ET vs OKE: How Energy Transfer and ONEOK Compare (2026)

Same yardstick, side by side (as of July 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.

The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. ET and OKE share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.

This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined ET and OKE exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.

Energy Transfer owns and operates one of the largest and most diversified energy-infrastructure portfolios in the United States, spanning roughly 140,000 miles of pipeline across 44 states with assets in all major production basins. Its segments include natural gas gathering, processing, and intrastate and interstate transportation and storage; crude oil transportation and terminalling; NGL transportation, fractionation, and export; and refined products. The business is largely fee-based: it earns money by moving and storing volumes for producers, refiners, utilities, and exporters under long-term contracts, which makes cash flow less directly tied to commodity prices than an exploration company, though volumes and spreads still matter. Recent growth is concentrated in the Permian Basin, NGL exports (which set company records in Q1 2026), and a wave of natural-gas supply agreements tied to data centers and power generation, including deals to deliver gas to Oracle data centers.

Full ET guide

ONEOK (NYSE: OKE) is an American midstream energy company headquartered in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It provides gathering, processing, fractionation, transportation, storage, and marine export services for natural gas, natural gas liquids, crude oil, and refined products across four reportable business segments. The company operates approximately 60,000 miles of pipeline and earns the majority of its revenue through long-term, fee-based contracts that limit direct commodity price exposure. Roughly 90% of 2026 earnings are expected to be fee-based, making cash flow relatively predictable across commodity price cycles.

Full OKE guide

Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.

• ET drivers: Fee-based midstream cash flows; High distribution and stated growth target.
• OKE drivers: Fee-Based Revenue Durability; Acquisition Synergy Capture.

A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: Energy Transfer's volumes and some spreads remain exposed to commodity cycles, drilling activity, and energy demand, so a downturn in production or prices can pressure cash flow. For OKE, oNEOK's Net Debt to EBITDA stands at approximately 4x, which is elevated even by midstream standards, and the 2026 adjusted EBITDA guidance range of approximately $7.9 to $8.3 billion was viewed by some analysts as essentially flat versus 2025, raising questions about near-term earnings momentum.

Pick ET if you believe its drivers more; OKE if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the ET and OKE guides.

ET. Energy Transfer is most often evaluated on cash-flow and yield metrics rather than traditional earnings multiples, because as a midstream MLP its appeal is income from distributions backed by distributable cash flow. As of June 2026 the units yielded roughly 7%, supported by record NGL and Permian volumes and a stated 3% to 5% distribution-growth target. These are descriptive figures tied to the asOf date, not projections, and yields move with the unit price.

OKE. ONEOK's trailing P/E of approximately 15x to 16x sits modestly below its peer group average of roughly 17.5x and well below its own 10-year historical average of approximately 23x, reflecting market uncertainty around integration complexity and a cautious 2026 volume outlook. The EV/EBITDA multiple of approximately 11x is consistent with large-cap midstream peers and suggests the market is pricing in a period of consolidation rather than re-acceleration. Free cash flow of approximately $2.5 billion in fiscal 2025 comfortably covers the dividend, supporting the roughly 76% payout ratio.

Headline figures (approximate, 2026-06): ET shows revenue (ttm) ~$89 billion, distributable cash flow (q1 2026, attributable to partners) ~$2.7 billion, distribution yield ~7% (quarterly distribution ~$0.338/unit), 2026 adjusted ebitda guidance ~$18.2-$18.6 billion; OKE shows revenue (fy 2025) ~$33.6 billion, net income (fy 2025, attributable to oneok) ~$3.39 billion, adjusted ebitda (fy 2025) ~$8.02 billion, diluted eps (fy 2025) ~$5.42.

ET and OKE are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined ET and OKE exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.