Energy Transfer had the larger reported distribution-coverage cushion in the second quarter of 2026, but that does not establish that its payout is safer overall. Energy Transfer’s reported figures imply about 2.21x coverage for the quarter; Enterprise Products Partners reported 1.9x operational coverage and said it retained $1.1 billion of distributable cash flow. Because the companies define their cash-flow measures differently and the available debt figures are not directly comparable, the quarter’s coverage snapshot favors Energy Transfer, not a definitive all-around safety verdict.
What the latest distribution coverage says
The latest results available here cover the quarter ended June 30, 2026. Coverage compares a partnership’s defined distributable-cash-flow measure with distributions for a period. A higher ratio can indicate more reported cash-flow headroom, but it does not by itself account for debt, capital spending, or future changes in cash generation.
| Partnership | Second-quarter 2026 cash-flow measure | Distribution coverage | What the company reported about cash left over |
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy Transfer (ET) | $2.587 billion of adjusted DCF attributable to Energy Transfer partners, reported in the partnership’s August 4, 2026 results | About 2.21x, calculated by dividing the $2.587 billion by $1.172 billion of distributions to partners reported for the quarter | The same figures imply approximately $1.415 billion of partner-level adjusted DCF above partner distributions. This subtraction is not a measure of cash freely available after every capital, debt, and other obligation. |
| Enterprise Products Partners (EPD) | $2.312 billion of operational DCF, reported in the partnership’s July 30, 2026 results | 1.9x, reported by EPD for distributions declared for the quarter | EPD said it retained $1.1 billion of DCF in the quarter. |
On this specific quarter’s reported coverage, ET has the edge. The comparison is not perfectly standardized: ET’s ratio above is a calculation using its adjusted DCF attributable to partners and partner distributions, while EPD reported its operational DCF coverage directly. EPD’s 2025 Form 10-K cautions that its DCF calculation may not be comparable with similarly titled measures at other companies.
How strong is each partnership’s broader payout picture?
Energy Transfer
ET reported $5.07 billion of adjusted EBITDA and $2.59 billion of adjusted DCF attributable to partners for the second quarter of 2026. Its quarterly common-unit distribution was $0.34, or $1.36 annualized, and the August 4 release called it the partnership’s nineteenth consecutive quarterly increase.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
#1 Best Overall
For the first six months of 2026, ET reported $5.291 billion of adjusted DCF attributable to partners and $2.334 billion of partner distributions. Dividing those amounts implies about 2.27x coverage over that half-year. This provides a longer snapshot than a single quarter, but still does not establish how the distribution would hold up under materially different operating conditions.
Enterprise Products Partners
EPD reported record second-quarter 2026 adjusted EBITDA of $2.829 billion alongside its $2.312 billion of operational DCF and 1.9x reported coverage. Its declared quarterly distribution was $0.56 per unit, or $2.24 annualized, a 2.8% increase from the year-earlier quarter. The partnership’s 2025 materials identify 27 consecutive years of distribution increases through 2025.
EPD also reported a 56% payout ratio for the 12 months ended June 30, 2026, including common-unit repurchases. That is a trailing measure based on Adjusted CFFO, not the same period or denominator as quarterly DCF coverage. It adds context about cash distributions and buybacks, but should not be treated as directly interchangeable with EPD’s 1.9x quarterly coverage.
What the debt figures can—and cannot—show
At June 30, 2026, ET reported $68.393 billion of long-term debt excluding current maturities. It also reported $3.764 billion available on its $5.0 billion five-year revolving credit facility, which matures April 11, 2029. In July 2026, ET issued $650 million and $1.10 billion of junior subordinated notes due in 2057, with initial stated interest rates of 6.550% and 6.700%, respectively.
Recommended Free Tools
EPD reported $33.532 billion of total debt principal outstanding at June 30, 2026. These are different debt presentations, so the totals alone do not show which partnership has lower leverage or a safer balance sheet. A meaningful comparison would need a consistent calculation using both companies’ filings, with matched treatment of cash, current maturities, subsidiaries, and other relevant items, alongside comparable earnings or cash flow.
Capital plans and operating variability matter too
Both partnerships are investing in growth, which may support future cash flow but also competes with distributions for capital and carries execution, financing, and commissioning risks.
Rank #4
- ET: Its 2026 guidance called for $18.8 billion to $19.1 billion of adjusted EBITDA and $5.6 billion to $5.9 billion of growth capital investment. The company said no single business segment contributed more than one-third of consolidated adjusted EBITDA in the second quarter of 2026.
- EPD: It reported $6.5 billion of organic growth projects under construction. For 2026, it expected $2.9 billion to $3.4 billion of net growth capital plus $600 million of sustaining capital. In the second quarter it spent $1.169 billion in total capital investments, including $1.0 billion of growth capital and $140 million of sustaining capital.
Operating results also need context. ET reported year-over-year second-quarter increases of 13% in NGL transportation volumes, 25% in NGL exports, 4% in crude-oil transportation, and 4% in midstream gathered volumes. EPD reported record second-quarter volumes of 14.7 million barrels-per-day equivalent through its pipelines, up 8%, and 2.8 million barrels per day at its marine terminals, up 33%.
EPD said marine-terminal volumes returned to normal levels in June and July after unusually strong April and May activity related to efforts to backfill volumes affected by hostilities in the Middle East. That example shows why a record quarter should not automatically be treated as a recurring run rate. More broadly, a midstream business can still face changes in volumes, customer activity, margins, commodity-linked operations, and project timing.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Best Value
Which distribution looks safer?
For the second quarter of 2026, the reported coverage evidence favors Energy Transfer: its partner-level figures imply about 2.21x coverage, above EPD’s reported 1.9x operational coverage. EPD nonetheless reported substantial coverage, $1.1 billion retained in quarterly DCF, and a 56% trailing payout ratio that includes unit repurchases.
The available figures do not support declaring either partnership categorically safer overall. Coverage measures differ by issuer, absolute debt totals are not on a matched basis, and both partnerships have ongoing capital programs. Distribution increases over time are useful history, not a guarantee of future payments. Investors comparing the two should weigh standardized leverage and debt maturities, recurring cash generation, required capital spending, customer and operating exposures, and the definitions behind each company’s cash-flow measures—not rely on one quarter’s coverage ratio alone.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
