Financial Comparison: Plains All American Pipeline (PAA) vs. Its Rivals

Core Insights - Plains All American Pipeline is compared to its peers in the "Pipelines, Except Natural Gas" industry, focusing on various performance metrics and investment indicators [1][5]. Institutional and Insider Ownership - 41.8% of Plains All American Pipeline shares are held by institutional investors, lower than the industry average of 47.7% - Insider ownership stands at 0.9%, compared to 2.9% for the industry, indicating less confidence from insiders in the company's long-term growth potential [1]. Dividends - The company pays an annual dividend of $1.52 per share, resulting in a dividend yield of 8.6% - It pays out 125.6% of its earnings as dividends, suggesting potential sustainability issues for future payments compared to the industry average payout of 112.0% [2]. Analyst Ratings - Plains All American Pipeline has received 1 buy rating, with no sell or strong buy ratings, resulting in a rating score of 3.00 - In contrast, its competitors have a higher average rating score of 2.51, indicating a more favorable outlook for rivals [4]. Earnings & Valuation - Plains All American Pipeline reported gross revenue of $50.07 billion and net income of $772 million, with a price-to-earnings ratio of 14.59 - Competitors have lower gross revenue of $10.13 billion and net income of $374.42 million, but a higher price-to-earnings ratio of 15.94, suggesting Plains is more affordable [7]. Risk and Volatility - The company has a beta of 0.59, indicating its stock is 41% less volatile than the S&P 500, while competitors have a beta of 0.95, showing they are only 5% less volatile [8]. Profitability - Plains All American Pipeline has a net margin of 2.42%, return on equity of 11.04%, and return on assets of 4.41% - In comparison, competitors have significantly higher net margins of 32.45%, return on equity of 36.20%, and return on assets of 10.59% [10]. Summary - Plains All American Pipeline lags behind its competitors in 10 out of 15 performance factors analyzed, indicating a less favorable position in the industry [11].