Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Phillips 66 Partners Lp (PSXP) 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: Phillips 66 Partners Lp vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 1,146M vs 21,456M combined for its competitors (5.1% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+15.5% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs decelerating (-23.7%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Phillips 66 Partners Lp generated 24.9% revenue growth year over year in Q4 2021, vs 86.4% for its competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 90.3% net margin compares with 0.5% for the peer group.
- Peer revenue share: Phillips 66 Partners Lp accounted for 7.5% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 10.8% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.08M compares with $4.57M for the peer group (0.0x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
PSXP Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2021
Phillips 66 Partners Lp reported revenue growth of 24.91 % year on year in Q4 2021, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 86.37 %.
With a net margin of 90.33 %, Phillips 66 Partners Lp achieved higher profitability than its competitors (0.47 %).
Phillips 66 Partners Lp generated 7.48 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 10.77 % a year earlier.
API endpoints for this dataset
Phillips 66 Partners Lp vs. its Competitors, Q4 2021
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 Phillips 66 Partners Lp reports; 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 Phillips 66 Partners Lp and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (4) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Phillips 66 Partners Lp's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Natural Gas Utilities industry grew revenue 42.9% year over year, combined, vs 24.9% for Phillips 66 Partners Lp. Phillips 66 Partners Lp's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.13% to 0.11%, a loss of 0.02 percentage points.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Competitor Quality Breadth
Group definitions: see Methodology: Performance Group Definitions.
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (1) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (7 of 7) | 62.50 % (5 of 8) | 50.00 % (4 of 8) | 12.50 % (1 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.
PSXP Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
PSXP Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
PSXP 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 | Global Partners Lp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Phillips 66 Partners Lp's best-performing competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Publicly Traded Peers of Phillips 66 Partners Lp
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
 Phillips 66 Partners Lp |
9,592.56 | 1,146.00 |
 Global Partners Lp |
- | 21,456.19 |
| SUBTOTAL | 9,592.56 | 22,602.19 |
Sources: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Phillips 66 Partners Lp versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from Phillips 66 Partners Lp reports and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Cvr Energy Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Our Energy | Company report | 85% |
| Emerging Energy | Company report | 85% |
| Blue Star Foods Corp | Company report | 85% |
| Westlake Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Central Garden and Pet Company | Company report | 85% |
| Valero Energy Corp | Company report | 85% |
| Delek Us Holdings Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Conocophillips | Company report | 85% |
| Imperial Oil Limited | Company report | 85% |
| Occidental Petroleum Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Chevron Corp | Company report | 85% |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Hollyfrontier Corp | Company report | 85% |
| Pbf Energy Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Sunoco Lp | Company report | 85% |
| Murphy Usa Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Devon Energy Corp | Company report | 85% |
| Calumet Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Marathon Oil Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Hess Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Murphy Oil Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Mmex Resources Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Lyondellbasell Industries N v | Company report | 85% |
| Suncor Energy inc | Company report | 85% |
| Bp Plc | Company report | 85% |
Company report basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Phillips 66 Partners Lp's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Phillips 66 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 |
|---|---|
| Global Partners Lp | Wholesale segment 70.91 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's reports (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).
Phillips 66 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | 9,593 | 81,857 | 55,500 |
| Global Partners Lp | - | 4,565,146 | 41,533 |
| PEERS TOTAL | - | 4,565,146 | 41,533 |
Phillips 66 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 (100 companies). See the full Natural Gas Utilities industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 0.00 % | 41.15 % (avg) | -41.1 pp |
| Operating Margin | 59.77 % | industry median | +41.4 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 86.21 % | 30.82 % (avg) | +55.4 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 0.00 % | 21.06 % (avg) | -21.1 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.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Natural Gas Utilities industry average (100 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 Natural Gas Utilities industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 12.5x | 25.2x | -12.7x |
| EV / EBITDA | 12.6x | 11.2x | +1.4x |
| P/B | 2.4x | 2.5x | -0.2x |
| Return on Equity | 21.54 % | industry aggregate | 8.04 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 5.03 % | 5.82 % (avg) | -0.79 % |
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.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in company reports.| Metric | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 15.93 % | 185.39 % | 23.22 % | -96.47 % | 26.23 % | -7.82 % | 10.40 % |
| Operating Margin | 81.78 % | 78.76 % | 80.19 % | -548.48 % | - | - | 59.77 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 10.20 % | 10.00 % | 8.95 % | -1.56 % | - | - | 5.03 % |
| P/E | 16.3x | 12.9x | 20.3x | 11.5x | 23.4x | 8.5x | 12.5x |
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.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Strategic Group Map
Phillips 66 Partners Lp is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC are labeled. See Methodology: Strategic Group Map for how this chart is built.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's trailing-12-month revenue growth of 10.4% and operating margin of 59.8% compares with an average of 4.6% growth and 51.8% margin across its 8 closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC -- Phillips 66 Partners Lp sits above that peer average on growth and above it on margin.
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.
Phillips 66 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 0.00 % vs industry average 21.06 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
Note: see Methodology: Porter's Five Forces. Supplier power and buyer power are covered on Phillips 66 Partners Lp's dedicated Suppliers and Customers pages, not here.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
See Methodology: GE/McKinsey Matrix for how the two axes are built.
Phillips 66 Partners Lp falls in the High attractiveness / High 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.
Phillips 66 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 41.4 points above the industry median.
- Return on equity 8.0 points above the industry aggregate.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+15.5% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
No rule matched.
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- Tracked peer group's revenue run-rate is broadly decelerating (-23.7% annualized).
Methodology: see Methodology: SWOT Analysis.
Phillips 66 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | 0.05 | 0.27 | 1.09 |
| Global Partners Lp | 0.02 | 1.16 | 2.08 |
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.
Phillips 66 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | Q4 2021 | +24.9 % | +149.2 % |
| Global Partners Lp | Q2 2026 | +46.8 % | +181.6 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +45.6 % | +154.8 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Phillips 66 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | Q4 2021 | - | - |
| Global Partners Lp | Q2 2026 | +48.4 % | +132.2 % |
Phillips 66 Partners Lp's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | 11.01% | 7.76% | 21.54% |
| Global Partners Lp | 4.92% | 5.59% | 27.70% |
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).
Phillips 66 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | 14.10 | 8.37 |
| Global Partners Lp | 14.42 | - |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 9.87 | 0.42 |
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.