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 tracked 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 tracked 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.
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 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 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 |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (5) | $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 24.5% year over year, combined, vs 24.9% for Phillips 66 Partners Lp. Phillips 66 Partners Lp's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.11% to 0.11%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Phillips 66 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phillips 66 Partners Lp | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Competitors combined (1) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 50.00 % (4 of 8) | 37.50 % (3 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 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 tracked 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: Phillips 66 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 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 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 71.69 % |
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).
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 (81 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 100.00 % | 58.03 % (avg) | +42.0 pp |
| Operating Margin | 59.77 % | industry median | +41.7 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 86.21 % | 31.10 % (avg) | +55.1 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 0.00 % | 20.19 % (avg) | -20.2 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 (81 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.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 12.9x | 21.6x | -8.7x |
| EV / EBITDA | 12.8x | 11.4x | +1.4x |
| P/B | 2.4x | 2.6x | -0.1x |
| Return on Equity | 21.54 % | industry aggregate | 7.89 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 5.03 % | 6.01 % (avg) | -0.98 % |
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 SEC filings.| 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 | 24.3x | 9.0x | 12.9x |
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
Every company in Phillips 66 Partners Lp's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. Phillips 66 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.
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 20.19 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Phillips 66 Partners Lp's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Phillips 66 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.
Phillips 66 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.
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 41.7 points above the industry median.
- Return on equity 7.9 points above the industry aggregate.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+15.5% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below, the standard financial-distress signal.
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- Tracked peer group's revenue run-rate is broadly decelerating (-23.7% annualized).
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.
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 | 15.11 | - |
| 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.