|Bid||6.44 x 900|
|Ask||6.50 x 3100|
|Day's range||6.28 - 6.50|
|52-week range||3.75 - 15.26|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||2.69|
|PE ratio (TTM)||8.94|
|Earnings date||05 Aug 2020 - 10 Aug 2020|
|Forward dividend & yield||1.22 (19.24%)|
|Ex-dividend date||06 May 2020|
|1y target est||11.32|
Energy Transfer LP (ET) closed at $6.44 in the latest trading session, marking a +1.58% move from the prior day.
(Bloomberg) -- Energy Transfer LP’s fight to stave off a shutdown of the Dakota Access oil pipeline now heads to a federal appeals court after a district judge on Thursday refused to cut the company a break.Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. district court in Washington rejected a request to freeze his July 6 order that operations of the pipeline be halted by Aug. 5.Energy Transfer has already launched a challenge at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and will now ask that court to sideline the shutdown order for the duration of the appeal.The company could ask the Supreme Court to step in if the appeals court declines to do so.Also See: Pipeline Billionaire Girds for His Next War Over Dakota AccessEnergy Transfer lawyers have called Boasberg’s order unprecedented. If upheld, it would mark the first time a major oil and gas pipeline has been forced to shutter because of violations of the National Environmental Policy Act.The order requires the pipeline to stop the flow of oil while the Army Corps of Engineers conducts a new environmental review, a process expected to stretch into 2021.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg) -- Kelcy Warren, the billionaire pipeline mogul, has said he’s proud of the Dakota Access oil project like it were his son.So when a judge delivered a surprise ruling this week ordering the pipeline to shut until further environmental reviews are conducted, Warren flashed the pugnacious, bare-knuckled approach that has made him -- and the project -- a source of seemingly never-ending controversy in America.His company, Energy Transfer LP, announced Wednesday it will press on with operating the pipeline, despite the order to stop the oil from flowing by an Aug. 5 deadline. The company said it would continue to accept oil from producers in the Bakken shale field looking to ship oil on the pipeline next month while it appealed the ruling.It was, to Warren’s enemies in the indigenous community and conservation circles, an incendiary statement that would only add to the bitterness remaining four years after the project stoked weeks of protests at the Standing Rock reservation in North Dakota.To his supporters, it was classic Warren: The 64-year-old CEO, a fund-raiser for President Donald Trump, has adopted a relentlessly aggressive approach to building pipelines that get the nation’s enormous oil and natural gas reserves to market. While that helped him create a corporate giant, and a $3.1 billion fortune, the pipeline industry is increasingly in the cross-hairs of an environmental movement seeking to keep fossil fuels in the ground.“Energy Transfer has taken the view that if you want to get anything built or done in this current regulatory environment, you have to be aggressive,” said Hinds Howard, a portfolio manager at CBRE Clarion Securities LLC. “It’s a strategy and a corporate culture that’s maybe out-of-step with the times.”The decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia was one of three major blows to the U.S. pipeline industry in the space of 24 hours. On Sunday, developers of the Atlantic Coast gas pipeline canceled the project due to escalating costs and delays. The next day, the Supreme Court stood by a lower court’s decision blocking a key permit for TC Energy’s Keystone XL oil-sands pipeline.But the ruling on the 1,172-mile (1,886-kilometer) Dakota Access, which shuttles crude from North Dakota to Illinois, was perhaps the most shocking development of all because it ordered an operational pipeline to shut, something that’s never been done before for a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act. Dallas-based Energy Transfer said it believes Judge James E. Boasberg “exceeded his authority and does not have the jurisdiction to shut down the pipeline or stop the flow of crude oil.” The company has asked the district court to freeze its order, pressing Boasberg to stay his “literally unprecedented” decision until an appeals court can weigh in. (Energy Transfer clarified later on Wednesday that it has no intention of flouting the judge’s order and instead is taking the dispute to court.)The company took aim at both the impacts of the judge’s shutdown order and his underlying conclusion that federal approval for Dakota Access violated environmental law. Energy Transfer also argues that legal precedent suggests Boasberg’s shutdown order went a step too far.Energy policy analysts are divided on the prospects for a quick resolution in court. Height Securities LLC said the case in front of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals “appears weighted in favor of” Energy Transfer, since cases used to justify the decision didn’t involve active, operating pipelines.Rapidan Energy Group is less sure. The appeals court has repeatedly blocked Trump administration efforts to expedite energy environmental analyses, and Boasberg relied heavily on its past D.C. Circuit rulings in concluding that the Army Corps’ environmental review was insufficient. Both factors make it less likely the appeals court will issue a temporary stay of the shutdown order, the policy group advised clients.“I like their chances on appeal better than on the stays,” said Brandon Barnes, an analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. But the prospect of a successful appeal remains “up in the air,” he said.When it comes to Dakota Access, Energy Transfer has a wild card to play: Its cheerleader in the White House. Trump, who owned Energy Transfer Partners stock before winning the general election, has sought to boost Dakota Access and other pipelines since his first week in office. On his fourth full day as president, Trump signed a pair of executive orders to support the sector, including a directive mandating federal regulators reconsider their earlier decision to conduct deep environmental scrutiny of Dakota Access.Warren last month hosted Trump’s first in-person fundraiser since the coronavirus outbreak locked down much of the country in March. Former U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry sits on the board of directors of the so-called general partner that controls Energy Transfer, an arrangement that Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren has said represents “the kind of unethical, revolving-door corruption that has made Americans cynical and distrustful of the federal government.”Still, it’s unclear whether there’s much Trump can do to save Dakota Access from the coming legal battle. “The Trump administration’s tools are somewhat limited” outside of the courts, Height Securities LLC analyst Josh Price said.Energy Transfer has embarked on bold legal strategies in the past. The company took the unusual step of suing the Obama administration when it slow-walked a final permit for Dakota Access, and has pushed states to criminalize protests near pipelines, chemical plants and other infrastructure.In 2017, Energy Transfer filed an aggressive lawsuit against protesters, accusing Greenpeace and other groups of operating a criminal network aimed at destroying legitimate businesses. A federal court later tossed the claims. When asked on a conference call last year whether that marked the end of the company’s Dakota Access legal fights, Warren replied it wasn’t.“At times, they’ve had an aggressive approach to pipeline opponents, as well as adverse decisions from court and government,” said James W. Coleman, a professor at Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law. “They would say they got results. They got Dakota Access built.”For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg) -- Two days after a judge ordered the controversial Dakota Access oil pipeline to shut by early August, its owner Energy Transfer LP is continuing to schedule shipments and has made no moves to take it offline.The Dallas-based company run by billionaire Kelcy Warren said Wednesday that it’s not currently emptying the pipeline and, in fact, is accepting requests for shipments next month. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia had ordered the pipeline to be drained by Aug. 5 while a more robust environmental review is conducted.“We are not shutting in the line,” Energy Transfer spokeswoman Vicki Granado said in an email when asked if the company had begun emptying it. Judge James E. Boasberg “we believe exceeded his authority and does not have the jurisdiction to shut down the pipeline or stop the flow of crude oil.” The company later said in a statement that it has no intention of defying Boasberg’s order.It’s the latest sign that Energy Transfer is preparing for yet another battle over Dakota Access, which four years ago drew months of on-the-ground protests from environmental groups and tribes opposed to the project’s route across Lake Oahe, a dammed section of the Missouri River just a half-mile from the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in the Dakotas.Energy Transfer pressed Boasberg on Wednesday to freeze his “literally unprecedented” decision until an appeals court can weigh in. The company took aim at both the impacts of the judge’s shutdown order, and his underlying conclusion that federal approval for Dakota Access violated environmental law.“Energy Transfer is playing a very dangerous game,” said Earthjustice lawyer Jan Hasselman, who represents the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe against Dakota Access. “They don’t get to ignore a federal court order just because they disagree with it.”Energy Transfer’s strategy likely reflects optimism the ruling will be reversed on appeal or at least temporarily blocked by a higher court.In Washington, energy lobbyists have mused that the shutdown order would be difficult to enforce, according to three people familiar with the discussions.Height Securities LLC also predicts the unprecedented ruling to shut down Dakota Access because of a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act is unlikely to withstand review by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to a research note for clients.“The D.C. Circuit case law appears weighted in favor of ET,” especially since cases Boasberg used to justify the decision to shut down Dakota Access did not involve active, operating pipelines, Height analyst Josh Price said in the note.When asked whether Energy Transfer plans to defy Boasberg’s decision if it remains in effect Aug. 5, Granado reiterated that the company doesn’t think he has the authority to shut the line. She later said Energy Transfer’s decision to refrain from emptying the pipeline isn’t meant as an act of defiance, rather the company “is seeking appropriate relief from that order through the established legal process.”Prices for Bakken crude, produced in North Dakota, rose after the news that Energy Transfer planned to keep the line in service. The discount for Bakken at Clearbrook, Minnesota, narrowed 60 cents to $2.15 a barrel against benchmark oil futures in New York, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.Energy Transfer has multiple routine options for fighting the order in court. It’s asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to suspend the decision, and it’s pursuing an appeal. If those efforts fail, it can ask the U.S. Supreme Court to step in.If Energy Transfer opts to bypass those traditional routes and instead simply refuses to shut down the pipeline, the district court could hold the company in contempt. An outright violation of a court order could result in fines or jail time.(Updates with company statement in third paragraph)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Oil infrastructure giant Energy Transfer (NYSE: ET), which operates the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline, is vowing not to shut down the major crude artery in spite of a court order. On Monday, July 6, U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg issued a ruling that the pipeline would have to shut down by August 5 for a thorough environmental review, which could take up to 13 months. On Wednesday, Bloomberg quoted Energy Transfer spokeswoman Vicki Granado as stating bluntly in an email, "We are not shutting down the line."
Investors need to pay close attention to Energy Transfer (ET) stock based on the movements in the options market lately.
A federal judge denied an emergency request by owners of the Dakota Access oil pipeline (DAPL) for the court to reconsider its order to shut and drain the 570,000 barrel-a-day line within a month, court records showed on Tuesday. The pipeline, operated by Energy Transfer, is the largest out of the Bakken shale region in North Dakota, one of the biggest oil producing patches in the United States. Without the pipeline, the region's production capacity will be constrained.
Pipeline giant Energy Transfer (NYSE: ET) got another dose of bad news this week. A U.S. district court judge ordered the company to temporarily shut down and drain its Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) by August 5th, pending the outcome of an environmental review. The news sent shares of Energy Transfer and the pipeline's other investors into a tailspin.
Energy Transfer (ET) is instructed by the court to dissolve operations at its Dakota Access oil pipeline within a month.
(Bloomberg) -- It was once the center of America’s shale boom -- a vast reservoir of crude unleashed by hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, turning North Dakota into the second-largest oil producer in the U.S. and helping transform the nation into the world’s largest supplier.These days, the Bakken is looking like anything but a boom. Drilling in the once-prolific shale formation straddling North Dakota, Montana and parts of Canada has all but halted -- another victim of the pandemic that sapped fuel demand worldwide. Output is believed to have fallen by as much as half a million barrels a day this year. Even before the virus, drillers there were struggling to compete with fast-improving margins in Texas’s Permian Basin. Now, the looming shutdown of the Dakota Access pipeline that carries more than a third of the region’s oil to market threatens to keep the play from booming ever again.“This court ruling will create major obstacles for producers in North Dakota, who’ve been struggling to rebound,” said Sandy Fielden, director of research for Morningstar Inc. The buyers of Bakken crude, he said, will simply turn elsewhere for supplies once the pipeline dries up.On Monday, a U.S. district court ruled that Energy Transfer LP’s Dakota Access pipeline will have to shut by Aug. 5. If the ruling survives appeals, it would be the first time a major pipeline in service was ordered shut because of environmental concerns. Exactly how long it will be down is unclear -- the court has decided it should remain closed until a proper environmental review is complete. That process could extend into 2021.One thing’s clear: The closure will be devastating for the Bakken, which once jostled to become the nation’s most prolific crude-producing field and defined the careers of some of the most well-known titans of shale including Continental Resources Inc.’s Harold Hamm and Whiting Petroleum Corp.’s former chairman, Jim Volker.Dakota Access, which started up in 2017, was fundamental to advancing North Dakota’s oil production. Output grew to a record volume of 1.52 million barrels a day in November but has fallen since the spread of the coronavirus devastated demand. The state expects crude output in May probably fell below 1 million barrels a day for the first time since 2017. Even before the pandemic, it was struggling to attract investment as more money flowed to the Permian Basin of Texas and left reeling from Whiting’s bankruptcy in April. Bakken producers have shut in nearly 7,000 wells as oil markets languish due to the pandemic, according to the Bakken Restart Task Force.Shutting the pipeline will mean oil can’t leave the state economically at a time when a pandemic-related glut gives buyers plenty of oil to choose from. Dakota Access connects with Energy Transfer’s ETCO crude pipeline and provides users a pathway to send barrels from North Dakota to the Gulf Coast. This system charges from $5.50 to more than $8.00 a barrel. The alternative of using rail would double the cost of transportation.Losing LusterThe Bakken was already losing its luster in favor of oil fields in Texas, which are cheaper to produce. The number of rigs drilling for oil there tumbled more than 80% this year, according to Baker Hughes Co. “Capital allocation, on a relative basis, was more skewed to the lower breakevens that exist in the core areas of the Permian,” Vincent Piazza, senior U.S. oil and gas analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence, said by phone. “Even operators in the Bakken were looking elsewhere.”The price of Bakken crude at Clearbrook, Minnesota, weakened Monday with the discount to West Texas Intermediate oil widening $1.15 to $2.75 a barrel, the biggest decline since late May, data compiled by Bloomberg show.Phillips 66, which owns a stake in the pipeline, said Monday it was disappointed in the court ruling. “The negative impacts resulting from this court’s decision to markets, customers, and jobs up and down the energy value chain will inflict more damage on an already struggling economy and jeopardize our national security,” Dennis Nuss, a spokesman, said in an emailed statement.Continental, a shale producer founded by Hamm, said the bulk of its oil is shipped on other pipelines. “That being said, we believe that today’s DAPL court decision is harmful to royalty owners, the state of North Dakota and the American consumer,” Kristin Thomas, a spokeswoman, said in an email. “This decision will serve to drive the price of crude higher.”For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg Law) -- The Dakota Access pipeline must shut down by Aug. 5, a district court ruled Monday in a stunning defeat for the Trump administration and the oil industry.The decision, which shuts the pipeline during a court-ordered environmental review that’s expected to extend into 2021, is a momentous win for American Indian tribes that have opposed the Energy Transfer LP project for years. It comes just a day after Dominion Energy Inc. and Duke Energy Corp. scuttled another project, the Atlantic Coast natural gas pipeline, after years of legal delays.Environmentalists have increasingly used the courts to try to block additional investment in fossil fuel infrastructure while they push for a clean energy transition. Tribes, landowners, and other project opponents have also complained about local impacts from construction and potential spills on or near their land.The sophisticated legal onslaught has led to delays and disruptions for several other pipelines, including Keystone XL. But Monday’s court order, if upheld on appeal, marks the first time a major, in-service oil pipeline will be forced to shutter because of environmental concerns.Energy Transfer said it’s “immediately pursuing all available legal and administrative processes” to challenge the decision.‘Historic Day’The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said a crucial federal permit for Dakota Access fell too far short of National Environmental Policy Act requirements to allow the pipeline to continue operating while regulators conduct a broader analysis the court ordered in a previous decision.The ruling scraps a critical permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, and requires the pipeline to end its three-year run of delivering oil from North Dakota shale fields to an Illinois oil hub. Judge James E. Boasberg said Dakota Access must shut down the pipeline and empty it of oil by Aug. 5.“Today is a historic day for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the many people who have supported us in the fight against the pipeline,” tribal Chairman Mike Faith said in a statement. “This pipeline should have never been built here. We told them that from the beginning.”Boasberg acknowledged that the ruling would cause major disruptions for Dakota Access and the North Dakota drillers that supply its oil.“Yet, given the seriousness of the Corps’ NEPA error, the impossibility of a simple fix, the fact that Dakota Access did assume much of its economic risk knowingly, and the potential harm each day the pipeline operates, the Court is forced to conclude that the flow of oil must cease,” he wrote, referring to the National Environmental Policy Act.Energy Transfer said it plans to immediately ask Boasberg to freeze the decision, and will head to the U.S. Court of Appeals if that request is denied.The company said it’s confident “that once the law and full record are fully considered Dakota Access Pipeline will not be shut down and that oil will continue to flow.”The Army Corps referred questions about the ruling to the Justice Department, which didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment, including on whether it intends to appeal the ruling. But Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette slammed the ruling, and said the Trump administration would continue promoting U.S. energy infrastructure.“It is disappointing that, once again, an energy infrastructure project that provides thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in economic revenue has been shut down by the well-funded environmental lobby, using our Nation’s court system to further their agenda,” he said in a statement.DisruptionsKatie Bays, co-founder of Washington-based Sandhill Strategy LLC, said the court ruling “is likely to be enormously disruptive.” The Army Corps’ 18-month timeline for addressing flaws in its environmental review makes Energy Transfer “vulnerable to a change in administration and a more draconian policy towards oil pipelines,” she said.ClearView Energy Partners analyst Christine Tezak said “there is a strong possibility that the new Biden Administration could decide to not reissue the authorizations now that the permits have been vacated.”The ruling will also fuel litigation against other projects, as it “just totally overturns that conventional wisdom” that courts will never force in-service pipelines to shut down, said Southern Methodist University law professor James W. Coleman.“There’s no legal rule that says you won’t shut down an existing pipeline but people felt like that was such a constant that they could count on it,” he said.Coleman assigned 50% odds to the prospect that the D.C. Circuit would stay the lower court’s decision. Some analysts speculated odds as low as 30%.The pro-pipeline GAIN Coalition argued that Monday’s decision jeopardizes energy security, and said it’s confident “common sense will prevail and this decision will be stayed or overturned.” The American Petroleum Institute called for permitting reform.“Our nation’s outdated and convoluted permitting rules are opening the door for a barrage of baseless, activist-led litigation, undermining American energy progress and denying local communities the environmental, employment and economic benefits modern pipelines provide,” the oil industry group said.Energy Transfer’s shares fell as much as 13.8% Monday for the biggest intraday drop since mid-March.Continental Resources Inc., the shale producer founded by Harold Hamm, another prominent Trump supporter, also fell on the decision, as did Hess Corp. Both companies have significant operations in the Bakken shale field, and a shutdown of Dakota Access will make it harder for them to pipe their crude out of the basin.Physical sweet crude prices in the U.S. rose slightly against oil futures on Monday, as the closing of the pipeline means less oil supply. However, prices for oil produced in North Dakota have come under pressure as the loss of the conduit would mean less interest from buyers.Years of OppositionBoasberg’s decision comes after four years of litigation from tribes opposed to Dakota Access’ route across Lake Oahe, a dammed section of the Missouri River just a half-mile from the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in the Dakotas.The Standing Rock Sioux, Cheyenne River Sioux, and others sued the Army Corps for approving the water crossing in 2016, saying it put tribal water supplies and cultural resources at risk.Their frustrations triggered an outpouring of support from fellow tribes, indigenous advocates, and environmentalists from across the country. Thousands of pipeline opponents camped out in North Dakota for months to show their opposition.The Obama administration responded by withholding a final permit and committing to a new consultation process, but President Donald Trump quickly put Dakota Access back on track after taking office in 2017.Kelcy Warren, the billionaire chief executive officer of Energy Transfer, has long been a Trump fan. He recently hosted a fundraiser for the president’s re-election campaign at his private Dallas home.“My God, this is going to be refreshing,” Warren told investors two days after Trump won the last election.Despite high-profile opposition to Dakota Access, including from celebrities and some of Warren’s favorite musicians, the Energy Transfer founder has stood by the project, going so far as to say he talks about Dakota Access “like I talk about my son” earlier this year.“I’m so proud of that project,” he said.Trouble in CourtBut the district court in Washington found flaws in the government’s pipeline approval process. Boasberg ordered the Army Corps to conduct additional environmental review in mid-2017, but allowed the pipeline to remain in service during that time.Earlier this year, the court again identified shortcomings in the Army Corps’ review, concluding that the agency didn’t fully consider expert disagreement over the risk of an oil spill in Lake Oahe. The Army Corps must do an in-depth environmental impact statement for Dakota Access, the judge said.Boasberg issued the opinion in March and ordered both sides to submit new briefs explaining whether the pipeline should shut down in light of the decision.The default consequence for an agency violation of the National Environmental Policy Act is invalidation of the permit at issue, but legal precedent allows courts to balance that outcome against other factors, including how disruptive nixing a permit would be, and how likely an agency is to support its original decision after additional analysis.The Army Corps has said it expects to finish the court-ordered analysis in mid-2021.The case is Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps of Engineers, D.D.C., No. 1:16-cv-01534, 7/6/20.—With assistance from Sheela Tobben (Bloomberg News).To contact the reporter on this story: Ellen M. Gilmer (Bloomberg Law) in Washington at email@example.com and Rachel Adams-Heard (Bloomberg News) in Houston at in Houston at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Gregory Henderson at email@example.com; Chuck McCutcheon at firstname.lastname@example.org; Anna Yukhananov at email@example.com(Adds comment from energy secretary in paragraph 13-14.)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
What happened Pipeline stocks are getting pulverized today. Several were down more than 10% by 12:30 p.m. EDT on Monday, including Energy Transfer (NYSE: ET), Phillips 66 Partners (NYSE: PSXP), ONEOK (NYSE: OKE), and Crestwood Equity Partners (NYSE: CEQP).
Financial troubles among oil and gas producers generally -- and those of one large customer in particular -- weighed on the pipeline giant.
U.S. pipeline company Energy Transfer <ET.N> has taken the rare step of invoking force majeure - normally used in times of war or natural disaster - to prevent oil firms from walking away from a proposed expansion of the controversial Dakota Access pipeline, according to two sources familiar with the matter. Energy Transfer wants to nearly double the size of the line, and some companies that signed up say it is no longer necessary due to the sharp fall in U.S. oil production after the coronavirus pandemic. DAPL is the largest pipeline running out of North Dakota's Bakken shale basin.
Here at Zacks, our focus is on the proven Zacks Rank system, which emphasizes earnings estimates and estimate revisions to find great stocks. Nevertheless, we are always paying attention to the latest value, growth, and momentum trends to underscore strong picks.
The Energy Transfer Lp (NYQ:ET) share price has risen by 17.1% over the past month and it’s currently trading at 8.26. For investors considering whether to buy...
Units of Energy Transfer (NYSE: ET) have cratered roughly 35% this year. One of the things he noted was that Energy Transfer generated $1.42 billion of cash during the quarter. As a result, he pointed out that the "coverage ratio for the quarter was 1.72 times, which resulted in excess cash flow after distributions of $594 million."
The herd trade has seized oil as hedge funds pile into the market to try and gain from its upside momentum, even without a fresh driver for prices. A day after rallying 5% on positive crude stockpiles data that was offset by a surprise rise in gasoline inventories, U.S. crude’s West Texas Intermediate benchmark was up again, this time without a new catalyst. Brent, the London-traded global benchmark for oil, rose 16 cents, or 0.5%, at $35.91.
The Energy Transfer Lp (NYQ:ET) share price has risen by 32.4% over the past month and it’s currently trading at 7.51. For investors considering whether to buy8230;
Energy Transfer (ET) misses first-quarter earnings and revenue estimates, and lowers its 2020 capital expenditure guidance, taking into account the economic crisis caused by COVID-19 impacts.
Let's see if Energy Transfer LP (ET) stock is a good choice for value-oriented investors right now, or if investors subscribing to this methodology should look elsewhere for top picks.