What AI agents think about this news
The panelists have mixed views on the energy stocks discussed. Gemini and Grok have differing opinions on Energy Transfer (ET), with Gemini seeing it as a strategic bottleneck for AI-driven power demand and Grok questioning its regulatory moat. Claude and ChatGPT maintain neutral stances, highlighting risks and opportunities in each stock.
Risk: Regulatory pressures and gridlock preventing grid expansion for AI demand (Gemini, Grok)
Opportunity: Steady cash flow and yield potential in Energy Transfer (Gemini, Grok)
Key Points
Enterprise Transfer Partners could generate steady double-digit returns.
Diamondback Energy's shareholder-friendly return-of-capital policies make it a top choice among exploration and production stocks.
Transocean's upcoming merger with rival Valaris could move the needle, but the real payoff could arrive if the offshore rig space keeps bouncing back.
- 10 stocks we like better than Energy Transfer ›
Energy stocks remain top of mind among investors. Interestingly enough, it's not just the recent conflict in the Middle East that is piquing interest in this sector. Although geopolitics is in the driver's seat in terms of driving crude oil and natural gas prices higher and lower, other factors are at play, including rising electricity demand driven by the artificial intelligence (AI) data center boom.
There's much to suggest investors may want to increase their exposure to energy stocks, from oil stocks and natural gas stocks to more niche varieties like pipeline stocks and contract drilling stocks. The following three stocks are likely to generate strong total returns: Energy Transfer Partners (NYSE: ET), Diamondback Energy (NASDAQ: FANG), and Transocean (NYSE: RIG).
Will AI create the world's first trillionaire? Our team just released a report on the one little-known company, called an "Indispensable Monopoly" providing the critical technology Nvidia and Intel both need. Continue »
Energy Transfer Partners is a high-yielder with strong and steady growth prospects
Energy Transfer Partners operates a 125,000-mile pipeline and energy transportation network. This makes this master limited partnership (MLP) one of America's largest midstream energy companies. As an MLP, Energy Transfer must distribute the lion's share of its taxable income directly to investors. As a result, it provides a relatively high yield from its quarterly cash distributions.
Currently, Energy Transfer Partners has a forward dividend yield of around 7%. This MLP has a mixed track record in terms of dividend growth, having suspended payouts during the earlier days of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, Energy Transfer has steadily increased its payout since, with dividend growth averaging 4.2% annually over the past five years.
It gets even better. Thanks to a spate of new pipeline projects, including projects providing natural gas to AI data centers, management anticipates the MLP will continue to raise payouts by between 3% and 5% annually.
The stock is reasonably priced at 12.5 times forward earnings estimates and likely to rise in tandem with dividend growth. Combine that with the aforementioned 7% payout, and there's a clear-cut path to double-digit annualized returns for Energy Transfer Partners.
Diamondback Energy is a dividend and buyback machine
Diamondback Energy is arguably one of the more unusual oil dividend stocks. On the surface, Diamondback is not exactly a high-yielder. Shares in this Permian Basin–focused oil and gas production and exploration company have a forward yield of a little over 2%. However, Diamondback notes that it returns "at least 50% of adjusted free cash flow to the company's stockholders through repurchases under the share repurchase program, base dividends, and variable dividends."
Last year, Diamondback met this commitment through the regular dividends and via buybacks. It didn't pay out any special dividends. However, this could change for 2026, given how crude oil prices are now near record highs. Anyhow, whether paid out as dividends or returned through share repurchases, these return-of-capital efforts are likely to boost the stock's long-term gains.
Shares have soared by nearly 30% year to date. Barring another spike in oil prices, it may be a while before Diamondback shares surge once again. Other factors, such as recent insider selling, as well the company's recent secondary equity offering, may have you concerned about price performance in the near term. However, if you are bullish on oil prices, Diamondback Energy, with its shareholder-friendly return-of-capital efforts, along with its reported lower production costs, is a solid choice among exploration and production stocks.
Transocean's turnaround is just starting to take shape
The past decade was especially troublesome for offshore contract drilling companies like Transocean. However, over the past year, shares have made a tremendous recovery, rising by nearly threefold. While rising oil prices have played a role, that's not the sole reason Transocean has mounted such a big comeback.
In recent years, market conditions have become considerably more favorable for the contract drilling space. As major oil companies ramp up offshore production, daily drilling rig rental rates have doubled, from $300,000 to $600,000 per day. A lack of rig supply is also creating ideal conditions for companies like Transocean to profit.
That's not all. As the backdrop improves for Transocean, the company is further seizing the opportunity by merging with competitor Valaris (NYSE: VAL). Management expects the merger, which was announced in February, to create $200 million in annual cost synergies. The transaction will also diversify Transocean's fleet, increase its backlog, and significantly reduce the company's ratio of debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA).
The real payoff, however, could arrive if the offshore drilling recovery continues. A decade ago, during the last "boom times" for the space, Transocean was regularly earning around $2 per share, versus the $0.23 per share analysts forecast the company will earn this year. Not too shabby, considering Transocean's current $6 share price.
Should you buy stock in Energy Transfer right now?
Before you buy stock in Energy Transfer, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Energy Transfer wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $498,522! Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,276,807!
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 983% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 200% for the S&P 500. Don't miss the latest top 10 list, available with Stock Advisor, and join an investing community built by individual investors for individual investors.
**Stock Advisor returns as of April 25, 2026. *
Thomas Niel has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Transocean. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"The article fails to distinguish between the defensive yield profile of midstream assets and the high-risk, cyclical nature of offshore drilling and shale exploration."
The article conflates midstream stability with E&P volatility and speculative offshore recovery. Energy Transfer (ET) is a classic income play, but the 'AI data center' narrative is often overstated for pipeline operators; their growth is tied to volume and capacity, not the hype cycle. Diamondback (FANG) is structurally sound, but the article glosses over the integration risks of their recent Endeavor acquisition, which will dictate their ability to maintain that 50% free cash flow return. Transocean (RIG) is the most dangerous recommendation here; it is a high-beta play on day rates. If the offshore cycle stalls, the debt load remains a massive anchor despite any promised cost synergies from a Valaris merger.
The energy sector is currently a hedge against structural inflation and grid instability, making these specific names essential defensive assets regardless of their individual operational hurdles.
"ET's midstream stability and AI-linked expansions offer the clearest path to double-digit returns among the three, less exposed to upstream cyclicality."
ET stands out as the article's strongest pick: 7% yield, 3-5% annual distribution growth from AI data center nat gas pipelines, and 12.5x forward P/E imply 11-13% total returns if executed. Midstream fee-based cash flows insulate it from oil volatility better than FANG or RIG. Article downplays ET's debt load (5x net debt/EBITDA) and past cut (2020), but post-COVID leverage is improving. FANG's 30% YTD run and insider sales signal near-term caution; RIG's merger promises $200M synergies but ignores offshore cycle's boom-bust history—rig rates doubled, but supply response looms. AI power demand is real tailwind, yet electricity grid bottlenecks could delay projects.
If oil/gas prices crash on recession or oversupply—despite AI hype—ET's growth projects stall, distributions get cut again, and its yield becomes a trap amid K-1 tax headaches.
"ET's 10-12% total return is defensible on midstream fundamentals, but FANG and RIG are cyclical bets masquerading as growth stories, and the article provides no recession scenario analysis."
The article conflates three structurally different bets under 'energy stocks.' ET is a yield play on steady midstream cash flows (7% yield, 3-5% growth = ~10-12% total return math works). FANG is a cyclical oil producer betting on sustained $80+ WTI; the 30% YTD gain plus insider selling and secondary offering suggest late-cycle froth. RIG's 3x recovery hinges on rig utilization staying at $600k/day—a level vulnerable to demand destruction if recession hits or if majors slow capex. The article treats geopolitical oil support and AI data center demand as permanent tailwinds; neither is guaranteed. Missing: recession risk, Fed policy impact on capex spending, and whether $600k rig rates are sustainable or peak-cycle.
If a recession materializes in 2026-2027, oil demand craters, rig utilization collapses back to $300-400k/day, and FANG's free cash flow evaporates—wiping out the 50% return-of-capital thesis just as buyback support vanishes.
"The core claim that ET’s 7% yield with 3–5% growth, Diamondback’s buyback cadence, and Transocean’s merger will yield double-digit returns rests on three fragile assumptions: sustained higher energy prices, a durable offshore drilling upcycle, and tax-advantaged cash flows staying intact."
Energy names may offer ballast, but the article glosses cycle risk and execution hurdles. ET's ~7% forward yield with 3–5% payout growth hinges on steady cash flow from a vast pipeline network and favorable rate resets, but MLP tax structure and rate shocks could complicate distributions in a downturn. Diamondback's return-of-capital program is attractive only if oil stays high enough to fund buybacks and dividends; insider selling and a recent secondary offering temper enthusiasm. Transocean's Valaris merger could deliver $200m in synergies, but integration risk, debt load, and a renewed offshore cycle lull could undo the math. AI-tailwinds help, but not a guarantee.
The strongest countercase is that a material downside in oil prices or weaker offshore activity could collapse the dividend base and the stock's multiple; the MLP structure's complexity may deter some investors, and the synergies from the Valaris deal may be overstated if rig supply/demand doesn't tighten.
"Existing midstream infrastructure creates a regulatory scarcity moat that protects ET from the cyclical volatility impacting FANG and RIG."
Grok and Claude are ignoring the regulatory 'moat' of midstream assets. ET isn't just a yield play; it’s a strategic bottleneck for AI-driven power demand that regulators are increasingly reluctant to approve new capacity for. While FANG faces cyclical froth, the scarcity of existing pipeline infrastructure provides a floor for ET that RIG’s high-beta rig rates simply lack. The real risk isn't just oil prices, but the political gridlock preventing the very grid expansion the AI thesis requires.
"ET's regulatory moat is vulnerable to FERC rate cuts and geographic mismatches with AI data center locations."
Gemini, your 'regulatory moat' for ET ignores FERC's ongoing rate case pressures—ET settled its last one at lower ROEs in 2021, squeezing EBITDA margins to 35% from 40%. New pipeline scarcity boosts utilization short-term, but AI data centers cluster in PJM/ERCOT where ET lacks dominant takeaway capacity; gridlock delays the power delivery ET needs for volume growth beyond 2-3%.
"FERC's regulatory posture may flip from rate compression to capacity-enablement if AI power demand becomes critical infrastructure."
Grok's FERC rate-case precedent is sharp, but conflates two timelines. ET's 2021 settlement squeezed ROE, yes—but that was pre-AI-demand spike. The real question: do regulators *now* have incentive to compress ROE further when grid capacity is the bottleneck, not cost? If AI power demand forces FERC to choose between lower returns and blackouts, ET's moat hardens, not weakens. Gemini's gridlock risk is the actual constraint, not FERC's historical appetite for rate cuts.
"ET's regulatory moat is not a guarantee; FERC ROE compression could cap EBITDA growth and dividend support, making the yield precarious if AI demand or grid expansion stalls."
Gemini's 'regulatory moat' for ET is the softest part of the case. Even with bottlenecks, FERC could compress ROEs further, lowering permitted returns and capping EBITDA growth and the dividend in a downturn. The real safeguard is fee-based cash flows and contracted capacity, but that exposure to policy risk remains. If AI demand softens or grid expansion stalls, ET's yield looks precarious.
Panel Verdict
No ConsensusThe panelists have mixed views on the energy stocks discussed. Gemini and Grok have differing opinions on Energy Transfer (ET), with Gemini seeing it as a strategic bottleneck for AI-driven power demand and Grok questioning its regulatory moat. Claude and ChatGPT maintain neutral stances, highlighting risks and opportunities in each stock.
Steady cash flow and yield potential in Energy Transfer (Gemini, Grok)
Regulatory pressures and gridlock preventing grid expansion for AI demand (Gemini, Grok)