Compare · ENB vs HEP
ENB vs HEP
Side-by-side comparison of Enbridge Inc (ENB) and Holly Energy Partners L.P. (HEP): market cap, price performance, sector, and recent activity on the wire.
Summary
- Both ENB and HEP operate in Natural Gas Distribution (Energy), so they compete in similar markets.
- ENB is the larger of the two at $121.87B, about 61.9x HEP ($1.97B).
- ENB has hit the wire 4 times in the past 4 weeks while HEP has been quiet.
- ENB has more recent analyst coverage (25 ratings vs 9 for HEP).
Enbridge Inc
Enbridge Inc. operates as an energy infrastructure company. The company operates through five segments: Liquids Pipelines, Gas Transmission and Midstream, Gas Distribution and Storage, Renewable Power Generation, and Energy Services. The Liquids Pipelines segment operates pipelines and related terminals to transport various grades of crude oil and other liquid hydrocarbons in Canada and the United States. The Gas Transmission and Midstream segment invests in natural gas pipelines, and gathering and processing facilities in Canada and the United States. The Gas Distribution and Storage segment is involved in natural gas utility operations serving residential, commercial, and industrial customers in Ontario, as well as natural gas distribution and energy transportation activities in Quebec. The Renewable Power Generation segment operates power generating assets, such as wind, solar, geothermal, and waste heat recovery facilities; and transmission assets in North America and Europe. The Energy Services segment provides energy marketing services to refiners, producers, and other customers; and physical commodity marketing and logistical services in Canada and the United States. The company was formerly known as IPL Energy Inc. and changed its name to Enbridge Inc. in October 1998. Enbridge Inc. was founded in 1949 and is headquartered in Calgary, Canada.
Holly Energy Partners L.P.
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. owns and operates petroleum product and crude pipelines, storage tanks, distribution terminals, loading rack facilities, and refinery processing units that support the refining and marketing operations in Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Kansas, Idaho, and Washington. It operates through two segments, Pipelines and Terminals, and Refinery Processing Units. The company operates refined product pipelines that transport conventional gasolines, reformulated gasolines, and low-octane gasolines for oxygenate blending, as well as distillates, such as high- and low-sulfur diesel and jet fuels, and liquefied petroleum gases; intermediate product pipelines that transport intermediate feedstocks and crude oils; and oil trunk, gathering, and connection pipelines that delivers crude oil. It operates 26 main pipelines; crude gathering networks; 10 refined product terminals; 1 crude terminal; 31,800 track feet of rail storage; 7 locations with truck and/or rail racks; and tankages at 6 refining facility locations, as well as 5 refinery processing units. Holly Energy Partners, L.P. was incorporated in 2004 and is based in Dallas, Texas.
Latest ENB
- Enbridge Publishes 2025 Sustainability Report
- SEC Form F-X filed by Enbridge Inc
- SEC Form CB filed by Enbridge Inc
- Enbridge Inc. and Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Announce Debt Exchange Proposal
- SEC Form 10-Q filed by Enbridge Inc
- Enbridge Inc filed SEC Form 8-K: Results of Operations and Financial Condition, Financial Statements and Exhibits
- Enbridge Reports Strong First Quarter Results, Reaffirms 2026 Financial Guidance, and Grows Secured Backlog to $40 Billion
- Enbridge Inc filed SEC Form 8-K: Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement, Material Modification to Rights of Security Holders, Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders, Financial Statements and Exhibits
- Enbridge Inc. Declares Quarterly Dividends
- Enbridge B.C. Natural Gas Pipeline Expansion Receives Federal Approval
Latest HEP
- SEC Form 15-12G filed by Holly Energy Partners L.P.
- SEC Form EFFECT filed by Holly Energy Partners L.P.
- Jennings Michael returned 26,377 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)
- Norwood Kenneth covered exercise/tax liability with 7,916 units of Common Units, was granted 17,307 units of Common Units and returned 91,076 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)
- Petersen Mark A returned 15,940 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)
- Mattson Eric L returned 34,175 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)
- Lee James H returned 32,106 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)
- Lafollette Christine B returned 36,175 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)
- Jamieson Robert I was granted 15,732 units of Common Units, covered exercise/tax liability with 9,065 units of Common Units and returned 73,168 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)
- Baldwin Larry R returned 41,627 units of Common Units to the company, closing all direct ownership in the company (SEC Form 4)