ENB vs EPD Stock Comparison
Compare ENB and EPD across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ENB and EPD?
EPD leads the current stock comparison as Enterprise Products Partners L.P., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Enbridge Inc. vs Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
EPD leads
EPD leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 20 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support EPD, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Enbridge Inc.
Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EPD over ENB, 54 versus 39 as of Sep 6, 2026. EPD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. EPD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EPD today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. EPD lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Enbridge Inc. and Enterprise Products Partners L.P. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare ENB and EPD against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Momentum25%39 vs 65EPD +26
- Value30%41 vs 56EPD +15
- Quality30%27 vs 40EPD +13
- Risk Resilience15%59 vs 57Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor EPD. EPD’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
EPD's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ENB and EPD both carry a full feed there.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
EPDEPD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EPDEPD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EPDEPD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
EPDEPD on the Momentum factor, by 26 points.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
EPDEPD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | ENB | EPD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -0.2% | +5.3% | EPD has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +17.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EPD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | EPD | 39 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | EPDon balance | revenue growth -6.3% vs 27%; EPS growth -39.6% vs 23.5%; TTM ROE 10% vs 21.2%; gross margin 28.2% vs 13.2%; operating margin 13.8% vs 13% — EPD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EPD | Value 41 vs 56 |
| Technicals | EPD | Price vs 50-day -5.8% vs 2.1%; vs 200-day -4% vs 7.3% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 59 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | EPD | Target upside -0.2% vs 5.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ENB and EPD and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on EPD.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5EPD lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- EPD +15
- 39 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- EPD +17
- 38 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- EPD +20
- 35 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- EPD +10
- 38 vs 48
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.93%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
5 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.02%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.85%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.59%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1ENB closes the Momentum gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to EPD's edge.
- 2ENB's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3EPD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 15-point move would eliminate EPD's advantage entirely.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
EPD leads on balance| Metric | ENB | EPD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -6.3% | 27% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -39.6% | 23.5% |
| Gross margin | 28.2% | 13.2% |
| Operating margin | 13.8% | 13% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10% | 21.2% |
| Debt to equity | 1.72 | 1.12 |
Performance
EPD leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | ENB | EPD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.2% | -0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.3% | 3.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11% | 3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -6.7% | 3.6% |
| Year to date | 4.7% | 21.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 3.7% | 22.3% |
Technicals
EPD has the stronger structure| Metric | ENB | EPD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 46.4 | 54.3 |
| ADX (14) | 35 | 18.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.8% | 2.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4% | 7.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.3% | 15.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | ENB | EPD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.12 | -0.25 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.09 | 1.02 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.14 | 1.62 |
| Max drawdown | -14.3% | -9.3% |
| Current drawdown | -13.7% | -2.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.7% | 17.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.7% | -1.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ENB or EPD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EPD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 54 against ENB's 39. The edge comes from momentum and value. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is ENB or EPD the better buy right now?
EPD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EPD over ENB?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. EPD leads Momentum by 26 points; EPD leads Value by 15 points; EPD leads Quality by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ENB or EPD?
Analyst price targets imply -0.2% upside for ENB and +5.3% for EPD, so the Street currently favors EPD. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, ENB or EPD?
EPD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EPD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, ENB or EPD?
EPD on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, ENB or EPD?
EPD on the Momentum factor, by 26 points. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, ENB or EPD?
The two are close on downside measures. Downside measures are level or not covered. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ENB more profitable than EPD?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 28.2% vs 13.2%; operating margin 13.8% vs 13%; ttm roe 10% vs 21.2%. ENB leads on two measures and EPD on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is EPD's lead over ENB getting stronger or weaker?
EPD lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the ENB vs EPD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ENB closes the Momentum gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to EPD's edge; ENB's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; EPD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 15-point move would eliminate EPD's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ENB and EPD?
ENB: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. EPD: 5 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on ENB is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On EPD it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ENB and EPD with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.