<p>當你投資於收入時，購買收益最高的投資產品的誘惑是巨大的。這是可以理解的，因為這至少在短期內會帶來更大的收入流。但如果你是一個長期的分紅投資者，你必須抵制這種誘惑。</p>
<p>有時候，購買一家歷史上經營良好的公司的低收益股票，比購買一家歷史不太令人印象深刻的公司的高收益股票要好。這正是今天你比較 <strong>Energy Transfer</strong>（ET -1.15%）與 <strong>Enterprise Products Partners</strong>（EPD 0.57%）時的情況。</p>
<h2>Energy Transfer 是做什麼的？</h2>
<p>Energy Transfer 是一家專注於能源行業中游環節的能源公司。這意味着它擁有幫助全球運輸石油和天然氣的基礎設施。</p>
<p>然而，關鍵在於 Energy Transfer 的業務主要是基於費用的。作為一個收費者，流經其系統的商品價格並不如對這些產品的需求重要。無論能源價格如何，能源需求往往保持強勁。</p>
<p>Enterprise Products Partners 的情況基本相同。與 Energy Transfer 一樣，它是北美最大的中游企業之一。雖然這兩家 MLP 所擁有的基礎資產顯然存在差異，但如果投資者從商業角度看待它們，認為它們在某種程度上是可以互換的，也是可以理解的。</p>
<p>考慮到 Energy Transfer 的分配收益率為 7%，而 Enterprise 的收益率為 6.4%，你可能會被誘惑選擇更高的收益率。這是一個錯誤。</p>
<h2>為什麼 Enterprise Products Partners 是更好的選擇</h2>
<p>這有幾個原因，但第一個直接與分配有關。雖然 Energy Transfer 的分配最近有所增加，但在新冠疫情期間曾被削減了一半。那時能源行業面臨嚴重壓力，因此削減分配的決定並不不合理。這確保了 MLP 在一個非常不確定的時期擁有流動性。</p>
<p>Enterprise Products Partners 在 2020 年增加了分配，並且現在已經連續 26 年每年增加分配。在過去的四分之一世紀中，經歷了多次能源低迷，因此 Enterprise 顯然表現出更可靠的收入股票。</p>
<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://media.ycharts.com/charts/8086081c855997e8a885c1d333797a24.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://media.ycharts.com/charts/8086081c855997e8a885c1d333797a24.png"/></p>
<p>ET 每股分紅（季度）數據來自 YCharts</p>
<p>選擇 Enterprise Products 而非 Energy Transfer 的下一個原因是財務實力。正如下圖所示，Energy Transfer 的債務與 EBITDA（息税折舊攤銷前利潤）比率在過去十年中顯著下降。</p>
<p>這很好，但 Enterprise Products Partners 的債務與 EBITDA 比率在整個期間內一直較低，並且仍然保持較低。事實上，Enterprise 的槓桿通常處於行業同類企業的低端。它的管理非常保守，並且一直如此。</p>
<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://media.ycharts.com/charts/d439b3b257112ab249812b872fc80f19.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://media.ycharts.com/charts/d439b3b257112ab249812b872fc80f19.png"/></p>
<p>ET 財務債務與 EBITDA（TTM）數據來自 YCharts</p>
<p>第三個原因有點模糊，一些投資者可能認為這個故事今天已經太舊而不值得關注。然而，在 2016 年，Energy Transfer 同意收購 <strong>Williams Companies</strong>。能源行業的低迷促使它重新考慮該交易，並最終取消了它。為此，Energy Transfer 發行了可轉換證券，將相當數量的混合資產出售給當時的首席執行官——這一過程引起了一些觀察者的質疑。那位首席執行官是現任董事會主席。</p>
<p>這是一個複雜的時期，取消 Williams 交易的決定可能是正確的。然而，結束交易的方式令人擔憂，表明 Energy Transfer 更關心內部人士而非持有人。Enterprise Products Partners 的過去沒有類似事件。當你將 Energy Transfer 在 2016 年的決定與 2020 年的分配削減結合起來時，如果你是一個收入投資者，這就形成了一個令人擔憂的模式。</p>
<h2>沒有公司是完美的，但為什麼要將就？</h2>
<p>每個企業都會經歷困難時期。每個企業都會做出後來後悔的決定。然而，如果你將 Enterprise 與 Energy Transfer 進行比較，很明顯 Enterprise 是更可靠的收入股票。為了獲得從 Energy Transfer 中獲得的額外 60 個基點的收入而降低投資標準是不值得的，因為從分配的可靠性、槓桿和影響持有人的重大決策來看，Energy Transfer 顯然是一個不太理想的中游投資。</p>

<p>這篇文章將能源轉移公司（Energy Transfer）和企業產品合夥公司（Enterprise Products Partners）作為股息股票進行了比較。雖然能源轉移公司提供了更高的 7% 的收益率，但它有過削減分配的歷史，特別是在疫情期間。相比之下，企業產品合夥公司已經連續 26 年增加其分配，並且維持較低的債務與息税折舊攤銷前利潤（EBITDA）比率，顯示出更強的財務健康狀況。文章總結認為，儘管收益率略低，企業產品合夥公司由於其穩定性和管理決策，是長期股息投資者更可靠的選擇</p>

<p>When you invest for income, there's a huge temptation to buy the highest-yielding investments you can. That's understandable since it will result, at least in the near term, in a larger income stream. But you have to resist that temptation if you are a long-term dividend investor.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>當你投資於收入時，購買收益最高的投資產品的誘惑是巨大的。這是可以理解的，因為這至少在短期內會帶來更大的收入流。但如果你是一個長期的分紅投資者，你必須抵制這種誘惑。</p>
</div><p>Sometimes, it is better to buy a lower yield backed by a historically well-run company than to buy a high yield from a company with a less-than-impressive history. This is exactly the case when you compare <strong>Energy Transfer</strong>(ET -1.15%) to <strong>Enterprise Products Partners</strong>(EPD 0.57%) today.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>有時候，購買一家歷史上經營良好的公司的低收益股票，比購買一家歷史不太令人印象深刻的公司的高收益股票要好。這正是今天你比較 <strong>Energy Transfer</strong>（ET -1.15%）與 <strong>Enterprise Products Partners</strong>（EPD 0.57%）時的情況。</p>
</div><h2>What does Energy Transfer do?</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>Energy Transfer 是做什麼的？</h2>
</div><p>Energy Transfer is an energy company with a focus on the midstream segment of the industry. That means it owns the infrastructure that helps to move oil and natural gas around the world.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Energy Transfer 是一家專注於能源行業中游環節的能源公司。這意味着它擁有幫助全球運輸石油和天然氣的基礎設施。</p>
</div><p>The key, however, is that Energy Transfer's business is heavily fee based. As a toll taker, the price of the commodities flowing through its system is less important than the demand for those products. Energy demand tends to remain strong no matter what is going on with energy prices.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>然而，關鍵在於 Energy Transfer 的業務主要是基於費用的。作為一個收費者，流經其系統的商品價格並不如對這些產品的需求重要。無論能源價格如何，能源需求往往保持強勁。</p>
</div><p>Enterprise Products Partners is basically the same story. Like Energy Transfer, it is one of the largest midstream players in North America. There are clearly differences in the underlying assets each of these MLP's owns, but it would be understandable if an investor viewed them as somewhat interchangeable from a business perspective.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Enterprise Products Partners 的情況基本相同。與 Energy Transfer 一樣，它是北美最大的中游企業之一。雖然這兩家 MLP 所擁有的基礎資產顯然存在差異，但如果投資者從商業角度看待它們，認為它們在某種程度上是可以互換的，也是可以理解的。</p>
</div><p>And given that Energy Transfer's distribution yield is 7% while Enterprise's yield is 6.4%, you might be tempted to simply opt for the higher yield. That's a mistake.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>考慮到 Energy Transfer 的分配收益率為 7%，而 Enterprise 的收益率為 6.4%，你可能會被誘惑選擇更高的收益率。這是一個錯誤。</p>
</div><h2>Why Enterprise Products Partners is a better choice</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>為什麼 Enterprise Products Partners 是更好的選擇</h2>
</div><p>There are a few reasons for this, but the first one relates directly back to the distribution. While Energy Transfer's distribution has been increasing lately, it was cut in half during the coronavirus pandemic. The energy sector was under severe strain at that time, so the decision to cut the distribution isn't unreasonable. It ensured the MLP had liquidity in what was a very uncertain time.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>這有幾個原因，但第一個直接與分配有關。雖然 Energy Transfer 的分配最近有所增加，但在新冠疫情期間曾被削減了一半。那時能源行業面臨嚴重壓力，因此削減分配的決定並不不合理。這確保了 MLP 在一個非常不確定的時期擁有流動性。</p>
</div><p>Enterprise Products Partners increased its distribution in 2020 and has now increased its distribution annually for 26 consecutive years. There have been multiple energy downturns in the last quarter century, so Enterprise has clearly shown itself to be a more reliable income stock.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Enterprise Products Partners 在 2020 年增加了分配，並且現在已經連續 26 年每年增加分配。在過去的四分之一世紀中，經歷了多次能源低迷，因此 Enterprise 顯然表現出更可靠的收入股票。</p>
</div><p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://media.ycharts.com/charts/8086081c855997e8a885c1d333797a24.png" alt="" original-src="https://media.ycharts.com/charts/8086081c855997e8a885c1d333797a24.png"/></p>
<p>ET Dividend Per Share (Quarterly) data by YCharts</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>ET 每股分紅（季度）數據來自 YCharts</p>
</div><p>The next reason to prefer Enterprise Products over Energy Transfer is financial strength. As the chart below highlights, Energy Transfer's debt-to-EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) ratio has come down materially over the past decade.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>選擇 Enterprise Products 而非 Energy Transfer 的下一個原因是財務實力。正如下圖所示，Energy Transfer 的債務與 EBITDA（息税折舊攤銷前利潤）比率在過去十年中顯著下降。</p>
</div><p>That's good, but Enterprise Products Partners' debt-to-EBITDA ratio was lower the entire time and still remains lower. In fact, Enterprise's leverage is generally at the low end of the industry relative to similarly sized peers. It is conservatively managed and always has been.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>這很好，但 Enterprise Products Partners 的債務與 EBITDA 比率在整個期間內一直較低，並且仍然保持較低。事實上，Enterprise 的槓桿通常處於行業同類企業的低端。它的管理非常保守，並且一直如此。</p>
</div><p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://media.ycharts.com/charts/d439b3b257112ab249812b872fc80f19.png" alt="" original-src="https://media.ycharts.com/charts/d439b3b257112ab249812b872fc80f19.png"/></p>
<p>ET Financial Debt to EBITDA (TTM) data by YCharts</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>ET 財務債務與 EBITDA（TTM）數據來自 YCharts</p>
</div><p>The third reason is a bit more nebulous, and some investors might think the story is too old to care about today. However, in 2016 Energy Transfer agreed to buy <strong>Williams Companies</strong>. An energy industry downturn led it to reconsider that deal and, eventually, kill it. To do so, Energy Transfer issued convertible securities, selling a notable amount of the hybrid assets to the then CEO -- a process that some observers questioned. That CEO is the current chairman of the board of directors.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>第三個原因有點模糊，一些投資者可能認為這個故事今天已經太舊而不值得關注。然而，在 2016 年，Energy Transfer 同意收購 <strong>Williams Companies</strong>。能源行業的低迷促使它重新考慮該交易，並最終取消了它。為此，Energy Transfer 發行了可轉換證券，將相當數量的混合資產出售給當時的首席執行官——這一過程引起了一些觀察者的質疑。那位首席執行官是現任董事會主席。</p>
</div><p>This was a complicated period, and the decision to scuttle the Williams deal was probably the right call. However, the manner in which the deal was ended is troubling and suggests that Energy Transfer was more worried about insiders than unitholders. There is no similar event in Enterprise Products Partners' past. And when you combine Energy Transfer's 2016 decision with the distribution cut in 2020, it creates a troubling pattern if you are an income investor.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>這是一個複雜的時期，取消 Williams 交易的決定可能是正確的。然而，結束交易的方式令人擔憂，表明 Energy Transfer 更關心內部人士而非持有人。Enterprise Products Partners 的過去沒有類似事件。當你將 Energy Transfer 在 2016 年的決定與 2020 年的分配削減結合起來時，如果你是一個收入投資者，這就形成了一個令人擔憂的模式。</p>
</div><h2>No company is perfect, but why settle?</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>沒有公司是完美的，但為什麼要將就？</h2>
</div><p>Every business goes through hard times. And every business makes decisions that it later regrets. However, if you are comparing Enterprise to Energy Transfer, it is pretty clear that Enterprise is the more reliable income stock. It isn't worth the 60 basis points more in income you will get from stepping down into Energy Transfer, which is simply a less desirable midstream investment when you look at distribution reliability, leverage, and big decisions that have impacted unitholders.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>每個企業都會經歷困難時期。每個企業都會做出後來後悔的決定。然而，如果你將 Enterprise 與 Energy Transfer 進行比較，很明顯 Enterprise 是更可靠的收入股票。為了獲得從 Energy Transfer 中獲得的額外 60 個基點的收入而降低投資標準是不值得的，因為從分配的可靠性、槓桿和影響持有人的重大決策來看，Energy Transfer 顯然是一個不太理想的中游投資。</p>
</div>

能源轉移與企業產品合作伙伴：有一個明確的股息股票贏家