Energy Transfer (NYSE: ET) pays partnership distributions to common unitholders; The Williams Companies (NYSE: WMB) pays corporate dividends to shareholders. The available figures support a dated comparison of payout amounts and Williams’ reported coverage and leverage, but not a same-date yield comparison or a reliable verdict that one payout is safer. To compare them, separate the cash paid per unit or share from its market-price yield, then examine cash-flow coverage, debt, and each company’s risks.
What each company pays—and why the distinction matters
ET is a master limited partnership, so its payment is a distribution to unitholders. WMB is a corporation, so its payment is a dividend to shareholders. The legal form can affect tax treatment and reporting; the companies’ filings explain their respective structures and risks: ET’s 2025 Form 10-K and Williams’ 2025 Form 10-K.
The figures below are announced or listed payout rates, not yields. A per-unit or per-share payment alone does not tell you the return at which a security trades.
| Company | Reported payout | Date and context |
|---|---|---|
| Energy Transfer (ET) | $0.335 per common unit quarterly; $1.34 annualized | Announced in January 2026 for the quarter ended December 31, 2025; more than 3% above the Q4 2024 rate. ET’s investor-relations page later listed a $0.34 per-unit common distribution dated August 19, 2026. These are distinct dated figures, not a single rate. Q4 2025 release; ET investor relations |
| The Williams Companies (WMB) | $0.525 per share quarterly; $2.10 annualized | Approved in April 2026, a 5% increase from the 2025 quarterly dividend of $0.50. Williams noted that some portion of a distribution may be considered return of capital for tax purposes. Williams dividend announcement |
Why a current yield comparison is unresolved
Indicated yield is the annualized payout divided by the security’s market price. A meaningful ET-versus-WMB comparison therefore needs both prices from the same date, plus a clear assumption that the stated annualized payout continues. The available information does not establish paired ET and WMB prices at the October 4, 2026 research cut-off, so a precise current yield comparison cannot be stated responsibly.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute#1 Best Overall
For your own calculation, use the same market date for both securities: annualized per-unit or per-share payout ÷ that date’s unit or share price. Label the result as an indicated yield, since it assumes the payout rate continues; it is not a guaranteed return. Do not compare ET’s $1.34 annualized rate announced in January with a later distribution rate without identifying the dates and the rate used.
What the latest matched operating figures say about Williams
Williams’ August 2026 Q2 release reported $1.921 billion in adjusted EBITDA and $1.450 billion in available funds from operations (AFFO) for the quarter. It reported an AFFO-basis dividend coverage ratio of 2.26x and debt-to-adjusted EBITDA of 3.67x. For year-to-date through Q2 2026, it reported adjusted EBITDA of $4.175 billion, AFFO of $3.220 billion, and dividend coverage of 2.51x. These are issuer-reported figures in the Q2 2026 earnings release.
Rank #2
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
Coverage and leverage answer different questions. Coverage compares a defined cash-flow measure available for dividends with the dividend paid; leverage compares debt with earnings on the company’s stated basis. Williams’ presentation defines its leverage measure using debt net of cash and adjusted EBITDA for the trailing four quarters. Its 2026 calculation also adjusts for cash purchases of reimbursable long-lead Power Innovation equipment. Williams says this ratio is not the one used for credit-agreement compliance or calculated by ratings agencies; see its Q2 2026 presentation.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Why the figures do not establish which payout is safer
The available ET materials do not provide Q2 2026 debt-to-adjusted EBITDA and distribution-coverage figures that match Williams’ reporting period and measures. ET’s Q4 2025 release and 2025 Form 10-K are relevant sources for its dated results, distribution policy, and risks, but comparing an ET FY2025 figure with a Williams Q2 2026 figure would mix periods. Company-specific cash-flow definitions can also differ, so ratios should not be treated as directly interchangeable without reconciling their methods.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
A fuller risk comparison would use matched-date information on debt and maturities, liquidity, cash available for payouts, capital spending needs, and issuer-specific risks. Review both companies’ filings for factors such as project execution, regulation and rate cases, commodity or volume exposure, refinancing and interest costs, and investment requirements. A higher yield, on its own, does not establish a better-supported or safer payout.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- It can be a gift option
- Comes with secure packaging
- Helpful in various ways
Rank #4
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.
