EPD vs KMI Stock Comparison
Compare EPD and KMI across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between EPD and KMI?
EPD leads the current stock comparison as Enterprise Products Partners L.P., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. vs Kinder Morgan, Inc.
EPD leads
EPD leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors KMI on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support EPD, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
Kinder Morgan, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EPD over KMI, 54 versus 42 as of Sep 6, 2026. EPD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while KMI holds the stronger quality profile. EPD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors KMI. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EPD today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. EPD lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and Kinder Morgan, Inc. 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 EPD and KMI 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.
- Value30%56 vs 31EPD +25
- Momentum25%65 vs 41EPD +24
- Quality30%40 vs 51KMI +11
- Risk Resilience15%57 vs 47EPD +10
5 of 6 evidence groups favor EPD. EPD’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; KMI keeps a meaningful quality edge.
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 — EPD and KMI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EPD (Enterprise Products Partners L.P.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
KMI (Kinder Morgan, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 25.3% against 15.5%.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
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 25 points.
Momentum
EPDEPD on the Momentum factor, by 24 points.
Lower downside
EPDEPD on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
KMIKMI on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors EPD, analyst targets favor KMI. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | EPD | KMI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +5.3% | +18.6% | KMI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +17.1% | +29.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 4 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
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 | 54 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | EPDon balance | revenue growth 27% vs -7.3%; EPS growth 23.5% vs -11.4%; TTM ROE 21.2% vs 11.1%; gross margin 13.2% vs 54.9%; operating margin 13% vs 29% — EPD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EPD | Value 56 vs 31 |
| Technicals | EPD | Price vs 50-day 2.1% vs -1.8%; vs 200-day 7.3% vs 1% |
| Risk Resilience | EPD | Risk Resilience 57 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | KMI | Target upside 5.3% vs 18.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of EPD and KMI 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 12 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 widening. (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: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- EPD +12
- 54 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- EPD +7
- 55 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- EPD +6
- 55 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- EPD +3
- 48 vs 45
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 30 when EPD moved ahead of KMI.
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.
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
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.85%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short 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 -0.59%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.63%, 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.
- 1KMI closes the Value gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to EPD's edge.
- 2KMI'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.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
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 | EPD | KMI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 27% | -7.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 23.5% | -11.4% |
| Gross margin | 13.2% | 54.9% |
| Operating margin | 13% | 29% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 21.2% | 11.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.12 | 1.02 |
Performance
EPD leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | EPD | KMI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.2% | -0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.2% | 1.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 3% | -0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.6% | -5.9% |
| Year to date | 21.5% | 14.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.3% | 17.5% |
Technicals
EPD has the stronger structure| Metric | EPD | KMI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 54.3 | 41.7 |
| ADX (14) | 18.5 | 13.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.1% | -1.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.3% | 1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.5% | 25.3% |
Risk
EPD is the more resilient| Metric | EPD | KMI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.25 | -0.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.02 | 0.7 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.62 | 1.03 |
| Max drawdown | -9.3% | -10.1% |
| Current drawdown | -2.2% | -8.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.7% | 20.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.6% | -2.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, EPD or KMI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EPD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 54 against KMI's 42. The edge comes from value and momentum. KMI is not without a case — it holds the better quality profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. 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 EPD or KMI 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 KMI?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. EPD leads Value by 25 points; EPD leads Momentum by 24 points; KMI leads Quality by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, EPD or KMI?
Analyst price targets imply +5.3% upside for EPD and +18.6% for KMI, so the Street currently favors KMI. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors EPD. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, EPD or KMI?
EPD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EPD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, EPD or KMI?
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, EPD or KMI?
EPD on the Momentum factor, by 24 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, EPD or KMI?
EPD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. EPD on Risk Resilience, by 10 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is EPD more profitable than KMI?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 13.2% vs 54.9%; operating margin 13% vs 29%; ttm roe 21.2% vs 11.1%. EPD leads on one measure and KMI on two measures, 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 KMI getting stronger or weaker?
EPD lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-30, when EPD moved ahead of KMI.
What would change the EPD vs KMI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: KMI closes the Value gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to EPD's edge; KMI'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; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about EPD and KMI?
EPD: 5 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. KMI: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on EPD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On KMI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare EPD and KMI 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.