year over year, combined, vs 30.0% for Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp. Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.01% to 0.01%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (4) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 25.00 % (2 of 8) |
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.
KRP Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
KRP Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
KRP Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Black Stone Minerals L p | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Dorchester Minerals L p | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Viper Energy Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Sitio Royalties Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Publicly Traded Peers of Kimbell Royalty Partners lp
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | 1,714.19 | 341.09 |
| Viper Energy Inc | 7,782.25 | 2,041.00 |
| Black Stone Minerals L p | 3,044.37 | 459.50 |
| Sitio Royalties Corp | 1,410.53 | 613.65 |
| Dorchester Minerals L p | 1,372.88 | 192.22 |
| SUBTOTAL | 15,324.24 | 3,647.47 |
Sources: Kimbell Royalty 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 Kimbell Royalty Partners lp versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|
| Viper Energy Inc | Third Party Operated Properties 49.12 % |
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).
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | 1,714 | 11,761,870 | 3,495,407 |
| Viper Energy Inc | 7,782 | 127,562,500 | 6,437,500 |
| Black Stone Minerals L p | 3,044 | 3,766,426 | 2,324,475 |
| Sitio Royalties Corp | 1,411 | 19,795,129 | 2,839,645 |
| Dorchester Minerals L p | 1,373 | 7,393,192 | 3,400,308 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 13,610 | 16,955,774 | 2,887,297 |
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 113 companies in Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp ranks #51 of 113 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.11 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 785, indicating a unconcentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Shell Plc | 285,644 | 19.05 % |
| 2 | Totalenergies Se | 210,300 | 14.02 % |
| 3 | Canadian Natural Resources Limited | 103,976 | 6.93 % |
| 4 | Eni Spa | 94,508 | 6.30 % |
| 5 | Slb Limited | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Eog Resources Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Occidental Petroleum Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Cenovus Energy Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Diamondback Energy Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Devon Energy Corp | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 51 | Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | 1,700 | 0.11 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-29.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 46 | Bkv Corporation | 2,375 | -8.81 % |
| 47 | Select Water Solutions inc | 2,081 | 78.01 % |
| 48 | Expro Group Holdings N v | 1,815 | 26.46 % |
| 49 | Vermilion Energy inc | 1,739 | 32.94 % |
| 50 | Mach Natural Resources Lp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 51 | Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | 1,700 | 3.53 % |
| 52 | Kosmos Energy Ltd | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 53 | Atlas Energy Solutions Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 54 | Waterbridge Infrastructure Llc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 55 | Dorchester Minerals L p | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 56 | Rpc inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-29. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Oil And Gas Production industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (165 companies). See the full Oil And Gas Production industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | - | 57.30 % (avg) | - |
| Operating Margin | 40.15 % | industry median | +28.7 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 66.32 % | 11.81 % (avg) | +54.5 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 0.00 % | 24.95 % (avg) | -24.9 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.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Oil And Gas Production industry average (165 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns. See the full Oil And Gas Production industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 18.9x | 15.8x | +3.2x |
| EV / EBITDA | 9.7x | 8.9x | +0.7x |
| P/B | 2.3x | 1.8x | +0.5x |
| Return on Equity | 13.02 % | industry aggregate | 1.03 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 5.20 % | 5.38 % (avg) | -0.18 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Kimbell Royalty 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 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | - | - | 49.88 % | 82.91 % | 18.55 % | 5.18 % | 7.93 % |
| Operating Margin | - | -277.11 % | 36.36 % | 55.20 % | 37.36 % | 11.96 % | 39.79 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | - | -16.79 % | 4.27 % | - | 10.90 % | 1.34 % | 4.84 % |
| P/E | - | - | 35.0x | 11.0x | 15.4x | 398.6x | 22.0x |
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.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's Strategic Group Map
Every company in Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.01x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 0.1% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | High | Industry HHI of 785 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 0.00 % vs industry average 24.95 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Kimbell Royalty 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.
Kimbell Royalty 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.
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp falls in the Low attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Harvest.
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.
Kimbell Royalty 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
- Operating margin 28.7 points above the industry median.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+31.9% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.01x).
Opportunities
- A meaningful share of tracked competitors (33.30 %) 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.
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | 2.91 | 6.36 | 0.58 |
| Viper Energy Inc | 0.75 | 3.13 | 0.19 |
| Black Stone Minerals L p | 0.16 | 3.36 | 0.15 |
| Sitio Royalties Corp | 0.07 | 2.79 | 0.32 |
| Dorchester Minerals L p | 8.49 | 13.63 | - |
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.
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | Q2 2026 | +30.0 % | +77.3 % |
| Viper Energy Inc | Q2 2026 | +127.9 % | +294.0 % |
| Black Stone Minerals L p | Q2 2026 | -6.6 % | -11.4 % |
| Sitio Royalties Corp | Q2 2025 | -13.6 % | -49.9 % |
| Dorchester Minerals L p | Q2 2026 | +73.1 % | +158.4 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +53.3 % | +95.2 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | Q2 2026 | - | +33,130.5 % |
| Viper Energy Inc | Q2 2026 | - | - |
| Black Stone Minerals L p | Q2 2026 | - | +23.9 % |
| Sitio Royalties Corp | Q2 2025 | - | - |
| Dorchester Minerals L p | Q2 2026 | - | - |
Kimbell Royalty Partners Lp's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | 8.10% | 5.46% | 13.02% |
| Viper Energy Inc | 0.82% | 0.57% | 0.98% |
| Black Stone Minerals L p | 21.36% | 13.44% | 25.54% |
| Sitio Royalties Corp | 1.88% | 1.33% | 2.65% |
| Dorchester Minerals L p | 28.17% | 14.36% | 28.77% |
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).
Kimbell Royalty 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Kimbell Royalty Partners lp | 18.25 | 5.03 |
| Viper Energy Inc | 143.18 | 3.81 |
| Black Stone Minerals L p | 10.61 | 6.63 |
| Sitio Royalties Corp | 41.18 | 2.30 |
| Dorchester Minerals L p | 15.98 | 7.14 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 23.07 | 4.20 |
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.