Green Plains Partners Lp's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Green Plains Partners Lp (GPP) 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: Green Plains Partners Lp vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 82M vs 1,582,012M combined for tracked competitors (0.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is holding steady (-0.4% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs decelerating (-7.6%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Green Plains Partners Lp generated 4.4% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2023, vs -30.8% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 45.5% net margin compares with 9.4% for the peer group.
- Peer revenue share: Green Plains Partners Lp accounted for 0.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 0.0% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $1.79M compares with $6.46M for the peer group (0.3x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
GPP Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2023
Green Plains Partners Lp reported revenue growth of 4.42 % year on year in Q2 2023, above its competitors' combined revenue change of -30.76 %.
With a net margin of 45.54 %, Green Plains Partners Lp achieved higher profitability than its competitors (9.40 %).
Green Plains Partners Lp generated 0.01 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 0.00 % a year earlier.
Green Plains Partners Lp vs. its Competitors, Q2 2023
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 Green Plains Partners Lp and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Green Plains Partners Lp's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Chemical Manufacturing industry grew revenue 2.6% year over year, combined, vs 4.4% for Green Plains Partners Lp. Green Plains Partners Lp's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.02% to 0.02%, a gain of 0.00 percentage points.
Green Plains 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | Yes | Yes | Yes | - |
| Competitors combined (29) |
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.
GPP Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blue Dolphin Energy Co | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Valero Energy Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Pbf Energy Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Delek Us Holdings Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Green Plains Partners Lp's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Green Plains Partners Lp's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
We compete with independent fuel terminal operators and major fuel producers for terminal services based on terminal location, services provided, safety and cost. While there are numerous fuel producers and distributors that own terminal operations similar to ours, they are not typically focused on providing services to third parties. Independent operators are often located near key distribution points with cost advantages and provide more efficient services and distribution capabilities into strategic markets with a variety of transportation options. Companies often rely on independent operators when their own storage facilities cannot handle their volumes or manage their throughput adequately due to lack of expertise, market congestion, size constraints, optionality or the nature of the materials being stored.
We believe we are well-positioned to compete effectively in a growing market due to our expertise managing third-party terminal services and logistics. We are a low-cost operator, focused on safety and efficiency, capable of managing the needs of multiple constituencies across geographical markets. While the competitiveness of our services can be impacted by competition from new entrants, transportation constraints, industry production levels and related storage needs, we believe there are significant barriers to entry that partially mitigate these risks, including significant capital costs, execution risk, complex permitting requirements, development cycle, financial and working capital constraints, expertise and experience, and ability to effectively capture strategic assets or locations.
Publicly Traded Peers of Green Plains Partners Lp
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | 286.16 | 82.39 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400.22 | 368,757.00 |
| Chevron Corp | 407,361.69 | 215,261.00 |
| Conocophillips | 153,044.70 | 63,345.00 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 114,533.58 | 139,397.00 |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 112,937.60 | 153,577.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 1,923,639.06 | 1,582,094.42 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Green Plains Partners Lp.
Sources: Green Plains 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 Green Plains Partners Lp versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Green Plains 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 |
|---|---|
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Corporate and Unallocated 0.20 % |
| Chevron Corp | Reportable Segment, Aggregation before Other Operating 99.73 % |
| Valero Energy Corp | Refining 95.14 % |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | Refining and Marketing 94.83 % |
| Phillips 66 | Refining 69.25 % |
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).
Sign in to see all peers for Green Plains Partners Lp.
Green Plains 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | 286 | 1,791,087 | 832,217 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400 | 6,357,879 | 575,414 |
| Chevron Corp | 407,362 | 5,001,533 | 487,116 |
| Conocophillips | 153,045 | 6,398,485 | 936,263 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 114,534 | 14,208,236 | 777,699 |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 112,938 | 8,301,459 | 557,351 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 1,923,353 | 6,458,431 | 462,240 |
Sign in to see all peers for Green Plains Partners Lp.
Green Plains Partners Lp's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Phillips 66 | United States 79.26 % |
| Occidental Petroleum Corporation | Non-US 20.75 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Green Plains Partners Lp's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Chemical Manufacturing industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (96 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 100.00 % | 30.74 % (avg) | +69.3 pp |
| Operating Margin | 54.22 % | industry median | +45.9 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 54.45 % | 3.22 % (avg) | +51.2 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 0.73 % | 7.98 % (avg) | -7.3 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.
Green Plains Partners Lp's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Chemical Manufacturing industry average (96 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 | 8.7x | 27.8x | -19.1x |
| EV / EBITDA | 8.1x | 16.1x | -8.0x |
| P/B | - | 3.9x | - |
| Return on Equity | - | industry aggregate | - |
| Return on Invested Capital | - | 0.90 % (avg) | - |
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.
Green Plains 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 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 3.10 % | -5.84 % | -18.22 % | 1.16 % | -5.87 % | 1.68 % |
| Operating Margin | 59.96 % | 62.44 % | 59.76 % | 59.04 % | 60.22 % | 57.69 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -123.86 % | -102.53 % | -40.02 % | -41.54 % | 69.73 % | - |
| P/E | 41.1x | 12.7x | 8.0x | 4.9x | 8.4x | 7.4x |
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.
Green Plains 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 0.73 % vs industry average 7.98 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Green Plains Partners Lp's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Green Plains 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.
Green Plains 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.
Green Plains Partners Lp falls in the Low attractiveness / High strength cell: Selective.
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.
Green Plains 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 45.9 points above the industry median.
Weaknesses
No rule matched.
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- Tracked peer group's revenue run-rate is broadly decelerating (-7.6% 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.
Green Plains 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | 0.64 | 1.21 | - |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 0.13 | 1.11 | 0.17 |
| Chevron Corp | 0.01 | 1.16 | 0.21 |
| Conocophillips | 0.49 | 1.36 | 0.45 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 0.35 | 1.61 | 0.32 |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 0.18 | 1.25 | 1.69 |
Sign in to see all peers for Green Plains Partners Lp.
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.
Green Plains 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | Q2 2023 | +0.4 % | -7.4 % |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Q2 2026 | +42.3 % | +97.5 % |
| Chevron Corp | Q2 2026 | +56.3 % | +385.6 % |
| Conocophillips | Q2 2026 | +36.8 % | +98.8 % |
| Valero Energy Corp | Q2 2026 | +48.8 % | +514.3 % |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | Q2 2026 | +53.8 % | +244.0 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +28.9 % | +152.7 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Green Plains Partners Lp.
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Green Plains 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | Q2 2023 | - | +108.7 % |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Q2 2026 | - | +3.9 % |
| Chevron Corp | Q2 2026 | +36.3 % | +22.3 % |
| Conocophillips | Q2 2026 | +32.0 % | - |
| Valero Energy Corp | Q2 2026 | +36.2 % | - |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | Q2 2026 | +43.4 % | +70.6 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Green Plains Partners Lp.
Green Plains Partners Lp's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | 30.20% | 42.84% | - |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 7.29% | 7.92% | 12.57% |
| Chevron Corp | 6.40% | 6.49% | 10.85% |
| Conocophillips | 7.55% | 8.36% | 14.30% |
| Valero Energy Corp | 12.54% | 16.22% | 28.12% |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 11.79% | 12.26% | 42.47% |
Sign in to see all peers for Green Plains Partners Lp.
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).
Green Plains 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Green Plains Partners Lp | 7.64 | 3.47 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 20.97 | 1.84 |
| Chevron Corp | 19.59 | 1.89 |
| Conocophillips | 16.72 | 2.42 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 16.21 | 0.82 |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 13.44 | 0.74 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 16.98 | 1.22 |
Sign in to see all peers for Green Plains Partners Lp.
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.